Apollo program

The Apollo program, also known as Project Apollo, was the third
United States human spaceflight program carried out by the National Apollo program
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which succeeded in
landing the first humans on the Moon from 1969 to 1972. First
conceived during Dwight D. Eisenhower's administration as a three-
person spacecraft to follow the one-person Project Mercury, which
put the first Americans in space. Apollo was later dedicated to
President John F. Kennedy's national goal of "landing a man on the
Moon by the end of this decade and returning him safely to the
Earth" in an address to Congress on May 25, 1961. It was the third
US human spaceflight program to fly, preceded by the two-person
Project Gemini conceived in 1961 to extend spaceflight capability in Country United States
support of Apollo.
Organization NASA
Kennedy's goal was accomplished on the Apollo 11 mission when Purpose Crewed lunar
astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed their Apollo landing
Lunar Module (LM) on July 20, 1969, and walked on the lunar
Status Completed
surface, while Michael Collins remained in lunar orbit in the
command and service module (CSM), and all three landed safely on Program history
Earth on July 24. Five subsequent Apollo missions also landed Cost $25.4 billion (1973)[1]
astronauts on the Moon, the last, Apollo 17, in December 1972. In
these six spaceflights, twelve men walked on the Moon. $153 billion (2018)[2]
Duration 1961–1972
Apollo ran from 1961 to 1972, with the first crewed flight in 1968. It
encountered a major setback in 1967 when an Apollo 1 cabin fire Maiden SA-1
killed the entire crew during a prelaunch test. After the first flight October 27, 1961
successful landing, sufficient flight hardware remained for nine
follow-on landings with a plan for extended lunar geological and First crewed Apollo 7
astrophysical exploration. Budget cuts forced the cancellation of flight October 11, 1968
three of these. Five of the remaining six missions achieved
Last flight Apollo 17
successful landings, but the Apollo 13 landing was prevented by an
oxygen tank explosion in transit to the Moon, which destroyed the December 19, 1972
service module's capability to provide electrical power, crippling the
Successes 32
CSM's propulsion and life support systems. The crew returned to
Earth safely by using the lunar module as a "lifeboat" for these Failures 2 (Apollo 1 and 13)
functions. Apollo used Saturn family rockets as launch vehicles, Partial 1 (Apollo 6)
which were also used for an Apollo Applications Program, which failures
consisted of Skylab, a space station that supported three crewed
missions in 1973–74, and the Apollo–Soyuz Test Project, a joint US- Launch Cape Kennedy
Soviet Union Earth-orbit mission in 1975. site(s) Kennedy Space
Center
Apollo set several major human spaceflight milestones. It stands
alone in sending crewed missions beyond low Earth orbit. Apollo 8 White Sands
was the first crewed spacecraft to orbit another celestial body, and Vehicle information
Apollo 11 was the first crewed spacecraft to land humans on one.
Crew vehicle Apollo CSM · Apollo
LM
Overall the Apollo program returned 842 pounds (382 kg) of lunar Launch Little Joe II · Saturn I
rocks and soil to Earth, greatly contributing to the understanding of vehicle(s) · Saturn IB · Saturn
the Moon's composition and geological history. The program laid the V
foundation for NASA's subsequent human spaceflight capability,
and funded construction of its Johnson Space Center and Kennedy
Space Center. Apollo also spurred advances in many areas of
technology incidental to rocketry and human spaceflight, including
avionics, telecommunications, and computers.

Contents
Background
Origin and spacecraft feasibility studies
Political pressure builds
NASA expansion Buzz Aldrin (pictured) walked on the
Manned Spacecraft Center Moon with Neil Armstrong, on Apollo
Launch Operations Center 11, July 20–21, 1969.
Organization
Choosing a mission mode
Spacecraft
Command and service module
Apollo Lunar Module
Launch vehicles
Little Joe II
Saturn I
Saturn IB
Saturn V
Astronauts
Lunar mission profile Earthrise, the iconic 1968 image from
Apollo 8 taken by astronaut William
Profile variations
Anders
Development history
Uncrewed flight tests
Preparation for crewed flight
Program delays
Apollo 1 fire
Uncrewed Saturn V and LM tests
Crewed development missions
Production lunar landings
Mission cutbacks
Extended missions
Mission summary
Samples returned
Costs
Apollo Applications Program
Recent observations
Legacy
Science and engineering
Cultural impact
Apollo 11 broadcast data restoration project
Depictions on film
Documentaries
Docudramas
Fictional
See also
Notes
References
Further reading
External links
NASA reports
Multimedia

Background

Origin and spacecraft feasibility studies

The Apollo program was conceived during the Eisenhower administration in early 1960, as a follow-up to
Project Mercury. While the Mercury capsule could support only one astronaut on a limited Earth orbital
mission, Apollo would carry three. Possible missions included ferrying crews to a space station, circumlunar
flights, and eventual crewed lunar landings.

The program was named after Apollo, the Greek god of light, music, and the Sun, by NASA manager Abe
Silverstein, who later said, "I was naming the spacecraft like I'd name my baby."[3] Silverstein chose the
name at home one evening, early in 1960, because he felt "Apollo riding his chariot across the Sun was
appropriate to the grand scale of the proposed program."[4]

In July 1960, NASA Deputy Administrator Hugh L. Dryden announced the Apollo program to industry
representatives at a series of Space Task Group conferences. Preliminary specifications were laid out for a
spacecraft with a mission module cabin separate from the command module (piloting and reentry cabin), and
a propulsion and equipment module. On August 30, a feasibility study competition was announced, and on
October 25, three study contracts were awarded to General Dynamics/Convair, General Electric, and the
Glenn L. Martin Company. Meanwhile, NASA performed its own in-house spacecraft design studies led by
Maxime Faget, to serve as a gauge to judge and monitor the three industry designs.[5]

Political pressure builds

In November 1960, John F. Kennedy was elected president after a campaign that promised American
superiority over the Soviet Union in the fields of space exploration and missile defense. Up to the election of
1960, Kennedy had been speaking out against the "missile gap" that he and many other senators felt had
developed between the Soviet Union and United States due to the inaction of President Eisenhower.[6]
Beyond military power, Kennedy used aerospace technology as a symbol of national prestige, pledging to
make the US not "first but, first and, first if, but first period".[7] Despite Kennedy's rhetoric, he did not
immediately come to a decision on the status of the Apollo program once he became president. He knew
little about the technical details of the space program, and was put off by the massive financial commitment
required by a crewed Moon landing.[8] When Kennedy's newly appointed NASA Administrator James E.
Webb requested a 30 percent budget increase for his agency, Kennedy supported an acceleration of NASA's
large booster program but deferred a decision on the broader issue.[9]

On April 12, 1961, Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first person to fly in space, reinforcing
American fears about being left behind in a technological competition with the Soviet Union. At a meeting
of the US House Committee on Science and Astronautics one day after Gagarin's flight, many congressmen
pledged their support for a crash program aimed at ensuring that America would catch up.[10] Kennedy was
circumspect in his response to the news, refusing to make a commitment on America's response to the
Soviets.[11]

On April 20, Kennedy sent a memo to Vice President Lyndon B.

Johnson, asking Johnson to look into the status of America's space
program, and into programs that could offer NASA the opportunity
to catch up.[12][13] Johnson responded approximately one week later,
concluding that "we are neither making maximum effort nor
achieving results necessary if this country is to reach a position of
leadership."[14][15] His memo concluded that a crewed Moon
landing was far enough in the future that it was likely the United
States would achieve it first.[14]
President Kennedy delivers his
On May 25, 1961, twenty days after the first US crewed spaceflight
proposal to put a man on the Moon
Freedom 7, Kennedy proposed the crewed Moon landing in a before a joint session of Congress,
Special Message to the Congress on Urgent National Needs: May 25, 1961

Now it is time to take longer strides—time for a great

new American enterprise—time for this nation to take a
clearly leading role in space achievement, which in
many ways may hold the key to our future on Earth.

... 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 the
Earth. No single space project in this period will be
more impressive to mankind, or more important in the
long-range exploration of space; and none will be so
difficult or expensive to accomplish.[16] Full text

NASA expansion
At the time of Kennedy's proposal, only one American had flown in space—less than a month earlier—and
NASA had not yet sent an astronaut into orbit. Even some NASA employees doubted whether Kennedy's
ambitious goal could be met.[17] By 1963, Kennedy even came close to agreeing to a joint US-USSR Moon
mission, to eliminate duplication of effort.[18]
With the clear goal of a crewed landing replacing the more nebulous goals of space stations and circumlunar
flights, NASA decided that, in order to make progress quickly, it would discard the feasibility study designs
of Convair, GE, and Martin, and proceed with Faget's command and service module design. The mission
module was determined to be useful only as an extra room, and therefore unnecessary.[19] They used Faget's
design as the specification for another competition for spacecraft procurement bids in October 1961. On
November 28, 1961, it was announced that North American Aviation had won the contract, although its bid
was not rated as good as Martin's. Webb, Dryden and Robert Seamans chose it in preference due to North
American's longer association with NASA and its predecessor.[20]

Landing men on the Moon by the end of 1969 required the most sudden burst of technological creativity,
and the largest commitment of resources ($25 billion; $153 billion in 2018 dollars)[2] ever made by any
nation in peacetime. At its peak, the Apollo program employed 400,000 people and required the support of
over 20,000 industrial firms and universities.[21]

On July 1, 1960, NASA established the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama.
MSFC designed the heavy lift-class Saturn launch vehicles, which would be required for Apollo.[22]

Manned Spacecraft Center

It became clear that managing the Apollo program would exceed the capabilities of Robert R. Gilruth's
Space Task Group, which had been directing the nation's crewed space program from NASA's Langley
Research Center. So Gilruth was given authority to grow his organization into a new NASA center, the
Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC). A site was chosen in Houston, Texas, on land donated by Rice
University, and Administrator Webb announced the conversion on September 19, 1961.[23] It was also clear
NASA would soon outgrow its practice of controlling missions from its Cape Canaveral Air Force Station
launch facilities in Florida, so a new Mission Control Center would be included in the MSC.[24]

In September 1962, by which time two Project Mercury astronauts

had orbited the Earth, Gilruth had moved his organization to rented
space in Houston, and construction of the MSC facility was under
way, Kennedy visited Rice to reiterate his challenge in a famous
speech:

But why, some say, the Moon? Why choose this as our
goal? And they may well ask, why climb the highest
mountain? Why, 35 years ago, fly the Atlantic? ... We
Play media
choose to go to the Moon. We choose to go to the Moon
President Kennedy speaks at Rice
in this decade and do the other things, not because they
University, September 12, 1962 (17
are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal min, 47 s)
will serve to organize and measure the best of our
energies and skills; because that challenge is one that
we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to
postpone, and one we intend to win ...[25] Full text

The MSC was completed in September 1963. It was renamed by the US Congress in honor of Lyndon
Johnson soon after his death in 1973.[26]

Launch Operations Center

It also became clear that Apollo would outgrow the Canaveral launch facilities in Florida. The two newest
launch complexes were already being built for the Saturn I and IB rockets at the northernmost end: LC-34
and LC-37. But an even bigger facility would be needed for the mammoth rocket required for the crewed
lunar mission, so land acquisition was started in July 1961 for a Launch Operations Center (LOC)
immediately north of Canaveral at Merritt Island. The design, development and construction of the center
was conducted by Kurt H. Debus, a member of Dr. Wernher von Braun's original V-2 rocket engineering
team. Debus was named the LOC's first Director.[27] Construction began in November 1962. Upon
Kennedy's death, President Johnson issued an executive order on November 29, 1963, to rename the LOC
and Cape Canaveral in honor of Kennedy.[28]

The LOC included Launch Complex 39, a Launch Control Center,

and a 130-million-cubic-foot (3,700,000 m3) Vertical Assembly
Building (VAB) in which the space vehicle (launch vehicle and
spacecraft) would be assembled on a mobile launcher platform and
then moved by a crawler-transporter to one of several launch pads.
Although at least three pads were planned, only two, designated
A and B, were completed in October 1965. The LOC also included
an Operations and Checkout Building (OCB) to which Gemini and
Apollo spacecraft were initially received prior to being mated to
their launch vehicles. The Apollo spacecraft could be tested in two
vacuum chambers capable of simulating atmospheric pressure at George Mueller, Wernher von Braun,
altitudes up to 250,000 feet (76 km), which is nearly a and Eberhard Rees watch the AS-
101 launch from the firing room
vacuum.[29][30]

Organization

Administrator Webb realized that in order to keep Apollo costs under control, he had to develop greater
project management skills in his organization, so he recruited Dr. George E. Mueller for a high management
job. Mueller accepted, on the condition that he have a say in NASA reorganization necessary to effectively
administer Apollo. Webb then worked with Associate Administrator (later Deputy Administrator) Seamans
to reorganize the Office of Manned Space Flight (OMSF).[31] On July 23, 1963, Webb announced Mueller's
appointment as Deputy Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight, to replace then Associate
Administrator D. Brainerd Holmes on his retirement effective September 1. Under Webb's reorganization,
the directors of the Manned Spacecraft Center (Gilruth), Marshall Space Flight Center (von Braun), and the
Launch Operations Center (Debus) reported to Mueller.[32]

Based on his industry experience on Air Force missile projects, Mueller realized some skilled managers
could be found among high-ranking officers in the United States Air Force, so he got Webb's permission to
recruit General Samuel C. Phillips, who gained a reputation for his effective management of the Minuteman
program, as OMSF program controller. Phillips' superior officer Bernard A. Schriever agreed to loan
Phillips to NASA, along with a staff of officers under him, on the condition that Phillips be made Apollo
Program Director. Mueller agreed, and Phillips managed Apollo from January 1964, until it achieved the
first human landing in July 1969, after which he returned to Air Force duty.[33]

Choosing a mission mode

Once Kennedy had defined a goal, the Apollo mission planners were faced with the challenge of designing a
spacecraft that could meet it while minimizing risk to human life, cost, and demands on technology and
astronaut skill. Four possible mission modes were considered:
 Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (LOR): This turned out to be
the winning configuration, which achieved the goal with
Apollo 11 on July 24, 1969: a single Saturn V launched a
96,886-pound (43,947 kg) spacecraft that was composed
of a 63,608-pound (28,852 kg) Apollo command and
service module which remained in orbit around the Moon
and a 33,278-pound (15,095 kg) two-stage Apollo Lunar
Module spacecraft which was flown by two astronauts to
the surface, flown back to dock with the command module
and was then discarded.[34] Landing the smaller
spacecraft on the Moon, and returning an even smaller John Houbolt explaining the LOR
part (10,042 pounds or 4,555 kilograms) to lunar orbit, concept
minimized the total mass to be launched from Earth, but
this was the last method initially considered because of the
perceived risk of rendezvous and docking.
Direct Ascent: The spacecraft would be launched as a
unit and travel directly to the lunar surface, without first
going into lunar orbit. A 50,000-pound (23,000 kg) Earth
return ship would land all three astronauts atop a 113,000-
pound (51,000 kg) descent propulsion stage,[35] which
would be left on the Moon. This design would have
required development of the extremely powerful Saturn C-
8 or Nova launch vehicle to carry a 163,000-pound
(74,000 kg) payload to the Moon.[36]
Earth Orbit Rendezvous (EOR): Multiple rocket launches
(up to 15 in some plans) would carry parts of the Direct
Ascent spacecraft and propulsion units for translunar
injection (TLI). These would be assembled into a single Early Apollo configuration for Direct
spacecraft in Earth orbit. Ascent and Earth Orbit Rendezvous,
Lunar Surface Rendezvous: Two spacecraft would be 1961
launched in succession. The first, an automated vehicle
carrying propellant for the return to Earth, would land on
the Moon, to be followed some time later by the crewed vehicle. Propellant would have to be
transferred from the automated vehicle to the crewed vehicle.[37]

In early 1961, direct ascent was generally the mission mode in favor at NASA. Many engineers feared that
rendezvous and docking, maneuvers which had not been attempted in Earth orbit, would be nearly
impossible in lunar orbit. LOR advocates including John Houbolt at Langley Research Center emphasized
the important weight reductions that were offered by the LOR approach. Throughout 1960 and 1961,
Houbolt campaigned for the recognition of LOR as a viable and practical option. Bypassing the NASA
hierarchy, he sent a series of memos and reports on the issue to Associate Administrator Robert Seamans;
while acknowledging that he spoke "somewhat as a voice in the wilderness", Houbolt pleaded that LOR
should not be discounted in studies of the question.[38]

Seamans' establishment of an ad-hoc committee headed by his special technical assistant Nicholas E.
Golovin in July 1961, to recommend a launch vehicle to be used in the Apollo program, represented a
turning point in NASA's mission mode decision.[39] This committee recognized that the chosen mode was
an important part of the launch vehicle choice, and recommended in favor of a hybrid EOR-LOR mode. Its
consideration of LOR—as well as Houbolt's ceaseless work—played an important role in publicizing the
workability of the approach. In late 1961 and early 1962, members of the Manned Spacecraft Center began
to come around to support LOR, including the newly hired deputy director of the Office of Manned Space
Flight, Joseph Shea, who became a champion of LOR.[40] The engineers at Marshall Space Flight Center
(MSFC), which had much to lose from the decision, took longer to become convinced of its merits, but their
conversion was announced by Wernher von Braun at a briefing on June 7, 1962.[41]

But even after NASA reached internal agreement, it was far from smooth sailing. Kennedy's science advisor
Jerome Wiesner, who had expressed his opposition to human spaceflight to Kennedy before the President
took office,[42] and had opposed the decision to land men on the Moon, hired Golovin, who had left NASA,
to chair his own "Space Vehicle Panel", ostensibly to monitor, but actually to second-guess NASA's
decisions on the Saturn V launch vehicle and LOR by forcing Shea, Seamans, and even Webb to defend
themselves, delaying its formal announcement to the press on July 11, 1962, and forcing Webb to still hedge
the decision as "tentative".[43]

Wiesner kept up the pressure, even making the disagreement public during a two-day September visit by the
President to Marshall Space Flight Center. Wiesner blurted out "No, that's no good" in front of the press,
during a presentation by von Braun. Webb jumped in and defended von Braun, until Kennedy ended the
squabble by stating that the matter was "still subject to final review". Webb held firm and issued a request
for proposal to candidate Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) contractors. Wiesner finally relented, unwilling to
settle the dispute once and for all in Kennedy's office, because of the President's involvement with the
October Cuban Missile Crisis, and fear of Kennedy's support for Webb. NASA announced the selection of
Grumman as the LEM contractor in November 1962.[44]

Space historian James Hansen concludes that:

Without NASA's adoption of this stubbornly held minority opinion in 1962, the United States
may still have reached the Moon, but almost certainly it would not have been accomplished by
the end of the 1960s, President Kennedy's target date.[45]

The LOR method had the advantage of allowing the lander spacecraft to be used as a "lifeboat" in the event
of a failure of the command ship. Some documents prove this theory was discussed before and after the
method was chosen. In 1964 an MSC study concluded, "The LM [as lifeboat] ... was finally dropped,
because no single reasonable CSM failure could be identified that would prohibit use of the SPS."[46]
Ironically, just such a failure happened on Apollo 13 when an oxygen tank explosion left the CSM without
electrical power. The lunar module provided propulsion, electrical power and life support to get the crew
home safely.[47]

Spacecraft
Faget's preliminary Apollo design employed a cone-shaped command module, supported by one of several
service modules providing propulsion and electrical power, sized appropriately for the space station,
cislunar, and lunar landing missions. Once Kennedy's Moon landing goal became official, detailed design
began of a command and service Module (CSM) in which the crew would spend the entire direct-ascent
mission and lift off from the lunar surface for the return trip, after being soft-landed by a larger landing
propulsion module. The final choice of lunar orbit rendezvous changed the CSM's role to the translunar
ferry used to transport the crew, along with a new spacecraft, the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM, later
shortened to Lunar Module, LM, but still pronounced "lem") which would take two men to the lunar surface
and return them to the CSM.[48]

Command and service module

 The command module (CM)
was the conical crew cabin,
designed to carry three
astronauts from launch to
lunar orbit and back to an
Earth ocean landing. It was
the only component of the
Apollo spacecraft to survive
without major configuration
changes as the program
An Apollo boilerplate command
Apollo 15 CSM in lunar orbit evolved from the early module is on exhibit in the Meteor
Apollo study designs. Its Crater Visitor Center in Winslow,
exterior was covered with an Arizona.
ablative heat shield, and had its own reaction control system (RCS)
engines to control its attitude and steer its atmospheric entry path.
Parachutes were carried to slow its descent to splashdown. The module was 11.42 feet (3.48 m) tall, 12.83
feet (3.91 m) in diameter, and weighed approximately 12,250 pounds (5,560 kg).[49]

A cylindrical service module (SM) supported the command module, with a service propulsion engine and an
RCS with propellants, and a fuel cell power generation system with liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen
reactants. A high-gain S-band antenna was used for long-distance communications on the lunar flights. On
the extended lunar missions, an orbital scientific instrument package was carried. The service module was
discarded just before reentry. The module was 24.6 feet (7.5 m) long and 12.83 feet (3.91 m) in diameter.
The initial lunar flight version weighed approximately 51,300 pounds (23,300 kg) fully fueled, while a later
version designed to carry a lunar orbit scientific instrument package weighed just over 54,000 pounds
(24,000 kg).[49]

North American Aviation won the contract to build the CSM, and also the second stage of the Saturn V
launch vehicle for NASA. Because the CSM design was started early before the selection of lunar orbit
rendezvous, the service propulsion engine was sized to lift the CSM off the Moon, and thus was oversized to
about twice the thrust required for translunar flight.[50] Also, there was no provision for docking with the
lunar module. A 1964 program definition study concluded that the initial design should be continued as
Block I which would be used for early testing, while Block II, the actual lunar spacecraft, would incorporate
the docking equipment and take advantage of the lessons learned in Block I development.[48]

Apollo Lunar Module

The Apollo Lunar Module (LM) was designed to descend from lunar orbit to land two astronauts on the
Moon and take them back to orbit to rendezvous with the command module. Not designed to fly through the
Earth's atmosphere or return to Earth, its fuselage was designed totally without aerodynamic considerations
and was of an extremely lightweight construction. It consisted of separate descent and ascent stages, each
with its own engine. The descent stage contained storage for the descent propellant, surface stay
consumables, and surface exploration equipment. The ascent stage contained the crew cabin, ascent
propellant, and a reaction control system. The initial LM model weighed approximately 33,300 pounds
(15,100 kg), and allowed surface stays up to around 34 hours. An extended lunar module weighed over
36,200 pounds (16,400 kg), and allowed surface stays of more than three days.[49] The contract for design
and construction of the lunar module was awarded to Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, and the
project was overseen by Thomas J. Kelly.[51]

Launch vehicles
Before the Apollo program began, Wernher von Braun and his team
of rocket engineers had started work on plans for very large launch
vehicles, the Saturn series, and the even larger Nova series. In the
midst of these plans, von Braun was transferred from the Army to
NASA and was made Director of the Marshall Space Flight Center.
The initial direct ascent plan to send the three-person Apollo
command and service module directly to the lunar surface, on top of
a large descent rocket stage, would require a Nova-class launcher,
with a lunar payload capability of over 180,000 pounds
(82,000 kg).[52] The June 11, 1962, decision to use lunar orbit
rendezvous enabled the Saturn V to replace the Nova, and the MSFC
proceeded to develop the Saturn rocket family for Apollo.[53]
Apollo 11 Lunar Module Eagle on the
Since Apollo, like Mercury, used more than one launch vehicle for Moon, photographed by Neil
space missions, NASA used spacecraft-launch vehicle combination Armstrong
series numbers: AS-10x for Saturn I, AS-20x for Saturn IB, and AS-
50x for Saturn V (compare Mercury-Redstone 3,
Mercury-Atlas 6) to designate and plan all missions,
rather than numbering them sequentially as in Project
Gemini. This was changed by the time human flights
began.[54]

Little Joe II

Since Apollo, like Mercury, would require a launch

escape system (LES) in case of a launch failure, a
relatively small rocket was required for qualification
flight testing of this system. A rocket bigger than the
Little Joe used by Mercury would be required, so the Four Apollo rocket assemblies, drawn to scale:
Little Joe II, Saturn I, Saturn IB, and Saturn V
Little Joe II was built by General Dynamics/Convair.
After an August 1963 qualification test flight,[55] four
LES test flights (A-001 through 004) were made at the
White Sands Missile Range between May 1964 and January 1966.[56]

Saturn I

Saturn I, the first US heavy lift launch vehicle, was initially planned to launch
partially equipped CSMs in low Earth orbit tests. The S-I first stage burned RP-
1 with liquid oxygen (LOX) oxidizer in eight clustered Rocketdyne H-1
engines, to produce 1,500,000 pounds-force (6,670 kN) of thrust. The S-IV
second stage used six liquid hydrogen-fueled Pratt & Whitney RL-10 engines
with 90,000 pounds-force (400 kN) of thrust. A planned Centaur (S-V) third
stage with two RL-10 engines never flew on Saturn I.[57]

The first four Saturn I test flights were launched from LC-34, with only the first
stage live, carrying dummy upper stages filled with water. The first flight with a
A Saturn IB rocket
live S-IV was launched from LC-37. This was followed by five launches of
launches Apollo 7, 1968
boilerplate CSMs (designated AS-101 through AS-105) into orbit in 1964 and
1965. The last three of these further supported the Apollo program by also
carrying Pegasus satellites, which verified the safety of the translunar
environment by measuring the frequency and severity of micrometeorite impacts.[58]
In September 1962, NASA planned to launch four crewed CSM flights on the Saturn I from late 1965
through 1966, concurrent with Project Gemini. The 22,500-pound (10,200 kg) payload capacity[59] would
have severely limited the systems which could be included, so the decision was made in October 1963 to use
the uprated Saturn IB for all crewed Earth orbital flights.[60]

Saturn IB

The Saturn IB was an upgraded version of the Saturn I. The S-IB first stage increased the thrust to 1,600,000
pounds-force (7,120 kN) by uprating the H-1 engine. The second stage replaced the S-IV with the S-IVB-
200, powered by a single J-2 engine burning liquid hydrogen fuel with LOX, to produce 200,000 pounds-
force (890 kN) of thrust.[61] A restartable version of the S-IVB was used as the third stage of the Saturn V.
The Saturn IB could send over 40,000 pounds (18,100 kg) into low Earth orbit, sufficient for a partially
fueled CSM or the LM.[62] Saturn IB launch vehicles and flights were designated with an AS-200 series
number, "AS" indicating "Apollo Saturn" and the "2" indicating the second member of the Saturn rocket
family.[63]

Saturn V

Saturn V launch vehicles and flights were designated with an AS-500 series
number, "AS" indicating "Apollo Saturn" and the "5" indicating Saturn V.[63]
The three-stage Saturn V was designed to send a fully fueled CSM and LM to
the Moon. It was 33 feet (10.1 m) in diameter and stood 363 feet (110.6 m) tall
with its 96,800-pound (43,900 kg) lunar payload. Its capability grew to 103,600
pounds (47,000 kg) for the later advanced lunar landings. The S-IC first stage
burned RP-1/LOX for a rated thrust of 7,500,000 pounds-force (33,400 kN),
which was upgraded to 7,610,000 pounds-force (33,900 kN). The second and
third stages burned liquid hydrogen, and the third stage was a modified version
of the S-IVB, with thrust increased to 230,000 pounds-force (1,020 kN) and
capability to restart the engine for translunar injection after reaching a parking A Saturn V rocket
launches Apollo 11, 1969
orbit.[64]

Astronauts
NASA's director of flight crew operations during the Apollo
program was Donald K. "Deke" Slayton, one of the original Mercury
Seven astronauts who was medically grounded in September 1962
due to a heart murmur. Slayton was responsible for making all
Gemini and Apollo crew assignments.[65]

Thirty-two astronauts were assigned to fly missions in the Apollo

program. Twenty-four of these left Earth's orbit and flew around the
Moon between December 1968 and December 1972 (three of them
twice). Half of the 24 walked on the Moon's surface, though none of
Apollo 1 crew: Ed White, command
them returned to it after landing once. One of the moonwalkers was
pilot Gus Grissom, and Roger
a trained geologist. Of the 32, Gus Grissom, Ed White, and Roger
Chaffee
Chaffee were killed during a ground test in preparation for the
Apollo 1 mission.[54]
The Apollo astronauts were chosen from the Project Mercury and
Gemini veterans, plus from two later astronaut groups. All missions
were commanded by Gemini or Mercury veterans. Crews on all
development flights (except the Earth orbit CSM development
flights) through the first two landings on Apollo 11 and Apollo 12,
included at least two (sometimes three) Gemini veterans. Dr.
Harrison Schmitt, a geologist, was the first NASA scientist astronaut
to fly in space, and landed on the Moon on the last mission, Apollo
17. Schmitt participated in the lunar geology training of all of the
Apollo landing crews.[66]
Apollo 11 crew, from left:
NASA awarded all 32 of these astronauts its highest honor, the Commander Neil Armstrong,
Distinguished Service Medal, given for "distinguished service, Command Module Pilot Michael
ability, or courage", and personal "contribution representing Collins, and Lunar Module Pilot Buzz
substantial progress to the NASA mission". The medals were Aldrin
awarded posthumously to Grissom, White, and Chaffee in 1969,
then to the crews of all missions from Apollo 8 onward. The crew
that flew the first Earth orbital test mission Apollo 7, Walter M. Schirra, Donn Eisele, and Walter
Cunningham, were awarded the lesser NASA Exceptional Service Medal, because of discipline problems
with the flight director's orders during their flight. The NASA Administrator in October, 2008, decided to
award them the Distinguished Service Medals, by this time posthumously to Schirra and Eisele.[67]

Lunar mission profile

The first lunar landing mission was planned to proceed as follows:[68]
Launch The three Saturn V
stages burn for about 11
minutes to achieve a 100-
nautical-mile (190 km) circular
parking orbit. The third stage
burns a small portion of its fuel
to achieve orbit.
Extraction, The CMP docks
the CSM with the LM, and
pulls the complete spacecraft
away from the S-IVB. The
lunar voyage takes between
two and three days.
Midcourse corrections are
made as necessary using the
SM engine.
Translunar injection After
one to two orbits to verify
readiness of spacecraft
systems, the S-IVB third stage
reignites for about six minutes
to send the spacecraft to the
Moon.
Lunar orbit insertion The
spacecraft passes about 60
nautical miles (110 km) behind
the Moon, and the SM engine
is fired to slow the spacecraft
and put it into a 60-by-170-
nautical-mile (110 by 310 km)
orbit, which is soon
circularized at 60 nautical
miles by a second burn.
Transposition and docking
The Spacecraft Lunar Module
Adapter (SLA) panels
separate to free the CSM and
expose the LM. The command
module pilot (CMP) moves the
CSM out a safe distance, and
turns 180°.
After a rest period, the
commander (CDR) and lunar
module pilot (LMP) move to
the LM, power up its systems,
and deploy the landing gear.
The CSM and LM separate;
the CMP visually inspects the
LM, then the LM crew move a
safe distance away and fire
the descent engine for
Descent orbit insertion,
which takes it to a perilune of
about 50,000 feet (15 km).
Powered descent At perilune,
the descent engine fires again
to start the descent. The CDR
takes control after pitchover
for a vertical landing.
The CDR and LMP perform The ascent stage lifts off,
one or more EVAs exploring using the descent stage as a
the lunar surface and launching pad.
collecting samples, alternating
with rest periods.

The LM rendezvouses and The CDR and LMP transfer Trans-Earth injection The
docks with the CSM. back to the CM with their SM engine fires to send the
material samples, then the LM CSM back to Earth.
ascent stage is jettisoned, to
eventually fall out of orbit and
crash on the surface.

The SM is jettisoned just
before reentry, and the CM
turns 180° to face its blunt end
forward for reentry.
Atmospheric drag slows the
CM. Aerodynamic heating
surrounds it with an envelope
of ionized air which causes a
communications blackout for
several minutes.
Parachutes are deployed,
slowing the CM for a
splashdown in the Pacific
Ocean. The astronauts are
recovered and brought to an
aircraft carrier.
 Lunar flight profile (distances not to scale).

Profile variations
The first three lunar missions (Apollo 8, Apollo 10, and Apollo 11) used a free return trajectory,
keeping a flight path coplanar with the lunar orbit, which would allow a return to Earth in case
the SM engine failed to make lunar orbit insertion. Landing site lighting conditions on later
missions dictated a lunar orbital plane change, which required a course change maneuver
soon after TLI, and eliminated the free-return option.[69]
After Apollo 12 placed the second of several seismometers on the Moon,[70] the jettisoned LM
ascent stages on Apollo 12 and later missions were deliberately crashed on the Moon at
known locations to induce vibrations in the Moon's structure. The only exceptions to this were
the Apollo 13 LM which burned up in the Earth's atmosphere, and Apollo 16, where a loss of
attitude control after jettison prevented making a targeted impact.[71]
As another active seismic experiment, the S-IVBs on Apollo 13 and subsequent missions were
deliberately crashed on the Moon instead of being sent to solar orbit.[72]
Starting with Apollo 13, descent orbit insertion was to be performed using the service module
engine instead of the LM engine, in order to allow a greater fuel reserve for landing. This was
actually done for the first time on Apollo 14, since the Apollo 13 mission was aborted before
landing.[73]

Development history

Uncrewed flight tests

Two Block I CSMs were launched from LC-34 on suborbital flights in 1966 with the Saturn IB. The first,
AS-201 launched on February 26, reached an altitude of 265.7 nautical miles (492.1 km) and splashed down
4,577 nautical miles (8,477 km) downrange in the Atlantic Ocean.[74] The second, AS-202 on August 25,
reached 617.1 nautical miles (1,142.9 km) altitude and was
recovered 13,900 nautical miles (25,700 km) downrange in the
Pacific Ocean. These flights validated the service module
engine and the command module heat shield.[75]

A third Saturn IB test, AS-203 launched from pad 37, went into
orbit to support design of the S-IVB upper stage restart
capability needed for the Saturn V. It carried a nose cone instead
of the Apollo spacecraft, and its payload was the unburned
liquid hydrogen fuel, the behavior of which engineers measured
with temperature and pressure sensors, and a TV camera. This
flight occurred on July 5, before AS-202, which was delayed
because of problems getting the Apollo spacecraft ready for
flight.[76]
Apollo uncrewed development mission
launches. Click on a launch image to read
Preparation for crewed flight the main article about each mission

Two crewed orbital Block I CSM missions were planned: AS-

204 and AS-205. The Block I crew positions were titled Command Pilot, Senior Pilot, and Pilot. The Senior
Pilot would assume navigation duties, while the Pilot would function as a systems engineer.[77] The
astronauts would wear a modified version of the Gemini spacesuit.[78]

After an uncrewed LM test flight AS-206, a crew would fly the first Block II CSM and LM in a dual
mission known as AS-207/208, or AS-278 (each spacecraft would be launched on a separate Saturn IB).[79]
The Block II crew positions were titled Commander, Command Module Pilot, and Lunar Module Pilot. The
astronauts would begin wearing a new Apollo A6L spacesuit, designed to accommodate lunar extravehicular
activity (EVA). The traditional visor helmet was replaced with a clear "fishbowl" type for greater visibility,
and the lunar surface EVA suit would include a water-cooled undergarment.[80]

Deke Slayton, the grounded Mercury astronaut who became director of flight crew operations for the
Gemini and Apollo programs, selected the first Apollo crew in January 1966, with Grissom as Command
Pilot, White as Senior Pilot, and rookie Donn F. Eisele as Pilot. But Eisele dislocated his shoulder twice
aboard the KC135 weightlessness training aircraft, and had to undergo surgery on January 27. Slayton
replaced him with Chaffee.[81] NASA announced the final crew selection for AS-204 on March 21, 1966,
with the backup crew consisting of Gemini veterans James McDivitt and David Scott, with rookie Russell L.
"Rusty" Schweickart. Mercury/Gemini veteran Wally Schirra, Eisele, and rookie Walter Cunningham were
announced on September 29 as the prime crew for AS-205.[81]

In December 1966, the AS-205 mission was canceled, since the validation of the CSM would be
accomplished on the 14-day first flight, and AS-205 would have been devoted to space experiments and
contribute no new engineering knowledge about the spacecraft. Its Saturn IB was allocated to the dual
mission, now redesignated AS-205/208 or AS-258, planned for August 1967. McDivitt, Scott and
Schweickart were promoted to the prime AS-258 crew, and Schirra, Eisele and Cunningham were
reassigned as the Apollo 1 backup crew.[82]

Program delays

The spacecraft for the AS-202 and AS-204 missions were delivered by North American Aviation to the
Kennedy Space Center with long lists of equipment problems which had to be corrected before flight; these
delays caused the launch of AS-202 to slip behind AS-203, and eliminated hopes the first crewed mission
might be ready to launch as soon as November 1966, concurrently with the last Gemini mission. Eventually,
the planned AS-204 flight date was pushed to February 21, 1967.[83]

North American Aviation was prime contractor not only for the Apollo CSM, but for the Saturn V S-II
second stage as well, and delays in this stage pushed the first uncrewed Saturn V flight AS-501 from late
1966 to November 1967. (The initial assembly of AS-501 had to use a dummy spacer spool in place of the
stage.)[84]

The problems with North American were severe enough in late 1965 to cause Manned Space Flight
Administrator George Mueller to appoint program director Samuel Phillips to head a "tiger team" to
investigate North American's problems and identify corrections. Phillips documented his findings in a
December 19 letter to NAA president Lee Atwood, with a strongly worded letter by Mueller, and also gave a
presentation of the results to Mueller and Deputy Administrator Robert Seamans.[85] Meanwhile, Grumman
was also encountering problems with the Lunar Module, eliminating hopes it would be ready for crewed
flight in 1967, not long after the first crewed CSM flights.[86]

Apollo 1 fire

Grissom, White, and Chaffee decided to name their flight Apollo 1

as a motivational focus on the first crewed flight. They trained and
conducted tests of their spacecraft at North American, and in the
altitude chamber at the Kennedy Space Center. A "plugs-out" test
was planned for January, which would simulate a launch countdown
on LC-34 with the spacecraft transferring from pad-supplied to
internal power. If successful, this would be followed by a more
rigorous countdown simulation test closer to the February 21 launch,
with both spacecraft and launch vehicle fueled.[87] Charred Apollo 1 cabin interior

The plugs-out test began on the morning of January 27, 1967, and
immediately was plagued with problems. First, the crew noticed a strange odor in their spacesuits which
delayed the sealing of the hatch. Then, communications problems frustrated the astronauts and forced a hold
in the simulated countdown. During this hold, an electrical fire began in the cabin and spread quickly in the
high pressure, 100% oxygen atmosphere. Pressure rose high enough from the fire that the cabin inner wall
burst, allowing the fire to erupt onto the pad area and frustrating attempts to rescue the crew. The astronauts
were asphyxiated before the hatch could be opened.[88]

NASA immediately convened an accident review board, overseen by both houses of Congress. While the
determination of responsibility for the accident was complex, the review board concluded that "deficiencies
existed in command module design, workmanship and quality control".[88] At the insistence of NASA
Administrator Webb, North American removed Harrison Storms as command module program manager.[89]
Webb also reassigned Apollo Spacecraft Program Office (ASPO) Manager Joseph Francis Shea, replacing
him with George Low.[90]

To remedy the causes of the fire, changes were made in the Block II spacecraft and operational procedures,
the most important of which were use of a nitrogen/oxygen mixture instead of pure oxygen before and
during launch, and removal of flammable cabin and space suit materials.[91] The Block II design already
called for replacement of the Block I plug-type hatch cover with a quick-release, outward opening door.[91]
NASA discontinued the crewed Block I program, using the Block I spacecraft only for uncrewed Saturn V
flights. Crew members would also exclusively wear modified, fire-resistant A7L Block II space suits, and
would be designated by the Block II titles, regardless of whether a LM was present on the flight or not.[80]
Uncrewed Saturn V and LM tests

On April 24, 1967, Mueller published an official Apollo mission

numbering scheme, using sequential numbers for all flights, crewed
or uncrewed. The sequence would start with Apollo 4 to cover the
first three uncrewed flights while retiring the Apollo 1 designation to
honor the crew, per their widows' wishes.[54][92]

In September 1967, Mueller approved a sequence of mission types

which had to be successfully accomplished in order to achieve the
crewed lunar landing. Each step had to be successfully accomplished
before the next ones could be performed, and it was unknown how
many tries of each mission would be necessary; therefore letters
were used instead of numbers. The A missions were uncrewed
Saturn V validation; B was uncrewed LM validation using the
Saturn IB; C was crewed CSM Earth orbit validation using the Block II spacesuit in January 1968,
Saturn IB; D was the first crewed CSM/LM flight (this replaced AS- before (left) and after changes
258, using a single Saturn V launch); E would be a higher Earth recommended after the Apollo 1 fire
orbit CSM/LM flight; F would be the first lunar mission, testing the
LM in lunar orbit but without landing (a "dress rehearsal"); and G
would be the first crewed landing. The list of types covered follow-on lunar exploration to include H lunar
landings, I for lunar orbital survey missions, and J for extended-stay lunar landings.[93]

The delay in the CSM caused by the fire enabled NASA to catch up on human-rating the LM and Saturn V.
Apollo 4 (AS-501) was the first uncrewed flight of the Saturn V, carrying a Block I CSM on November 9,
1967. The capability of the command module's heat shield to survive a trans-lunar reentry was demonstrated
by using the service module engine to ram it into the atmosphere at higher than the usual Earth-orbital
reentry speed.

Apollo 5 (AS-204) was the first uncrewed test flight of LM in Earth orbit, launched from pad 37 on January
22, 1968, by the Saturn IB that would have been used for Apollo 1. The LM engines were successfully test-
fired and restarted, despite a computer programming error which cut short the first descent stage firing. The
ascent engine was fired in abort mode, known as a "fire-in-the-hole" test, where it was lit simultaneously
with jettison of the descent stage. Although Grumman wanted a second uncrewed test, George Low decided
the next LM flight would be crewed.[94]

This was followed on April 4, 1968, by Apollo 6 (AS-502) which carried a CSM and a LM Test Article as
ballast. The intent of this mission was to achieve trans-lunar injection, followed closely by a simulated
direct-return abort, using the service module engine to achieve another high-speed reentry. The Saturn V
experienced pogo oscillation, a problem caused by non-steady engine combustion, which damaged fuel lines
in the second and third stages. Two S-II engines shut down prematurely, but the remaining engines were able
to compensate. The damage to the third stage engine was more severe, preventing it from restarting for
trans-lunar injection. Mission controllers were able to use the service module engine to essentially repeat the
flight profile of Apollo 4. Based on the good performance of Apollo 6 and identification of satisfactory fixes
to the Apollo 6 problems, NASA declared the Saturn V ready to fly men, canceling a third uncrewed test.[95]

Crewed development missions

Apollo 7, launched from LC-34 on October 11, 1968, was the C mission, crewed by Schirra, Eisele, and
Cunningham. It was an 11-day Earth-orbital flight which tested the CSM systems.[96]
 Apollo 8 was planned to
be the D mission in
December 1968, crewed
by McDivitt, Scott and
Schweickart, launched
on a Saturn V instead of
two Saturn IBs.[97] In
the summer it had
become clear that the Apollo crewed development mission
LM would not be ready patches. Click on a patch to read the main
Neil Armstrong descends the LM's
in time. Rather than article about that mission
ladder in preparation for the first
steps on the lunar surface, as
waste the Saturn V on
televised live on July 20, 1969 another simple Earth-
orbiting mission, ASPO Manager George Low suggested the bold
step of sending Apollo 8 to orbit the Moon instead, deferring the
D mission to the next mission in March 1969, and eliminating the E mission. This would keep the program
on track. The Soviet Union had sent two tortoises, mealworms, wine flies, and other lifeforms around the
Moon on September 15, 1968, aboard Zond 5, and it was believed they might soon repeat the feat with
human cosmonauts.[98][99] The decision was not announced publicly until successful completion of Apollo
7. Gemini veterans Frank Borman and Jim Lovell, and rookie William Anders captured the world's attention
by making ten lunar orbits in 20 hours, transmitting television pictures of the lunar surface on Christmas
Eve, and returning safely to Earth.[100]

The following March, LM flight, rendezvous and docking were successfully demonstrated in Earth orbit on
Apollo 9, and Schweickart tested the full lunar EVA suit with its portable life support system (PLSS) outside
the LM.[101] The F mission was successfully carried out on Apollo 10 in May 1969 by Gemini veterans
Thomas P. Stafford, John Young and Eugene Cernan. Stafford and Cernan took the LM to within 50,000 feet
(15 km) of the lunar surface.[102]

The G mission was achieved on Apollo 11 in July 1969 by an all-Gemini veteran crew consisting of Neil
Armstrong, Michael Collins and Buzz Aldrin. Armstrong and Aldrin performed the first landing at the Sea
of Tranquility at 20:17:40 UTC on July 20, 1969. They spent a total of 21 hours, 36 minutes on the surface,
and spent 2 hours, 31 minutes outside the spacecraft,[103] walking on the surface, taking photographs,
collecting material samples, and deploying automated scientific instruments, while continuously sending
black-and-white television back to Earth. The astronauts returned safely on July 24.[104]

That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind.

— Neil Armstrong, just after stepping onto the Moon's surface[105]

Production lunar landings

In November 1969, Gemini veteran Charles "Pete" Conrad and rookie Alan L. Bean made a precision
landing on Apollo 12 within walking distance of the Surveyor 3 uncrewed lunar probe, which had landed in
April 1967 on the Ocean of Storms. The command module pilot was Gemini veteran Richard F. Gordon Jr.
Conrad and Bean carried the first lunar surface color television camera, but it was damaged when
accidentally pointed into the Sun. They made two EVAs totaling 7 hours and 45 minutes.[103] On one, they
walked to the Surveyor, photographed it, and removed some parts which they returned to Earth.[106]
 The success of the first
two landings allowed
the remaining missions
to be crewed with a
single veteran as
commander, with two
rookies. Apollo 13
launched Lovell, Jack
Swigert, and Fred Haise
in April 1970, headed Apollo production crewed lunar landing
for the Fra Mauro mission patches. Click on a patch to read
formation. But two days the main article about that mission
Apollo landings on the Moon, 1969– out, a liquid oxygen
1972 tank exploded, disabling
the service module and forcing the crew to use the LM as a
"lifeboat" to return to Earth. Another NASA review board was
convened to determine the cause, which turned out to be a combination of damage of the tank in the factory,
and a subcontractor not making a tank component according to updated design specifications.[47] Apollo
was grounded again, for the remainder of 1970 while the oxygen tank was redesigned and an extra one was
added.[107]

The contracted batch of 15 Saturn Vs was enough for lunar landing missions through Apollo 20. NASA
publicized a preliminary list of eight more planned landing sites, with plans to increase the mass of the CSM
and LM for the last five missions, along with the payload capacity of the Saturn V. These final missions
would combine the I and J types in the 1967 list, allowing the CMP to operate a package of lunar orbital
sensors and cameras while his companions were on the surface, and allowing them to stay on the Moon for
over three days. These missions would also carry the Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) increasing the
exploration area and allowing televised liftoff of the LM. Also, the Block II spacesuit was revised for the
extended missions to allow greater flexibility and visibility for driving the LRV.[108]

Mission cutbacks

About the time of the first landing in 1969, it was decided to use an existing Saturn V to launch the Skylab
orbital laboratory pre-built on the ground, replacing the original plan to construct it in orbit from several
Saturn IB launches; this eliminated Apollo 20. NASA's yearly budget also began to shrink in light of the
successful landing, and NASA also had to make funds available for the development of the upcoming Space
Shuttle. By 1971, the decision was made to also cancel missions 18 and 19.[109] The two unused Saturn Vs
became museum exhibits at the John F. Kennedy Space Center on Merritt Island, Florida, George C.
Marshall Space Center in Huntsville, Alabama, Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, Louisiana, and
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas.[110]

The cutbacks forced mission planners to reassess the original planned landing sites in order to achieve the
most effective geological sample and data collection from the remaining four missions. Apollo 15 had been
planned to be the last of the H series missions, but since there would be only two subsequent missions left, it
was changed to the first of three J missions.[111]

Apollo 13's Fra Mauro mission was reassigned to Apollo 14, commanded in February 1971 by Mercury
veteran Alan Shepard, with Stuart Roosa and Edgar Mitchell.[112] This time the mission was successful.
Shepard and Mitchell spent 33 hours and 31 minutes on the surface,[113] and completed two EVAs totalling
9 hours 24 minutes, which was a record for the longest EVA by a lunar crew at the time.[112]
In August 1971, just after conclusion of the Apollo 15 mission, President Richard Nixon proposed canceling
the two remaining lunar landing missions, Apollo 16 and 17. Office of Management and Budget Deputy
Director Caspar Weinberger was opposed to this, and persuaded Nixon to keep the remaining missions.[114]

Extended missions

Apollo 15 was launched on

July 26, 1971, with David
Scott, Alfred Worden and
James Irwin. Scott and Irwin
landed on July 30 near
Hadley Rille, and spent just
under two days, 19 hours on
the surface. In over 18 hours
of EVA, they collected about
Lunar Roving Vehicle used on
77 kilograms (170 lb) of
Apollos 15–17
lunar material.[115]

Apollo 16 landed in the

Descartes Highlands on April 20, 1972. The crew was commanded
Plaque left on the Moon by Apollo 17
by John Young, with Ken Mattingly and Charles Duke. Young and
Duke spent just under three days on the surface, with a total of over
20 hours EVA.[116]

Apollo 17 was the last of the Apollo program, landing in the Taurus–Littrow region in December 1972.
Eugene Cernan commanded Ronald E. Evans and NASA's first scientist-astronaut, geologist Dr. Harrison H.
Schmitt.[117] Schmitt was originally scheduled for Apollo 18,[118] but the lunar geological community
lobbied for his inclusion on the final lunar landing.[119] Cernan and Schmitt stayed on the surface for just
over three days and spent just over 23 hours of total EVA.[117]

Mission summary
 Launch
Designation Date CSM LM Crew Summary
vehicle
First flight of
Saturn IB and
Block I CSM;
suborbital to
AS-201 Feb 26, 1966 AS-201 CSM-009 None None
Atlantic Ocean;
qualified heat
shield to orbital
reentry speed.
No spacecraft;
observations of
liquid hydrogen
fuel behavior in
AS-203 Jul 5, 1966 AS-203 None None None
orbit, to support
design of S-IVB
restart
capability.
Suborbital flight
AS-202 Aug 25, 1966 AS-202 CSM-011 None None of CSM to
Pacific Ocean.
Not flown. All
crew members
Gus Grissom died in a fire
AS-204
Feb 21, 1967 AS-204 CSM-012 None Ed White during a launch
(Apollo 1)
Roger B. Chaffee pad test on
January 27,
1967.
First test flight
of Saturn V,
placed a CSM
in a high Earth
orbit;
Apollo 4 Nov 9, 1967 AS-501 CSM-017 LTA-10R None demonstrated
S-IVB restart;
qualified CM
heat shield to
lunar reentry
speed.
Earth orbital
flight test of LM,
launched on
Saturn IB;
demonstrated
Apollo 5 Jan 22–23, 1968 AS-204 None LM-1 None
ascent and
descent
propulsion;
human-rated
the LM.
Apollo 6 Apr 4, 1968 AS-502 CM-020 LTA-2R None Uncrewed,
SM-014 second flight of
Saturn V,
attempted
demonstration
of trans-lunar
injection, and
direct-return
abort using SM
engine; three
engine failures,
including failure
 of S-IVB
restart. Flight
controllers used
SM engine to
repeat Apollo
4's flight profile.
Human-rated
the Saturn V.
First crewed
Earth orbital
demonstration
of Block II
CSM, launched
Wally Schirra
on Saturn IB.
Apollo 7 Oct 11–22, 1968 AS-205 CSM-101 None Walt Cunningham
First live
Donn Eisele
television
publicly
broadcast from
a crewed
mission.
First crewed
flight of Saturn
Frank Borman V; First crewed
Apollo 8 Dec 21–27, 1968 AS-503 CSM-103 LTA-B James Lovell flight to Moon;
William Anders CSM made 10
lunar orbits in
20 hours.
Second crewed
flight of Saturn
V; First crewed
flight of CSM
and LM in Earth
James McDivitt
CSM-104 LM-3 orbit;
Apollo 9 Mar 3–13, 1969 AS-504 David Scott
Gumdrop Spider demonstrated
Russell Schweickart
portable life
support system
to be used on
the lunar
surface.
Dress rehearsal
for first lunar
CSM-106 Thomas Stafford landing; flew
LM-4
Apollo 10 May 18–26, 1969 AS-505 Charlie John Young LM down to
Snoopy
Brown Eugene Cernan 50,000 feet
(15 km) from
lunar surface.
First crewed
landing, in
Tranquility
Base, Sea of
Neil Armstrong Tranquility.
CSM-107 LM-5
Apollo 11 Jul 16–24, 1969 AS-506 Michael Collins Surface EVA
Columbia Eagle
Buzz Aldrin time: 2:31 hr.
Samples
returned: 47.51
pounds
(21.55 kg).
Apollo 12 Nov 14–24, 1969 AS-507 CSM-108 LM-6 C. "Pete" Conrad Second
Yankee Intrepid Richard Gordon landing, in
Clipper Alan Bean Ocean of
Storms near
Surveyor 3 .
 Surface EVA
time: 7:45 hr.
Samples
returned: 75.62
pounds
(34.30 kg).
Third landing
attempt aborted
in transit to the
Moon, due to
SM failure.
James Lovell
CSM-109 LM-7 Crew used LM
Apollo 13 Apr 11–17, 1970 AS-508 Jack Swigert
Odyssey Aquarius as "lifeboat" to
Fred Haise
return to Earth.
Mission
labelled as a
"successful
failure".[120]
Third landing,
in Fra Mauro
formation,
located
northeast of the
Alan Shepard Ocean of
Jan 31 – Feb 9, CSM-110 LM-8
Apollo 14 AS-509 Stuart Roosa Storms.
1971 Kitty Hawk Antares
Edgar Mitchell Surface EVA
time: 9:21 hr.
Samples
returned: 94.35
pounds
(42.80 kg).
First Extended
LM and rover,
landed in
Hadley-
Apennine,
located near
David Scott
Jul 26 – Aug 7, CSM-112 LM-10 the Sea of
Apollo 15 AS-510 Alfred Worden
1971 Endeavour Falcon Showers/Rains.
James Irwin
Surface EVA
time:18:33 hr.
Samples
returned:
169.10 pounds
(76.70 kg).
Landed in Plain
of Descartes.
Surface EVA
John Young
CSM-113 LM-11 time: 20:14 hr.
Apollo 16 Apr 16–27, 1972 AS-511 T. Kenneth Mattingly
Casper Orion Samples
Charles Duke
returned:
207.89 pounds
(94.30 kg).
Apollo 17 Dec 7–19, 1972 AS-512 CSM-114 LM-12 Eugene Cernan Only Saturn V
America Challenger Ronald Evans night launch.
Harrison Schmitt Landed in
Taurus–Littrow.
First geologist
on the Moon.
Apollo's last
crewed Moon
landing.
Surface EVA
 time: 22:02 hr.
Samples
returned:
243.40 pounds
(110.40 kg).

Source: Apollo by the Numbers: A Statistical Reference (Orloff 2004)[121]

Samples returned
The Apollo program returned over 382 kg (842 lb) of
lunar rocks and soil to the Lunar Receiving Laboratory in
Houston.[122][121][123] Today, 75% of the samples are
stored at the Lunar Sample Laboratory Facility built in
1979.[124]

The rocks collected from the Moon are extremely old

compared to rocks found on Earth, as measured by
radiometric dating techniques. They range in age from
about 3.2 billion years for the basaltic samples derived The most famous of the Ferroan Anorthosite
from the lunar maria, to about 4.6 billion years for Moon rocks recovered, the Moon rock, returned
samples derived from the highlands crust. [125] As such, Genesis Rock, returned from Apollo 16.
from Apollo 15.
they represent samples from a very early period in the
development of the Solar System, that are largely absent
on Earth. One important rock found during the Apollo
Program is dubbed the Genesis Rock, retrieved by astronauts David Scott and James Irwin during the
Apollo 15 mission.[126] This anorthosite rock is composed almost exclusively of the calcium-rich feldspar
mineral anorthite, and is believed to be representative of the highland crust.[127] A geochemical component
called KREEP was discovered by Apollo 12, which has no known terrestrial counterpart.[128] KREEP and
the anorthositic samples have been used to infer that the outer portion of the Moon was once completely
molten (see lunar magma ocean).[129]

Almost all the rocks show evidence of impact process effects. Many samples appear to be pitted with
micrometeoroid impact craters, which is never seen on Earth rocks, due to the thick atmosphere. Many show
signs of being subjected to high-pressure shock waves that are generated during impact events. Some of the
returned samples are of impact melt (materials melted near an impact crater.) All samples returned from the
Moon are highly brecciated as a result of being subjected to multiple impact events.[130]

Analysis of the composition of the lunar samples supports the giant impact hypothesis, that the Moon was
created through impact of a large astronomical body with the Earth.[131]

Costs
Apollo cost $25.4 billion (or approximately $153 billion in 2018 dollars when adjusted for inflation via the
GDP deflator index).[1]

Of this amount, $20.2 billion ($122 billion adjusted) was spent on the design, development, and production
of the Saturn family of launch vehicles, the Apollo spacecraft, space suits, scientific experiments, and
mission operations. The cost of constructing and operating Apollo-related ground facilities, such as the
NASA human spaceflight centers and the global tracking and data acquisition network, added an additional
$5.2 billion ($31.4 billion adjusted).
The amount grows to $28 billion ($169 billion adjusted) if the costs for related projects such as Project
Gemini and the robotic Ranger, Surveyor, and Lunar Orbiter programs are included.[132]

NASA's official cost breakdown, as reported to Congress in the Spring of 1973, is as follows:

Project Apollo Cost (original $)

Apollo spacecraft 8.5 billion
Saturn launch vehicles 9.1 billion
Launch vehicle engine development 900 million
Operations 1.7 billion
Total R&D 20.2 billion
Tracking and data acquisition 900 million
Ground facilities 1.8 billion
Operation of installations 2.5 billion
Total 25.4 billion

Accurate estimates of human spaceflight costs were difficult in the early 1960s, as the capability was new
and management experience was lacking. Preliminary cost analysis by NASA estimated $7 billion -
$12 billion for a crewed lunar landing effort. NASA Administrator James Webb increased this estimate to
$20 billion before reporting it to Vice President Johnson in April 1961.[133]

Project Apollo was a massive undertaking, representing the largest research and development project in
peacetime. At its peak, it employed over 400,000 employees and contractors around the country and
accounted for more than half of NASA's total spending in the 1960s.[134] It proved unsustainable.

After the first Moon landing, public and political interest waned, including that of President Nixon, who
wanted to rein in federal spending.[135] NASA's budget could not sustain Apollo missions which cost, on
average, $445 million ($2.24 billion adjusted)[136] each while simultaneously developing the Space Shuttle.
The final fiscal year of Apollo funding was 1973.

Apollo Applications Program

Looking beyond the crewed lunar landings, NASA investigated several post-lunar applications for Apollo
hardware. The Apollo Extension Series (Apollo X,) proposed up to 30 flights to Earth orbit, using the space
in the Spacecraft Lunar Module Adapter (SLA) to house a small orbital laboratory (workshop). Astronauts
would continue to use the CSM as a ferry to the station. This study was followed by design of a larger
orbital workshop to be built in orbit from an empty S-IVB Saturn upper stage and grew into the Apollo
Applications Program (AAP). The workshop was to be supplemented by the Apollo Telescope Mount,
which could be attached to the ascent stage of the lunar module via a rack.[137] The most ambitious plan
called for using an empty S-IVB as an interplanetary spacecraft for a Venus fly-by mission.[138]

The S-IVB orbital workshop was the only one of these plans to make it off the drawing board. Dubbed
Skylab, it was assembled on the ground rather than in space, and launched in 1973 using the two lower
stages of a Saturn V. It was equipped with an Apollo Telescope Mount. Skylab's last crew departed the
station on February 8, 1974, and the station itself re-entered the atmosphere in 1979.[139][140]
The Apollo-Soyuz Test Project also used Apollo hardware for the first joint nation space flight, paving the
way for future cooperation with other nations in the Space Shuttle and International Space Station
programs.[140][141]

Recent observations
In 2008, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's SELENE probe
observed evidence of the halo surrounding the Apollo 15 Lunar
Module blast crater while orbiting above the lunar surface.[142]

Beginning in 2009, NASA's robotic Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter,

while orbiting 50 kilometers (31 mi) above the Moon, photographed
the remnants of the Apollo program left on the lunar surface, and
each site where crewed Apollo flights landed.[143][144] All of the
U.S. flags left on the Moon during the Apollo missions were found
to still be standing, with the exception of the one left during the
Apollo 11 mission, which was blown over during that mission's lift-
off from the lunar surface and return to the mission Command
Module in lunar orbit; the degree to which these flags retain their Tranquility Base, imaged in March
original colors remains unknown.[145] 2012 by the Lunar Reconnaissance
Orbiter
In a November 16, 2009, editorial, The New York Times opined:

[T]here's something terribly wistful about these photographs of the Apollo landing sites. The
detail is such that if Neil Armstrong were walking there now, we could make him out, make out
his footsteps even, like the astronaut footpath clearly visible in the photos of the Apollo 14 site.
Perhaps the wistfulness is caused by the sense of simple grandeur in those Apollo missions.
Perhaps, too, it's a reminder of the risk we all felt after the Eagle had landed—the possibility
that it might be unable to lift off again and the astronauts would be stranded on the Moon. But it
may also be that a photograph like this one is as close as we're able to come to looking directly
back into the human past ... There the [Apollo 11] lunar module sits, parked just where it landed
40 years ago, as if it still really were 40 years ago and all the time since merely imaginary.[146]

Legacy

Science and engineering

The Apollo program has been called the greatest technological achievement in human history.[147] Apollo
stimulated many areas of technology, leading to over 1,800 spinoff products as of 2015.[148] The flight
computer design used in both the lunar and command modules was, along with the Polaris and Minuteman
missile systems, the driving force behind early research into integrated circuits (ICs). By 1963, Apollo was
using 60 percent of the United States' production of ICs. The crucial difference between the requirements of
Apollo and the missile programs was Apollo's much greater need for reliability. While the Navy and Air
Force could work around reliability problems by deploying more missiles, the political and financial cost of
failure of an Apollo mission was unacceptably high.[149]
Technologies and techniques required for Apollo were developed by Project Gemini.[150] The Apollo
project was enabled by NASA's adoption of new advances in semiconductor electronic technology,
including metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) in the Interplanetary Monitoring
Platform (IMP)[151][152] and silicon integrated circuit chips in the Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC).[153]

Cultural impact

The crew of Apollo 8 sent the first live televised pictures of the
Earth and the Moon back to Earth, and read from the creation story
in the Book of Genesis, on Christmas Eve 1968.[154] An estimated
one quarter of the population of the world saw—either live or
delayed—the Christmas Eve transmission during the ninth orbit of
the Moon,[155] and an estimated one fifth of the population of the
world watched the live transmission of the Apollo 11
moonwalk.[156]

The Apollo program also affected environmental activism in the

1970s due to photos taken by the astronauts. The most well known
include Earthrise, taken by William Anders on Apollo 8, and The
The Blue Marble photograph taken
Blue Marble, taken by the Apollo 17 astronauts. The Blue Marble
on December 7, 1972, during Apollo
was released during a surge in environmentalism, and became a 17. "We went to explore the Moon,
symbol of the environmental movement as a depiction of Earth's and in fact discovered the Earth." —
frailty, vulnerability, and isolation amid the vast expanse of Eugene Cernan
space.[157]

According to The Economist, Apollo succeeded in accomplishing President Kennedy's goal of taking on the
Soviet Union in the Space Race by accomplishing a singular and significant achievement, to demonstrate the
superiority of the free-market system. The publication noted the irony that in order to achieve the goal, the
program required the organization of tremendous public resources within a vast, centralized government
bureaucracy.[158]

Apollo 11 broadcast data restoration project

Prior to Apollo 11's 40th anniversary in 2009, NASA searched for the original videotapes of the mission's
live televised moonwalk. After an exhaustive three-year search, it was concluded that the tapes had probably
been erased and reused. A new digitally remastered version of the best available broadcast television footage
was released instead.[159]

Depictions on film

Documentaries

Numerous documentary films cover the Apollo program and the Space Race, including:

Footprints on the Moon (1969)

Moonwalk One (1970)[160]
For All Mankind (1989)[161]
Moon Shot (1994 miniseries)
 "Moon" from the BBC miniseries The Planets (1999)
Magnificent Desolation: Walking on the Moon 3D (2005)
The Wonder of It All (2007)
In the Shadow of the Moon (2007)[162]
When We Left Earth: The NASA Missions (2008 miniseries)
Moon Machines (2008 miniseries)
James May on the Moon (2009)
NASA's Story (2009 series) (2009)
Apollo 11 (2019)[163][164]

Docudramas

The Apollo program, or certain missions, have been dramatized in Apollo 13 (1995), Apollo 11 (1996), From
the Earth to the Moon (1998), The Dish (2000), Space Race (2005), Moonshot (2009), and First Man
(2018).

Fictional

The Apollo program has been the focus of several works of fiction, including:

Apollo 18, a 2011 horror movie which was released to negative reviews.
For All Mankind, a 2019 TV series depicting an alternate reality in which the Soviet Union was
the first nation to successfully land a man on the Moon. The rest of the series follows an
alternate history of the late 1960s and early 1970s with NASA continuing Apollo missions to
the Moon.

See also
Apollo 11 in popular culture
Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package
Exploration of the Moon
List of artificial objects on the Moon
Moon landing conspiracy theories
Soviet crewed lunar programs
Stolen and missing Moon rocks

Notes
This article incorporates public domain material (http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/policies.html#Guidelines) from
websites or documents of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

1. United States. Congress. House. Committee on Science and Astronautics. (1973). 1974 NASA
authorization: hearings, Ninety-third Congress, first session, on H.R. 4567 (https://babel.hathitr
ust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015084762718&view=1up&seq=1277). Page 1271. Washington: U.S.
Govt. Print. Off.
 2. Thomas, Ryland; Williamson, Samuel H. (2019). "What Was the U.S. GDP Then?" (http://www.
measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/). MeasuringWorth. Retrieved April 6, 2019. United
States Gross Domestic Product deflator figures follow the Measuring Worth series.
3. Murray & Cox 1989, p. 55
4. "Release 69-36" (http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/about/history/apollo_press_release.html)
(Press release). Cleveland, OH: Lewis Research Center. July 14, 1969. Retrieved June 21,
2012.
5. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 1.7: "Feasility Studies" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/
SP-4205/ch1-7.html). pp. 16-21
6. Preble, Christopher A. (2003). " "Who Ever Believed in the 'Missile Gap'?": John F. Kennedy
and the Politics of National Security". Presidential Studies Quarterly. 33 (4): 813.
JSTOR 27552538 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/27552538).
7. Beschloss 1997
8. Sidey 1963, pp. 117–118
9. Beschloss 1997, p. 55
10. 87th Congress 1961
11. Sidey 1963, p. 114
12. Kennedy, John F. (April 20, 1961). "Memorandum for Vice President" (http://www.jfklibrary.org/
Asset-Viewer/6XnAYXEkkkSMLfp7ic_o-Q.aspx). The White House (Memorandum). Boston,
MA: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
13. Launius, Roger D. (July 1994). "President John F. Kennedy Memo for Vice President, 20 April
1961" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apollomon/apollo1.pdf) (PDF). Apollo: A
Retrospective Analysis (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apollomon/cover.html)
(PDF). Monographs in Aerospace History. Washington, D.C.: NASA. OCLC 31825096 (https://
www.worldcat.org/oclc/31825096). Retrieved August 1, 2013. Key Apollo Source Documents
(http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apollomon/docs.htm).
14. Johnson, Lyndon B. (April 28, 1961). "Memorandum for the President" (http://www.jfklibrary.or
g/Asset-Viewer/DjiWpQJegkuIlX7WZAUCtQ.aspx). Office of the Vice President
(Memorandum). Boston, MA: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum. Retrieved
August 1, 2013.
15. Launius, Roger D. (July 1994). "Lyndon B. Johnson, Vice President, Memo for the President,
'Evaluation of Space Program,' 28 April 1961" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apoll
omon/apollo2.pdf) (PDF). Apollo: A Retrospective Analysis (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/
History/Apollomon/cover.html) (PDF). Monographs in Aerospace History. Washington, D.C.:
NASA. OCLC 31825096 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/31825096). Retrieved August 1, 2013.
Key Apollo Source Documents (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/Apollomon/docs.ht
m).
16. Kennedy, John F. (May 25, 1961). Special Message to Congress on Urgent National Needs (ht
tp://www.jfklibrary.org/Asset-Viewer/xzw1gaeeTES6khED14P1Iw.aspx) (Motion picture
(excerpt)). Boston, MA: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum. Accession
Number: TNC:200; Digital Identifier: TNC-200-2. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
17. Murray & Cox 1989, pp. 16–17
18. Sietzen, Frank (October 2, 1997). "Soviets Planned to Accept JFK's Joint Lunar Mission Offer"
(http://www.spacedaily.com/news/russia-97h.html). SpaceDaily. SpaceCast News Service.
Retrieved August 1, 2013.
19. "Soyuz - Development of the Space Station; Apollo - Voyage to the Moon" (http://www.hq.nas
a.gov/pao/History/SP-4209/ch3-7.htm). Retrieved June 12, 2016.
20. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 2.5: "Contracting for the Command Module" (http://www.hq.nasa.g
ov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch2-5.html). pp. 41–44
21. Allen, Bob (ed.). "NASA Langley Research Center's Contributions to the Apollo Program" (htt
p://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/factsheets/Apollo.html). Langley Research Center.
NASA. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
22. "Historical Facts" (https://web.archive.org/web/20160603125431/http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/hi
story_fact_sheet.html). MSFC History Office. Archived from the original (http://history.msfc.nas
a.gov/history_fact_sheet.html) on June 3, 2016. Retrieved June 7, 2016.
23. Swenson, Loyd S., Jr.; Grimwood, James M.; Alexander, Charles C. (1989) [Originally
published 1966]. "Chapter 12.3: Space Task Group Gets a New Home and Name" (https://histo
ry.nasa.gov/SP-4201/ch12-3.htm). This New Ocean: A History of Project Mercury (http://www.h
q.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4201/toc.htm). The NASA History Series. Washington, D.C.:
NASA. OCLC 569889 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/569889). NASA SP-4201. Retrieved
August 1, 2013.
24. Dethloff, Henry C. (1993). "Chapter 3: Houston - Texas - U.S.A.". Suddenly Tomorrow Came ...
A History of the Johnson Space Center (http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/suddenly_tomorrow/su
ddenly.htm). National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ISBN 978-1502753588.
25. Kennedy, John F. (September 12, 1962). "Address at Rice University on the Nation's Space
Effort" (https://web.archive.org/web/20100506113709/http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical%2BRe
sources/Archives/Reference%2BDesk/Speeches/JFK/003POF03SpaceEffort09121962.htm).
Boston, MA: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum. Archived from the original (htt
p://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Speeches/JFK/003POF
03SpaceEffort09121962.htm) on May 6, 2010. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
26. Nixon, Richard M. (February 19, 1973). "50—Statement About Signing a Bill Designating the
Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston, Texas, as the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center" (htt
p://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=4109#axzz1RbWN5hpf). The American
Presidency Project. University of California, Santa Barbara. Retrieved July 9, 2011.
27. "Dr. Kurt H. Debus" (http://www.nasa.gov/centers/kennedy/about/biographies/debus.html).
Kennedy Biographies. NASA. February 1987. Retrieved October 7, 2008.
28. "Executive Orders Disposition Tables: Lyndon B. Johnson - 1963: Executive Order 11129" (htt
ps://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/1963-johnson.html). Office of the
Federal Register. National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved April 26, 2010.
29. Craig, Kay (ed.). "KSC Technical Capabilities: O&C Altitude Chambers" (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20120328084113/http://kscpartnerships.ksc.nasa.gov/techCap/altitude.htm). Center
Planning and Development Office. NASA. Archived from the original (http://kscpartnerships.ks
c.nasa.gov/techCap/altitude.htm) on March 28, 2012. Retrieved July 29, 2011.
30. "1976 Standard Atmosphere Properties" (http://www.luizmonteiro.com/StdAtm.aspx).
luizmonteiro.com (Complete International Standard Atmosphere calculator (1976 model)).
Luizmonteiro, LLC. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
31. Johnson 2002
32. Bilstein 1996, "Appendix G - NASA Organization During Apollo-Saturn" (https://history.nasa.go
v/SP-4206/p443.htm). November 1963. p. 443
33. Narvaez, Alfonso A. (February 1, 1990). "Samuel C. Phillips, Who Directed Apollo Lunar
Landing, Dies at 68" (https://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/01/obituaries/samuel-c-phillips-who-dir
ected-apollo-lunar-landing-dies-at-68.html?pagewanted=1). The New York Times. Retrieved
April 14, 2010.
34. Orloff, Richard W. (September 2004). Apollo by the Numbers: A Statistical Reference. Launch
Vehicle/Spacecraft Key Facts - 2nd table (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-12_Lau
nch_Vehicle-Spacecraft_Key_Facts.htm). Washington DC: NASA History Division. ISBN 016-
050631-X. Retrieved August 8, 2018.
35. Using the Apollo 11 lunar lander's mass ratio of 22,667-pound (10,282 kg) descent stage to
10,042-pound (4,555 kg) ascent stage, scaled up to Nova's 163,000-pound (74,000 kg)
payload.
36. Brooks, Grimwood, and Swenson (1979). Chariots For Apollo, chapter 2.6, "Influences on
Booster Determination". NASA SP-4205. (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/c
h2-6.html)
37. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 3.2: Early Reaction to LOR (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/His
tory/SP-4205/ch3-2.html). pp. 61-67
38. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 3.4: "Early Reaction to LOR" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/H
istory/SP-4205/ch3-4.html). p. 71
39. Hansen 1999, p. 32
40. Hansen 1999, pp. 35-39
41. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 3.6: "Settling the Mode Issue" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/
History/SP-4205/ch3-6.html). pp. 81-83
42. Levine, Anold S. (1982). Managing NASA in the Apollo Era, chapter 27, "The Lunar Landing
Decision and Its Aftermath". NASA SP-4102. (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4102/ch2.htm)
43. Brooks, Grimwood, and Swenson (1979). Chariots For Apollo, chapter 3.7, "Casting the Die".
NASA SP-4205. (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch3-7.html)
44. Brooks, Grimwood, and Swenson (1979). Chariots For Apollo, chapter 4.4, "Pressures by
PSAC". NASA SP-4205. (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch4-4.html)
45. Hansen 1999, p. 42
46. Letterman, p. 404 (James Lovell, "Explosion on Apollo 13; April 1970: From the Earth to the
Moon and Back". Lovell writes, "Naturally, I'm glad that view didn't prevail, and I'm thankful that
by the time of Apollo 10, the first lunar mission carrying the LM, the LM as a lifeboat was again
being discussed.").
47. Dumoulin, Jim (June 29, 2001). "Apollo-13 (29)" (http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/apollo/apo
llo-13/apollo-13.html). Historical Archive for Manned Missions. NASA. Retrieved
September 12, 2012.
48. "Apollo Program Summary Report" (https://history.nasa.gov/apsr/Apollopt2-2.pdf) (PDF).
Houston, TX: NASA. April 1975. pp. 3-66–4-12. JSC-09423. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
49. Orloff 2004, "Launch Vehicle/Spacecraft Key Facts - 2nd Table" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-40
29/Apollo_18-12_Launch_Vehicle-Spacecraft_Key_Facts.htm)
50. Wilford 1969, p. 167
51. Leary, Warren E. (March 27, 2002). "T. J. Kelly, 72, Dies; Father of Lunar Module" (https://ww
w.nytimes.com/2002/03/27/nyregion/t-j-kelly-72-dies-father-of-lunar-module.html). The New
York Times. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
52. Bilstein 1996, Chapter 2.2: "Aerospace Alphabet: ABMA, ARPA, MSFC" (https://history.nasa.g
ov/SP-4206/ch2.htm). p. 50
53. Bilstein 1996, Chapter 3: "Missions, Modes, and Manufacturing" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4
206/ch3.htm). p. 60
54. "Apollo 11 30th Anniversary: Manned Apollo Missions" (https://history.nasa.gov/ap11ann/missi
ons.htm). NASA History Office. 1999. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20110220232013/
https://history.nasa.gov/ap11ann/missions.htm) from the original on February 20, 2011.
Retrieved March 3, 2011.
55. Townsend 1973, p. 14
56. Townsend 1973, p. 22
57. Dawson & Bowles 2004, p. 85. See footnote 61.
58. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 7.6: "Portents for Operations" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/
History/SP-4205/ch7-6.html)
59. Apollo Systems Description (http://www.alternatewars.com/SpaceRace/Saturn/ASD_II_Saturn
_Launch_Vehicles-2-1964.pdf) (PDF) (Technical Memorandum). Volume II: Saturn Launch
Vehicles. NASA. February 1, 1964. p. 3-3. NASA TM-X-881. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
60. Wade, Mark. "Apollo SA-11" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120617193358/http://www.astrona
utix.com/flights/apoosa11.htm). Encyclopedia Astronautica. Archived from the original (http://w
ww.astronautix.com/flights/apoosa11.htm) on June 17, 2012. Retrieved June 21, 2012.
61. "Influences on Booster Determination" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-4205/ch2-6.ht
m). NASA HQ. Retrieved June 7, 2016.
62. "Saturn IB Design Features". Saturn IB News Reference (https://www.scribd.com/doc/5893902
9/Saturn-IB-News-Reference) (PDF). NASA; Chrysler Corporation; McDonnell Douglas
Astronautics Company; International Business Machines Corporation; Rocketdyne. December
1965. OCLC 22102803 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/22102803). Retrieved August 1, 2013.
63. "Origin of NASA's Names: Manned Spaceflight" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4402/ch4.htm).
Retrieved July 19, 2016.
64. Orloff 2004 Launch "Vehicle/Spacecraft Key Facts - 1st Table" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-402
9/Apollo_18-11_Launch_Vehicle-Spacecraft_Key_Facts.htm)
65. "Astronaut Bio: Deke Slayton 6/93" (https://web.archive.org/web/20060929001149/http://www.j
sc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/slayton.html). NASA. June 1993. Archived from the original (http://w
ww.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/slayton.html) on September 29, 2006. Retrieved August 1,
2013.
66. "Astronaut Bio: Harrison Schmitt" (https://web.archive.org/web/20110317220959/http://www.js
c.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/schmitt-hh.html). NASA. December 1994. Archived from the original
(http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/schmitt-hh.html) on March 17, 2011. Retrieved
September 12, 2012.
67. Pearlman, Robert Z. (October 20, 2008). "First Apollo flight crew last to be honored" (http://ww
w.collectspace.com/news/news-102008a.html). collectSPACE. Robert Pearlman. Retrieved
June 12, 2014.
68. Gatland, Kenneth (1976). Manned Spacecraft. New York: MacMillan. pp. 75–85, 88–89.
69. McDivitt, James A. (March 1970). Apollo 12 Mission Report (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/A
12_MissionReport.pdf) (PDF). Houston, Texas: NASA Manned Spacecraft Center. p. 5-4.
70. "Apollo 12 Lunar Module / ALSEP" (https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?
id=1969-099C). NASA Space Science Data Coordinate Archive. Retrieved June 15, 2016.
71. Williams, David R. "Apollo: Where are they now?" (http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/a
polloloc.html). National Space Science Data Center. NASA. Retrieved December 2, 2011.
72. "Apollo 13's Booster Impact" (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/
lroc-20100322-apollo13booster.html#.V2JPbfkrLD4). NASA. Retrieved June 16, 2016.
73. McDivitt, James A. (April 1971). "7.0 Command and Service Module Performance" (http://www.
hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a14/a14mr07.htm). Apollo 14 Mission Report. Houston, Texas: NASA
Manned Spacecraft Center. Retrieved May 19, 2016.
74. Postlaunch Report for Mission AS-201 (Apollo Spacecraft 009) (https://www.scribd.com/doc/59
688171/Post-Launch-Report-for-Mission-as-201-Apollo-Spacecraft-009) (PDF). Houston, TX:
NASA. May 6, 1966. MSC-A-R-66-4. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
75. Postlaunch Report for Mission AS-202 (Apollo Spacecraft 011) (https://www.scribd.com/doc/59
690251/Post-Launch-Report-for-Mission-AS-202) (PDF). Houston, TX: NASA. October 12,
1966. MSC-A-R-66-5. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
76. Chrysler Corp. (January 13, 1967). Evaluation of AS-203 Low Gravity Orbital Experiment
(Technical report). NASA.
77. "Apollo flight crew nomenclature changes" (https://web.archive.org/web/20100201000351/htt
p://astronautix.com/details/apo17594.htm). Astronautix. Archived from the original (http://www.
astronautix.com/details/apo17594.htm) on February 1, 2010. Retrieved July 8, 2016.
78. "A1C" (http://www.astronautix.com/a/a1c.html). Astronautix. Retrieved July 8, 2016.
79. Brooks, Grimwood, Swenson (1979). "Plans and Progress in Space Flight" (http://www.hq.nas
a.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch8-5.html). Chariots for Apollo. Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20080209003722/http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/contents.html)
from the original on February 9, 2008. Retrieved April 4, 2016.
80. Lutz, Charles C.; Carson, Maurice A. (November 1975). "Apollo Experience Report -
Development of the Extravehicular Mobility Unit" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/tnD8093EMUDe
velop.pdf) (PDF). NASA Technical Note. TN D-8093: 22–25. Retrieved May 18, 2016.
81. Teitel, Amy Shira (December 4, 2013) [2013]. "How Donn Eisele Became "Whatshisname," the
Command Module Pilot of Apollo 7" (http://www.popsci.com/blog-network/vintage-space/how-d
onn-eisele-became-whatshisname-command-module-pilot-apollo-7). Popular Science.
82. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 8.7: "Preparations for the First Manned Apollo Mission" (http://ww
w.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch8-7.html)
83. Orloff 2004, "Apollo 1: The Fire 27 January 1967" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_01
a_Summary.htm)
84. Benson, Charles D.; Faherty, William Barnaby (1978). "Delay after Delay after Delay" (http://w
ww.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4204/ch19-3.html). Moonport: A History of Apollo
Launch Facilities and Operations (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4204/content
s.html). The NASA History Series. Washington, D.C.: Scientific and Technical Information
Office, NASA. LCCN 77029118 (https://lccn.loc.gov/77029118). OCLC 3608505 (https://www.
worldcat.org/oclc/3608505). NASA SP-4204. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20080123
133438/http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4204/contents.html) from the original on
January 23, 2008. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
85. NASA never volunteered the tiger team findings to the US Congress in the course of its regular
oversight, but its existence was publicly disclosed as "the Phillips report" in the course of the
Senate investigation into the Apollo 204 fire. "The Phillips Report" (https://history.nasa.gov/Apo
llo204/phillip1.html). NASA History Office. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20100415050
958/https://history.nasa.gov/Apollo204/phillip1.html) from the original on April 15, 2010.
Retrieved April 14, 2010.
86. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 7.4: "The LEM Test Program: A Pacing Item" (http://www.hq.nasa.
gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch7-4.html)
87. Seamans, Robert C., Jr. (April 5, 1967). "Description of Test Sequence and Objectives". Report
of Apollo 204 Review Board (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/Apollo204/desc.html). NASA
History Office. Retrieved October 7, 2007.
88. Seamans, Robert C., Jr. (April 5, 1967). "Findings, Determinations And Recommendations".
Report of Apollo 204 Review Board (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/Apollo204/find.html).
NASA History Office. Retrieved October 7, 2007.
89. Gray 1994
90. Ertel et al. 1978, p. 119
91. Brooks, Courtney; Grimwood, James; Swenson, Loyd (1979). "The Slow Recovery" (http://ww
w.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch9-4.html). NASA. Retrieved May 14, 2016.
92. Ertel & al. 1978, Part 1(H)
93. Ertel et al. 1978, p. 157
94. Low, George M. (1975). "Testing and Retesting To Get Ready For flight" (http://www.hq.nasa.g
ov/office/pao/History/SP-350/ch-4-6.html). In Cortright, Edgar M (ed.). Apollo Expeditions to
the Moon (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-350/cover.html). Washington, D.C.:
Scientific and Technical Information Office, NASA. LCCN 75600071 (https://lccn.loc.gov/75600
071). OCLC 1623434 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1623434). NASA SP-350. Retrieved
August 1, 2013.
95. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 10.5: "Apollo 6: Saturn V's Shaky Dress Rehearsal" (http://www.h
q.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch10-5.html)
96. "Mission Objective" (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo7.html).
Retrieved July 8, 2016.
97. "Mission Objective" (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo8.html#.V4Bh
BRUrJeV). Retrieved July 8, 2016.
98. Chaikin, Andrew (1994). A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts. New
York: Viking. ISBN 978-0-670-81446-6. LCCN 93048680 (https://lccn.loc.gov/93048680).
99. "Poised for the Leap" (http://www.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,844661-1,00.html).
Time. New York. December 6, 1968. Retrieved December 15, 2011.
00. Brooks, et al. 1979, Chapter 11.6: "Apollo 8: The First Lunar Voyage" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/
office/pao/History/SP-4205/ch11-6.html). pp. 274-284
01. "Apollo 9" (https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=1969-018A). NASA
Space Science Data Coordinated Archive. Retrieved July 8, 2016.
02. "Apollo 10" (http://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/Ap10.html). NASA JSC. Retrieved July 8, 2016.
03. "Extravehicular Activity" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-30_Extravehicular_Activit
y.htm). Retrieved June 11, 2016.
04. "Apollo 11 Mission Overview" (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo11.
html). NASA. Retrieved July 8, 2016.
05. Mikkelson, Barbara; Mikkelson, David P. (October 2006). "One Small Misstep: Neil Armstrong's
First Words on the Moon" (http://www.snopes.com/quotes/onesmall.asp). Snopes.com. Urban
Legends Reference Pages. Retrieved September 19, 2009.
06. Conrad, Charles, Jr.; Shepard, Alan B, Jr. (1975). "Tan Dust On Surveyor" (https://history.nasa.
gov/SP-350/ch-12-3.html). In Cortright, Edgar M (ed.). Apollo Expeditions to the Moon (http://w
ww.hq.nasa.gov/pao/History/SP-350/cover.html). Washington, D.C.: Scientific and Technical
Information Office, NASA. LCCN 75600071 (https://lccn.loc.gov/75600071). OCLC 1623434 (h
ttps://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1623434). NASA SP-350. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
07. Compton 1989, Chapter 11-7: "Mission to Fra Mauro" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Histo
ry/SP-4214/ch11-7.html). p. 199
08. Compton 1989, Chapter 12-4: "Changes for Extended Lunar Missions" (http://www.hq.nasa.go
v/office/pao/History/SP-4214/ch12-4.html). pp. 211-214
09. Compton 1989, Chapter 11-7: "Cutbacks and Program Changes" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/offic
e/pao/History/SP-4214/ch12-2.html). pp. 201-202
10. Wright, Mike. "Three Saturn Vs on Display Teach Lessons in Space History" (http://history.msf
c.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/display.html). Marshall Space Flight Center History Office. Retrieved
July 19, 2016.
11. Williams, David (December 11, 2003). "Apollo 18 through 20 - The Cancelled Missions" (http://
nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo_18_20.html). NASA Space Science Data
Coordinated Archive. Retrieved June 11, 2016.
12. "Apollo 14" (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo14.html#.V1xEp5ErJe
U). NASA. July 8, 2009. Retrieved June 11, 2016.
13. "Apollo 14 Command and Service Module (CSM)" (https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraf
t/display.action?id=1971-008A). NASA Space Science Data Coordinated Archive. Retrieved
June 11, 2016.
14. "MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT" by Caspar Weinberger (via George Schultz), Aug
12, 1971, Page32(of 39) [1] (http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-885j-
aircraft-systems-engineering-fall-2005/video-lectures/logsdn_lec_notes.pdf)
15. "Apollo 15" (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo15.html). NASA. July
8, 2009. Retrieved June 9, 2016.
16. "Apollo 16" (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo16.html). NASA. July
8, 2009. Retrieved June 9, 2016.
17. "Apollo 17" (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo17.html). NASA. July
30, 2015. Retrieved June 9, 2016.
18. Grinter, Kay (September 28, 2011). "Apollo 18' Myths Debunked, NASA-style" (http://www.nas
a.gov/centers/kennedy/about/history/Apollo_18.html). NASA. Retrieved June 10, 2016.
19. Howell, Elizabeth (April 23, 2013). "Harrison Schmitt: Geologist on the Moon" (http://www.spac
e.com/20789-harrison-schmitt-astronaut-biography.html). Space.com. Retrieved June 10,
2016.
20. "Apollo 13" (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/missions/apollo13.html). US: NASA.
July 9, 2009. Retrieved November 7, 2019.
21. Orloff 2004, "Extravehicular Activity" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-30_Extravehi
cular_Activity.htm). NASA
22. "NASA Lunar Sample Laboatory Facility" (https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/lun-fac.cfm). NASA
Curation Lunar. NASA. September 1, 2016. Retrieved February 15, 2017. "A total of 382
kilograms of lunar material, comprising 2200 individual specimens returned from the Moon ..."
23. Chaikin, Andrew (2007). A Man On the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts (Third
ed.). New York: Penguin Books. pp. 611–613.
24. Kristen Erickson (July 16, 2009). Amiko Kauderer (ed.). "Rock Solid: JSC's Lunar Sample Lab
Turns 30" (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/40th/jsc_lunar_sample_lab_30.html).
40th Anniversary of Apollo Program. NASA. Retrieved June 29, 2012.
25. Papike et al. 1998, pp. 5-001–5-234
26. Harland 2008, pp. 132-133.
27. Harland 2008, p. 171.
28. Harland 2008, pp. 49-50.
29. Harland 2008, pp. 323-327.
30. Harland 2008, pp. 330-332.
31. Burrows 1999, p. 431
32. "How much did the Apollo program cost?" (http://www.planetary.org/get-involved/be-a-space-a
dvocate/become-an-expert/cost-of-apollo-program.html). www.planetary.org. The Planetary
Society. Retrieved June 21, 2019.
33. Butts, Glenn; Linton, Kent (April 28, 2009). "The Joint Confidence Level Paradox: A History of
Denial" (https://web.archive.org/web/20111026132859/http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nex
gen/Nexgen_Downloads/Butts_NASA's_Joint_Cost-Schedule_Paradox_-_A_History_of_Denia
l.pdf) (PDF). 2009 NASA Cost Symposium. Cost Analysis Division. pp. 25–26. Archived from
the original (http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/nexgen/Nexgen_Downloads/Butts_NASA's_Joi
nt_Cost-Schedule_Paradox_-_A_History_of_Denial.pdf) (PDF) on October 26, 2011.
34. Skolnikoff, Eugene B.; Hoagland, John H. (1968). The World-wide Spread of Space
Technology. 69-5. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Space Research. OCLC 14154430 (https://
www.worldcat.org/oclc/14154430).
35. Callahan, Jason. "How Richard Nixon Changed NASA" (http://www.planetary.org/blogs/guest-b
logs/jason-callahan/20141003-how-richard-nixon-changed-nasa.html). www.planetary.org. The
Planetary Society. Retrieved June 20, 2019.
36. United States. Congress. House. Committee on Science and Astronautics. (1973). 1974 NASA
authorization: hearings, Ninety-third Congress, first session, on H.R. 4567 (https://babel.hathitr
ust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015084762718&view=1up&seq=1280). Page 1274. Washington: U.S.
Govt. Print. Off.
37. "A Science Program for Manned Spaceflight" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4208/ch4.htm).
Retrieved June 11, 2016.
38. "Manned Venus Flyby" (http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=j74hfnr889r
eqoinelc27u5877&action=dlattach;topic=34776.0;attach=584256;sess=0). NASA. February 1,
1967. Retrieved July 19, 2016.
39. "What Goes Up ..." (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4208/ch19.htm) Retrieved June 11, 2016.
40. Bilstein 1996, "Legacy" (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4206/ch13.htm), pp. 379-382
41. "Apollo-Soyuz: An Orbital Partnership Begins" (http://www.nasa.gov/topics/history/features/ast
p.html). NASA. July 10, 2015. Retrieved July 19, 2016.
42. "The 'halo' area around Apollo 15 landing site observed by Terrain Camera on
SELENE(KAGUYA)" (http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2008/05/20080520_kaguya_e.html) (Press
release). Chōfu, Tokyo: Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency. May 20, 2008. Archived (https://
web.archive.org/web/20091212114843/http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2008/05/20080520_kaguya_e.
html) from the original on December 12, 2009. Retrieved November 19, 2009.
43. Hautaluoma, Grey; Freeberg, Andy (July 17, 2009). Garner, Robert (ed.). "LRO Sees Apollo
Landing Sites" (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.htm
l). NASA. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20091116012309/http://www.nasa.gov/missio
n_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html) from the original on November 16, 2009.
Retrieved November 19, 2009.
44. Townsend, Jason (ed.). "Apollo Landing Sites Revisited" (http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/
apollo/revisited/index.html). NASA. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20091113094613/htt
p://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/revisited/index.html) from the original on November
13, 2009. Retrieved November 19, 2009.
45. Robinson, Mark (July 27, 2012). "Question Answered!" (https://web.archive.org/web/20121024
061649/http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/index.php?%2Farchives%2F620-Question-Answered%2
1.html). LROC News System. Arizona State University. Archived from the original (http://lroc.se
se.asu.edu/news/index.php?/archives/620-Question-Answered!.html) on October 24, 2012.
Retrieved October 28, 2012.
46. "The Human Moon" (https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/opinion/17tue4.html). The New York
Times. November 16, 2009. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20121231162941/http://ww
w.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/opinion/17tue4.html) from the original on December 31, 2012.
Retrieved November 19, 2009.
47. "Apollo 11 30th Anniversary: Introduction" (https://history.nasa.gov/ap11ann/introduction.htm).
NASA History Office. 1999. Retrieved April 26, 2013.
48. NASA Spinoff Database (April 8, 2016). "NASA Spinoff Database" (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20190904164206/https://spinoff.nasa.gov/spinoff/database/). National Aeronautics and
Space Administration. Archived from the original (http://spinoff.nasa.gov/spinoff/database) on
September 4, 2019. Retrieved April 8, 2016.
49. Mindell 2008, pp. 125-131.
50. Brooks, Grimwood & Swenson 1979, pp. 181–182, 205–208.
51. Interplanetary Monitoring Platform (https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/1980
0012928.pdf) (PDF). NASA. August 29, 1989. pp. 1, 11, 134. Retrieved August 12, 2019.
52. White, H. D.; Lokerson, D. C. (1971). "The Evolution of IMP Spacecraft Mosfet Data Systems".
IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science. 18 (1): 233–236. doi:10.1109/TNS.1971.4325871 (http
s://doi.org/10.1109%2FTNS.1971.4325871). ISSN 0018-9499 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0
018-9499).
53. "Apollo Guidance Computer and the First Silicon Chips" (https://airandspace.si.edu/stories/edit
orial/apollo-guidance-computer-and-first-silicon-chips). National Air and Space Museum.
Smithsonian Institution. October 14, 2015. Retrieved September 1, 2019.
54. "Apollo 8: Christmas at the Moon" (https://www.nasa.gov/topics/history/features/apollo_8.html).
NASA. Retrieved July 20, 2016.
55. Chaikin 1994, p. 120
56. Burrows 1999, p. 429
57. Petsko, Gregory A (2011). "The blue marble" (https://doi.org/10.1186%2Fgb-2011-12-4-112).
Genome Biology. 12 (4): 112. doi:10.1186/gb-2011-12-4-112 (https://doi.org/10.1186%2Fgb-2
011-12-4-112). PMC 3218853 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3218853).
PMID 21554751 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21554751).
58. Lexington, ed. (May 21, 2011). "Apollo plus 50" (http://www.economist.com/node/18712369).
The Economist. London: The Economist Newspaper Limited. p. 36. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
59. Greenfieldboyce, Nell (July 16, 2009). "Houston, We Erased The Apollo 11 Tapes" (https://ww
w.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106637066). NPR. Washington, D.C.: National
Public Radio, Inc. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
60. Jones, Sam (May 25, 2009). "The moon shoot: film of Apollo mission on show again after 35
years in the can" (https://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/may/25/apollo-11-anniversary). The
Guardian. Retrieved September 5, 2019.
61. Goodsell, Luke (July 17, 2019). "Apollo 11 documentary is a time capsule for the fleeting
optimism of mankind's first Moon landing" (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-18/apollo-11-
review-documentary-captures-moon-landing-mission/11315242). ABC. Retrieved
September 5, 2019.
62. Gleiberman, Owen (August 29, 2007). "Movie Review: In the Shadow of the Moon" (http://ww
w.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20053781,00.html). Entertainment Weekly.
63. Kenny, Glenn (February 27, 2019). " 'Apollo 11' Review: The 1969 Moon Mission Still Has the
Power to Thrill" (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/27/movies/apollo-11-review.html). The New
York Times. Retrieved February 28, 2019.
64. Rubin, Rebecca (February 13, 2019). " 'Apollo 11' Documentary Gets Exclusive Imax Release"
(https://variety.com/2019/film/news/apollo-11-documentary-imax-release-1203138469/).
Variety. Retrieved July 20, 2019.

References
Beschloss, Michael R. (1997). "Kennedy and the Decision to Go to the Moon". In Launius,
Roger D.; McCurdy, Howard E. (eds.). Spaceflight and the Myth of Presidential Leadership.
Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. ISBN 0-252-06632-4. LCCN 96051213 (https://lccn.
loc.gov/96051213).
Bilstein, Roger E. (1996) [Originally published 1980]. Stages to Saturn: A Technological History
of the Apollo/Saturn Launch Vehicles (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4206/contents.htm). The
NASA History Series. Foreword by William R. Lucas. Washington D.C.: NASA.
OCLC 36332191 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/36332191). NASA SP-4206. Retrieved
August 1, 2013.
Brooks, Courtney G.; Grimwood, James M.; Swenson, Loyd S., Jr. (1979). Chariots for Apollo:
A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4205/cov
er.html). The NASA History Series. Foreword by Samuel C. Phillips. Washington, D.C.:
Scientific and Technical Information Branch, NASA. ISBN 978-0-486-46756-6.
LCCN 79001042 (https://lccn.loc.gov/79001042). OCLC 4664449 (https://www.worldcat.org/ocl
c/4664449). NASA SP-4205. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
Burrows, William E. (1999). This New Ocean: The Story of the First Space Age. New York:
Modern Library. ISBN 0-375-75485-7. OCLC 42136309 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/421363
09).
Chaikin, Andrew (1994). A Man on the Moon. New York: Penguin Books. ISBN 0-14-027201-1.
OCLC 38918860 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/38918860). Chaikin interviewed all the
surviving astronauts and others who worked with the program.
Compton, William David (1989). Where no man has gone before : a history of Apollo lunar
exploration missions (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4214/cover.html). NASA history series.
Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. OCLC 18223277 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/oclc/18223277). NASA SP-4214.
Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Science and Astronautics (April 13,
1961). Discussion of Soviet Man-in-space Shot (Hearing). Washington, D.C.: 87th Congress,
first session. LCCN 61061306 (https://lccn.loc.gov/61061306). OCLC 4052829 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/oclc/4052829).
Congress, House of Representatives, Committee on Science and Astronautics (1973). 1974
NASA Authorization Hearings (Hearing on H.R. 4567). Washington, D.C.: 93rd Congress, first
session. OCLC 23229007 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/23229007).
Dawson, Virginia P.; Bowles, Mark D. (2004). Taming Liquid Hydrogen: The Centaur Upper
Stage Rocket 1958-2002 (http://www.history.nasa.gov/SP-4230.pdf) (PDF). The NASA History
Series. Washington D.C.: NASA. OCLC 51518552 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/51518552).
NASA SP-2400-4320. Retrieved September 12, 2012.
Ertel, Ivan D.; Newkirk, Roland W.; et al. (1978). The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology (http://w
ww.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/documents/NTRS/collection3/NASA_SP_4009-4.pdf) (PDF). IV.
Foreword by Kenneth S. Kleinknecht. Washington, D.C.: Scientific and Technical Information
Office, NASA. LCCN 69060008 (https://lccn.loc.gov/69060008). OCLC 23818 (https://www.wor
ldcat.org/oclc/23818). NASA SP-4009. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
Gray, Mike (1994) [First published W. W. Norton & Company 1992]. Angle of Attack: Harrison
Storms and the Race to the Moon. New York: Penguin Books. ISBN 0-14-023280-X.
OCLC 30520885 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/30520885).
Hansen, James R. (1999). Enchanted Rendezvous: John C. Houbolt and the Genesis of the
Lunar-Orbit Rendezvous Concept (https://history.nasa.gov/monograph4.pdf) (PDF).
Monographs in Aerospace History. Washington, D.C.: NASA. OCLC 69343822 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/oclc/69343822). Retrieved May 3, 2012.
Harland, David M. (2008). Exploring the Moon: the Apollo Expeditions. Springer-Praxis books
in space exploration. Chichester, England: Springer. ISBN 9780387746388. OCLC 495296214
(https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/495296214).
Heppenheimer, T.A. (1999). The Space Shuttle Decision: NASA's Search for a Reusable
Space Vehicle (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4221/sp4221.htm). The NASA History Series.
Washington, D.C.: NASA. OCLC 40305626 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/40305626). NASA
SP-4221. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
Johnson, Stephen B. (2002). The Secret of Apollo: Systems Management in American and
European Space Programs (https://archive.org/details/secretofapollosy0000john). New series
in NASA history. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-6898-X.
LCCN 2001005688 (https://lccn.loc.gov/2001005688). OCLC 48003131 (https://www.worldcat.
org/oclc/48003131).
Launius, Roger D.; McCurdy, Howard E., eds. (1997). Spaceflight and the Myth of Presidential
Leadership. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. ISBN 0-252-06632-4. LCCN 96051213
(https://lccn.loc.gov/96051213).
Launius, Roger D. (July 2004) [Originally published July 1994]. Apollo: A Retrospective
Analysis (https://archive.org/details/nasa_techdoc_20040084534). Monographs in Aerospace
History (Reprint ed.). Washington, D.C.: NASA. Retrieved August 1, 2013.
Letterman, John B. (2003). Survivors: True Tales of Endurance: 500 Years of the Greatest
Eyewitness Accounts (https://archive.org/details/survivorstruetal00lett). New York: Simon &
Schuster. ISBN 0-7432-4547-4.
Mindell, David A. (2008). Digital Apollo: Human and Machine in Spaceflight. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-13497-2. OCLC 733307011 (https://www.wor
ldcat.org/oclc/733307011).
Murray, Charles; Cox, Catherine Bly (1989). Apollo: The Race to the Moon. New York: Simon
& Schuster. ISBN 0-671-61101-1. LCCN 89006333 (https://lccn.loc.gov/89006333).
OCLC 19589707 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/19589707).
Orloff, Richard W. (September 2004) [First published 2000]. Apollo by the Numbers: A
Statistical Reference (https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/SP-4029.htm). NASA History Division,
 Office of Policy and Plans. The NASA History Series. Washington, D.C.: NASA. ISBN 0-16-
050631-X. LCCN 00061677 (https://lccn.loc.gov/00061677). NASA SP-2000-4029. Retrieved
August 1, 2013.
Papike, James J.; Ryder, Graham; Shearer, Charles K. (January 1998). "Planetary Materials:
Lunar Samples". Reviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry. Washington, D.C.: Mineralogical
Society of America. 36 (1): 5.1–5.234. ISBN 0-939950-46-4. ISSN 0275-0279 (https://www.wor
ldcat.org/issn/0275-0279). LCCN 99474392 (https://lccn.loc.gov/99474392).
Sidey, Hugh (1963). John F. Kennedy, President (https://archive.org/details/johnfkennedypres0
00540mbp) (1st ed.). New York: Atheneum. LCCN 63007800 (https://lccn.loc.gov/63007800).
Retrieved August 1, 2013.
Townsend, Neil A. (March 1973), Apollo Experience Report: Launch Escape Propulsion
Subsystem (http://klabs.org/history/apollo_experience_reports/tn-d7083_apollo_launch_escap
e_propulsion.pdf) (PDF), Washington, D.C.: NASA, NASA TN D-7083, retrieved
September 12, 2012
Wilford, John Noble (1969). We Reach the Moon: The New York Times Story of Man's
Greatest Adventure. New York: Bantam Paperbacks. OCLC 29123 (https://www.worldcat.org/o
clc/29123).

Further reading
"Apollo Program Summary Report" (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/APSR-JSC-09423.pdf)
(PDF). (46.3 MB) NASA Report JSC-09423, April 1975
Collins, Michael (2001) [Originally published 1974; New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux].
Carrying the Fire: An Astronaut's Journeys (https://archive.org/details/carryingfire00mich).
Foreword by Charles Lindbergh. New York: Cooper Square Press. ISBN 978-0-8154-1028-7.
LCCN 2001017080 (https://lccn.loc.gov/2001017080). Astronaut Mike Collins autobiography of
his experiences as an astronaut, including his flight aboard Apollo 11.
Cooper, Henry S.F., Jr. (1995) [Originally published 1972; New York: Dial Press]. Thirteen: The
Apollo Flight That Failed (https://archive.org/details/thirteenapollofl00coop). Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-5097-5. LCCN 94039726 (https://lccn.loc.gov/9403972
6). OCLC 31375285 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/31375285). Although this book focuses on
Apollo 13, it provides a wealth of background information on Apollo technology and
procedures.
French, Francis; Burgess, Colin (2007). In the Shadow of the Moon: A Challenging Journey to
Tranquility, 1965–1969. Foreword by Walter Cunningham. Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press. ISBN 978-0-8032-1128-5. LCCN 2006103047 (https://lccn.loc.gov/2006103047).
OCLC 182559769 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/182559769). History of the Apollo program
from Apollos 1–11, including many interviews with the Apollo astronauts.
Gleick, James, "Moon Fever" [review of Oliver Morton, The Moon: A History of the Future;
Apollo's Muse: The Moon in the Age of Photography, an exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum
of Art, New York City, July 3 – September 22, 2019; Douglas Brinkley, American Moonshot:
John F. Kennedy and the Great Space Race; Brandon R. Brown, The Apollo Chronicles:
Engineering America's First Moon Missions; Roger D. Launius, Reaching for the Moon: A
Short History of the Space Race; Apollo 11, a documentary film directed by Todd Douglas
Miller; and Michael Collins, Carrying the Fire: An Astronaut's Journeys (50th Anniversary
Edition)], The New York Review of Books, vol. LXVI, no. 13 (15 August 2019), pp. 54–58. "'If
we can put a man on the moon, why can't we ...?' became a cliché even before [the] Apollo
[program] succeeded. ... Now ... the missing predicate is the urgent one: why can't we stop
destroying the climate of our own planet? ... I say leave it [the moon] alone for a while."
(pp. 57–58.)
Kranz, Gene (2000). Failure is Not an Option: Mission Control from Mercury to Apollo 13 and
Beyond (https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780743200790). New York: Simon & Schuster.
 ISBN 0-7432-0079-9. LCCN 00027720 (https://lccn.loc.gov/00027720). OCLC 43590801 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/oclc/43590801). Factual, from the standpoint of a flight controller during
the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo space programs.
Lovell, Jim; Kluger, Jeffrey (2000) [Previously published 1994 as Lost Moon]. Apollo 13.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. ISBN 0-618-05665-3. LCCN 99089647 (https://lccn.loc.go
v/99089647). OCLC 43118301 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/43118301). Details the flight of
Apollo 13.
Pellegrino, Charles R.; Stoff, Joshua (1999). Chariots for Apollo: The Untold Story Behind the
Race to the Moon. New York: Avon Books. ISBN 0-380-80261-9. OCLC 41579174 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/oclc/41579174). Tells Grumman's story of building the lunar modules.
Scott, David; Leonov, Alexei; Toomey, Christine (2004). Two Sides of the Moon: Our Story of
the Cold War Space Race (https://archive.org/details/twosidesofmoon00scot). Foreword by
Neil Armstrong; introduction by Tom Hanks (1st U.S. ed.). New York: Thomas Dunne Books.
ISBN 0-312-30865-5. LCCN 2004059381 (https://lccn.loc.gov/2004059381). OCLC 56587777
(https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/56587777).
Seamans, Robert C., Jr. (2005). Project Apollo: The Tough Decisions. Monographs in
Aerospace History. Washington, D.C.: NASA. ISBN 0-16-074954-9. LCCN 2005003682 (http
s://lccn.loc.gov/2005003682). OCLC 64271009 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/64271009).
NASA SP-4537. History of the crewed space program from 1 September 1960, to 5 January
1968.
Slayton, Donald K.; Cassutt, Michael (1995). Deke!: An Autobiography. New York: St. Martin's
Press. ISBN 0-312-85918-X. Account of Deke Slayton's life as an astronaut and of his work as
chief of the astronaut office, including selection of Apollo crews.
"The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology. Volume 1:" (https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntr
s.nasa.gov/19690022643_1969022643.pdf) (PDF). (131.2 MB) From origin to November 7,
1962
"The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology. Volume 2:" (https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntr
s.nasa.gov/19740004394_1974004394.pdf) (PDF). (13.4 MB) November 8, 1962 – September
30, 1964
"The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology. Volume 3:" (https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntr
s.nasa.gov/19760014180_1976014180.pdf) (PDF). (57.7 MB) October 1, 1964 – January 20,
1966
"The Apollo Spacecraft: A Chronology. Volume 4:" (https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntr
s.nasa.gov/19800011953_1980011953.pdf) (PDF). (24.2 MB) January 21, 1966 – July 13, 1974
Wilhelms, Don E. (1993). To a Rocky Moon: A Geologist's History of Lunar Exploration (https://
archive.org/details/torockymoongeolo0000wilh). Tucson: University of Arizona Press. ISBN 0-
8165-1065-2. LCCN 92033228 (https://lccn.loc.gov/92033228). OCLC 26720457 (https://www.
worldcat.org/oclc/26720457). The history of lunar exploration from a geologist's point of view.

External links
Apollo program history (http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/history/apollo/index.html) at NASA's Human
Space Flight (HSF) website
The Apollo Program (https://history.nasa.gov/apollo.html) at the NASA History Program Office
"Apollo Spinoffs" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120404160907/http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/ap
ollo.htm). Archived from the original (http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/apollo.htm) on April 4, 2012.
The Apollo Program (http://airandspace.si.edu/explore-and-learn/topics/apollo/) at the National
Air and Space Museum
Apollo 35th Anniversary Interactive Feature (http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/apollo11/index
1.html) at NASA (in Flash)
 Lunar Mission Timeline (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/expmoon/apollo_landings.html) at the Lunar
and Planetary Institute

NASA reports
Apollo Program Summary Report (https://history.nasa.gov/apsr/apsr.htm) (PDF), NASA, JSC-
09423, April 1975
NASA History Series Publications (https://history.nasa.gov/series95.html)
Project Apollo Drawings and Technical Diagrams (https://history.nasa.gov/diagrams/apollo.htm
l) at the NASA History Program Office
The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/frame.html) edited by Eric M.
Jones and Ken Glover
The Apollo Flight Journal (https://history.nasa.gov/afj/) by W. David Woods, et al.

Multimedia
NASA Apollo Program images and videos (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/index.
html)
Apollo Image Archive (http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/) at Arizona State University
Audio recording and transcript of President John F. Kennedy, NASA administrator James
Webb, et al., discussing the Apollo agenda (https://web.archive.org/web/20160601211812/htt
p://millercenter.org/presidentialrecordings/jfk-mtg-63) (White House Cabinet Room, November
21, 1962)
The Project Apollo Archive (http://www.apolloarchive.com/) by Kipp Teague is a large
repository of Apollo images, videos, and audio recordings
The Project Apollo Archive on Flickr (https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/)
Apollo Image Atlas (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/)—almost 25,000 lunar images,
Lunar and Planetary Institute
The short film Time of Apollo (1975) (https://archive.org/details/gov.ntis.ava03129vnb1) is
available for free download at the Internet Archive
The Journeys of Apollo - NASA Documentary (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNJpoP642
wc) on YouTube

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apollo_program&oldid=950138279"

This page was last edited on 10 April 2020, at 12:03 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.