Nation: Apollo's Return: Triumph Over Failure

• Share

(3 of 4)

Just as the first moon landing was a triumph for the world as well as for the U.S., so Apollo 13's mortal danger was not merely an American travail. Thirteen nations, including the Soviet Union, offered ships or planes to help in the rescue operation; none were needed. In Vienna, Chancellor-designate Bruno Kreisky interrupted a major political conference. Said he: "We all should follow the fate of the astronauts." Ordinary citizens were just as interested. In many countries they approached Americans with expressions of sympathy and concern. The U.S. embassy in London said there had been no such outpouring since John Kennedy's assassination. A Hamburg man telephoned Houston to suggest that the astronauts be allowed a space walk "to check out what really happened."

What Next? What really did happen—and what the effects of Apollo 13's failure will be on the space program's future—became Topic A after the splashdown. On the technical side, the answer will depend on whether the flaw that caused the explosion is easily correctable or not. The villain might turn out to be, as NASA Administrator Thomas Paine observed, a 25¢ plug. Or it might be a design fault that will be difficult to discover and both time-consuming and expsnsive to correct. The 1967 fire on the ground that killed three astronauts during a dry run led to extensive redesign of the command and service modules and delayed moon exploration for at least 18 months. Apollo 14 had been scheduled for October, but now the date is uncertain.

The space program, however, has other and deeper problems that may have been worsened by Apollo 13's aborted mission. The Government's economy drive has already caused financial reductions for NASA. Paine last week acknowledged that "an agency such as ours is completely dependent on public opinion and congressional support. The question then is whether, when the going gets tough, the support will continue." The same doubt was on Lovell's mind while he was still aloft. Said he: "I'm afraid that this is going to be the last moon mission for a long time."

Sure enough, Apollo 13, which yielded little for the $380 million spent on it, encouraged new skepticism about space exploration and manned flights. Scientists Linus Pauling and Ralph Lapp, already critical of the costs and motivation of the entire program, renewed the argument that space probes would be better run entirely with instruments. Stewart Udall, former Secretary of the Interior, dismissed manned flights as "stunts." NASA's position always has been that a human intelligence is necessary to get maximum results from space exploration. If the space agency should be forced to reverse that stand—a highly unlikely prospect —then much of the equipment and many of the procedures developed over the past twelve years would have to be scrapped. Congressman Olin Teague, the Texas Democrat who heads the House Manned Space Flight Subcommittee, warned: "The enemies of the program will seize upon this to delay it, just as they did the last time there was an accident."