The Moon Project

The United States is trying to place the first men on the moon by 1969. The cost of this effort, the Apollo Project, is officially announced as $20 billion, though authoritative estimates range as high as $40 billion. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the agency in charge of the government's space program, now receives an annual budget of over five billion dollars.

From its inception Project Apollo has been beset by difficulties, not the least of which is the time limit on the program. The technological problems involved in the moon effort have made it evident to scientists both in and out of NASA that the target date will not be met. With the officially planned expenditure, 1971 is a more realistic estimate. Furthermore, there has been growing public and political opposition to the immense Apollo budget. Senator Fulbright summarized these views in Congress last week, nothing that the results of moon exploration "are remote and incalculable, and the need for schools and jobs is immediate and pressing." Finally the President of the Soviet National Academy of Sciences and other sources have made it clear that the USSR is not willing to enter the lunar contest. Thus the U.S. is faced with the prospect of an empty victory which may not be worth $20 billion.

These difficulties, plus a desire to reduce tensions of the cold war, prompted Kennedy to make the surprise announcement, in his United Nations address, that the U.S. was ready to make Project Apollo a joint East-West effort. Yuri Gagarin, also speaking at the U.N., has since expressed his government's willingness to join in a co-operative venture. To thwart this move the House has passed an amendment to the space appropriations bill forbidding all space expenditures should the moon program pass out of strict U.S. control. Fortunately this measure, which took the Administration by surprise, is not likely to pass or even reach the Senate.

If the two space-powers pool their knowledge, the cost of a manned moon-landing will be more than halved. The Soviet Union already possesses a booster far more powerful than any developed by NASA. Thus the five billion dollar project to produce the Saturn booster could be slowed. Each country has progressed far ahead of the other in some facets of space research; many future advances will undoubtedly complement each other, filling gaps that would have been costly to fill independently and preventing duplication of research. Ruseian-American co-operation would also remove from the cold war an achievement which should belong to everyone.

But whether or not the U.S. and the USSR send a man to the moon together, the Kennedy administration must face up to the engineering and economic realities of Project Apollo: No American will reach the moon in 1969. Even if an American does reach the earth's satellite by 1971 or '72 the cost will surely be over $20 billion and the waste will have been enormous. Under the present arrangement Project Apollo is being run as Project Manhattan was during World War II. Waste is inevitable because the government does not have time to do things the right way, and the wrong-but-fast way is invariably the most expensive. Instead of hiring only the best technicians, engineers, and research assisstants, NASA must hire everyone available and train people for jobs in which they may later prove incompetent, in the all-out effort to solve problems quickly. The space and defense effort now employs three-fourths of the scientific community, depriving other fields of valuable minds and drawing scientists away from projects which might technically, medically, or otherwise advance the U.S.

Another obstacle stands in the way of manned flight into space in 1969, an obstacle which no expenditure can overcome: the sun. The end of this decade will be a maximum in the sun's eleven year cycle of activity. At unpredictable times during the solar cycle's peak, cataclysmic eruptions on the sun eject clouds of deadly high-energy particles deep into space. The chance of such an event occuring during a one-week lunar journey in 1969 will probably be about one to three, odds on which the U.S. has neither the right nor the wish to risk men's lives. Thus 1975 and 1986, both solar minima and free from dangerous radiation showers, may be suggested as more reasonable dates for a lunar expedition.

Kennedy's speech at the United Nations and Senator Fulbright's remarks could mark the start of a period for rational and unimpassioned appraisal of the space program. If the President and NASA foster such an atmosphere they will be able to get both Congress and the public to accept a realistic moon program. Neither the economy nor Project Apollo can afford the present pace.