Apollo's "Giant Leap for Mankind" Honored

40 Years Later, Moon Landing Remains Benchmark of American Achievement

(CBS/ AP)  The measure of what humanity can accomplish is a size 9 1/2 bootprint.

It belongs to Neil Armstrong, the first man on the moon. It will stay on the moon for millions of years with nothing to wipe it away, serving as an almost eternal testament to a can-do mankind.

Apollo 11 is the glimmering success that failures of society are contrasted against: "If we can send a man to the moon, why can't we ..."

What put man on the moon 40 years ago was an audacious and public effort that the world hasn't seen before or since. It required rocketry that hadn't been built, or even designed, in 1961 when President John F. Kennedy declared the challenge. It needed an advance in computerization that had not happened yet. NASA would have to learn how to dock separate spaceships, how to teach astronauts to walk in space, even how to keep them alive in space - all tasks so difficult experts weren't sure they were possible.

Forty years later, the moon landing is talked about as a generic human achievement, not an American one. But Apollo at the time was more about U.S. commitment and ingenuity.

Historian Douglas Brinkley called the Apollo program "the exemplary moment of America's we-can-do-anything attitude." After the moon landing, America got soft, he said, looking for the quick payoff of a lottery ticket instead of the sweat-equity of buckling down and doing something hard.

(According to a new CBS News poll, there is widespread agreement that landing men on the moon was worthwhile. Seventy-one percent said it was worth the time, effort and money that went into the endeavor, while 24 percent said it was not.)

Click here for more of the CBS News poll.

In years since, when America faces a challenge, leaders often look to the Apollo program for inspiration. In 1971, when President Richard Nixon declared a war on cancer, his staffers called it "a moon shot for cancer." Last year, then-candidate Barack Obama and former Vice President Al Gore proposed a massive effort to fight global warming, comparing it to Apollo 11. An environmentalists' project to tackle climate change and promote renewable energy took the name "Apollo Alliance."

Those still-unfinished efforts recall May 25, 1961, when President Kennedy, fresh from a disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, announced that America would land a man on the moon by the end of the decade and return him safely home.

"I thought he was crazy," said Chris Kraft, when he heard Kennedy's speech about landing on the moon.

Kraft was head of Mission Control. He was the man responsible for guiding astronauts to orbit (which hadn't been done yet) and eventually to the moon. Kraft first heard about a mission to the moon when Kennedy made the speech.

"We saw that as Buck Rogers stuff, rather than reality that would be carried out in any time period that we were dealing with," Kraft recently told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from Houston.

Less than three months later, Kraft was in the White House explaining to the president just how landing on the moon would be done. Kraft still didn't believe it would work.

"Too many unknowns," he said.

It was the Cold War and Russian Yuri Gagarin had just become the first man in space. Kennedy chose landing a man on the moon because experts told him it was the one space goal that was so distant and complicated at the time that the United States could catch up and pass the Soviet Union, Kennedy adviser Ted Sorensen said.

The idea in a world where American capitalism was pitted against Soviet communism on a daily basis was "to prove to the world which system was best, which one was the future," Sorensen said.

"It's not just the fact that the president wanted it done," Sorensen recalled. "It was the fact that we had a specific goal and a specific timetable."

In another speech, Kennedy famously said America would go to the moon and try other tasks "not because they were easy, but because they were hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills."

They weren't just skills with rockets and slide rules. Bringing together countless aerospace companies, engineers, scientists, technicians, politicians and several NASA centers around the nation was a management challenge even more impressive than building the right type of rockets, said Smithsonian Institution space scholar Roger Launius.

And it cost money. The United States spent $25.4 billion on the Apollo program, which translates to nearly $150 billion in current dollars - less than the U.S. spent in both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2007.

Yet, in the view of those heavily involved in the challenge, what made Apollo work was two tragedies: the assassination of Kennedy in 1963 and the fatal Apollo 1 fire in 1967.

The assassination of Kennedy made the Apollo program and its budget nearly untouchable politically. The moon-landing goal - which Kennedy later talked about modifying and even including the Soviets on - became a symbol of the martyred president. NASA's launch center was renamed from Cape Canaveral to Kennedy.

The Apollo fire, which occurred during ground testing, killed three astronauts, including Armstrong's neighbor. The main problem was that there was 100 percent oxygen in the capsule, which made fire spread rapidly.

Kraft, in a July interview said he is convinced that NASA couldn't have reached Kennedy's target were it not for the Apollo 1 fire and the way it made the space agency rethink everything: "We were building inferior hardware at that point in time.

"The whole program turned around, both from a hardware and management point of view," Kraft said. "You really learn from failure."

So NASA drilled astronauts and flight controllers ceaselessly with simulations. Failures kept being thrown at the astronauts and the controllers, some just plain unsolvable.

One of the last failures simulated before Apollo 11's launch was an alarm on the lunar lander that signaled the computer was overloaded. During the simulation, Mission Control in Houston aborted the landing. But controllers were later told it was just an "indication" signal and that if they had thought about it, the computer really was working fine. Controllers thought the test was unfair, according to an account in the new book, "Rocket Men: The Epic Story of the First Men on the Moon" by Craig Nelson.

But during the real mission, as the Eagle lunar lander approached the moon, that test-run computer signal appeared. This time controllers knew everything was OK. They didn't abort the moon landing.

Still, there were more hurdles to come. In another example, experience and nerves paid off. As Eagle neared the landing area in the spot called Sea of Tranquility, Armstrong saw too many boulders and craters to come down safely. So he kept flying horizontally, 100 feet off the ground, scouring the moonscape for a smooth place.

Eagle's fuel tank neared empty. Alarms went off. Mission controllers in Houston fretted.

"We still needed to get down," recalled Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin. "I'm not telling Neil, 'Hey Neil, hurry up, get on the ground.' I'm sort of conveying this with body English."

There were only 17 seconds worth of fuel left.

Finally, the radio at Mission Control crackled with Armstrong's voice: "Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed."

Two hours later, humans walked on a place other than Earth, a place truly foreign.

"This is a very desolate place," recalled Aldrin, second to step on the moon. "It's just boring. It's all one color that varies depending on the sun angle. But the sky is black, it's all black except the one object there, the Earth, and the object behind us, the sun."

The world watched on television as the first two men walked on the moon. But one person close to the action couldn't. He was the third crew member of Apollo 11, command module pilot Michael Collins, who was orbiting the moon alone. He didn't get to see what was happening. But he could hear Neil Armstrong say his famous first words.

Decades later, Armstrong, who has largely retreated from the spotlight, called his first words on the moon "a pretty simple statement, talking about stepping off something."

But Armstrong wasn't merely talking about that small step of his. What came next was the big deal. It was, as he said on the moon 40 years ago, "a giant leap for mankind."

It still is.

[MrBag]

You people make me sick with turning this blog into a he vs she tirade. It's supposed to be about the 40th anniversary of the 1st moon landing. I remember watching it on TV, so I KNOW that it happened. Those astronauts were some of the bravest people I know. To quote paraphrase Star Trek, the Apollo Astronauts truly and boldly went where no man had gone before... Put that in your pipe and smoke it...

[2ndSamuel710]

And JFK was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald. Sure.
USS Liberty attack was a case of mistaken identity. Sure.
Neil Armstrong walked on moon. Sure.
OK Bomb was caused by Tim McVeigh. Sure.
9/11 was caused by Muslim hijackers. Sure.
Vaccinations are safe and effective. Sure.
Hope everyone who believes the foregoing gets the new flu shot.
Got to cull the herd once in awhile.

[hamiltongrad]

Why did they only chose men to be the first on the moon ? Obviously some kind of male dominated club. Nothing changes.

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 8:34 PM EDT

You should read the garbage from a b@ll buster named erasmus.


Hee hee hee, and you LOVE it! It makes my day to bust your b@lls. : )

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 9:16 PM EDT
All I ever see is blaming, judging, and criticizing.


What is it that you are doing. You are always blaming women. You are always blaming me for things I haven't said.

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 9:16 PM EDT
It's really too bad that you couldn't have found a wife with my sweet disposition.
---------------------

Oh, you have a sweet disposition?

Maybe we'll get to see it sometime.


Well, I don't know what your problem is, others have seen it. Maybe it's just you. : )

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 9:05 PM EDT
I remember that now.

She pointed out that an abusive spouse can drive the victim to do something horrible, even though there would be no evidence of the long-term abuse that led up to it.

Which is the reason why I didn't slug my wife, even though she was constantly calling 911 and claiming I did. When the police came, I would just say, where are the marks.


I would have slugged her. : )

[hamiltongrad]

I am amazed that we are not doing a 40 year look back at Mary Jo Kopeckne, and how men abuse women and get away with it, as as mark of this anniversary. To me , it is far more important that putting a tin can in space all for the bragging rights of men riding a phallus like device straight up , only to limply return , all wet and tired.

I would like to have TED tell us all / As I have been saying. TED< TIME TO TALK.

A poster boy for being an abusive man. Even his blonde trophy wife, poor person, is quiet, and not responding to interviews from CBS to mark the 40 years , revealed. How did she feel at that time, to learn what happened while she sat home knitting ?

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 9:00 PM EDT


It's not fair. She tricked me.

She snuck up when I wasn't looking.


No, that's your trick. Your sneaky.

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 8:59 PM EDT
Oh, no wait. You said you didn't like guns because your tongue might get frozen to it in cold weather.


NO, you said that, not me. You are such a liar.

And you were shooting at your neighbour kids. That's what you told me.

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 8:54 PM EDT
That's because you were wrong. I was just telling it like it is.

You said we shouldn't lock our doors at night because it would mean we're living in fear.


I never said any such thing. I never told you that you shouldn't lock your doors. You live in a country that is very violent, why would I tell you that? I just said that there would be no need to lock them if you weren't fearful. : )

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 8:34 PM EDT

You should read the garbage from a b@ll buster named erasmus.

Now, there's a REAL man hater.


You are full of crap! There has never been one thing that I have ever said that would make anyone believe that I was a man hater. It's YOU. Everything I say, you switch it around to say what you want it to say. I have never had anyone tell me that I sounded like a man hater.

[erasmus111]

You on the other hand are always putting women down and are lumping them together. Not all women are like your wife.

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 8:33 PM EDT
And what the hell makes you an authority on that?
-----------------
"Being married for ten years to a woman who judged, blamed, and criticized every iota of my existence for most of them, until she finally felt so self-righteous and judgemental about me that she picked up a knife and stabbed me in the chest."


Being married for ten years to one woman only tells you about THAT woman. That does NOT make you an authority.


"And now that I know what it's like, I can see it in virtually every married couple I see."

Uh-huh, you just think you do. That idiot wife of yours has distorted your view on things.


"Then she tapes HIS dog to the refreigerator. Then erasmutt blames the man for not stopping her."

I didn't blame him for anything. I just said that he could have stopped her. And he could have, if he wanted to. But he chose not to. You have a way of switching my words around to make them say what you want.

Now, just because you can be mean and nasty, I don't for one minute judge all men by looking at you. : )

It's really too bad that you couldn't have found a wife with my sweet disposition. Your loss. : )

[erasmus111]

by hamiltongrad July 20, 2009 7:37 PM EDT
That is not true. I just tell it like it is. My theory is that Blame has no place in modern informed society, as all of society has a role.


BULL. You said that men were to blame for everything that women did. You said that if a women commits a crime, it's a man's fault. Either it wasn't her husband, it was her father.

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 8:28 PM EDT
by erasmus111 July 20, 2009 6:45 PM EDT
------------

See, hamiltongrad. There's a woman judging and criticizing me.

And we're not even married. We don't even live in the same country.

It's just not fair. Do you see what we men have to put up with?

She started it.


NO, YOU started it. You have been criticizing me since we first met over an argument about guns.

[erasmus111]

by cpqdk07191969 July 20, 2009 6:11 PM EDT

Women are the ones who do most of the blaming, judging, and criticizing.


And what the hell makes you an authority on that?

I've been on here for over two years and all I have heard is b*tchin' and whinin' from MEN, about women. It's always the women's fault for everthing.

The only women that I have heard blaming, criticizing and judging men are rowdy and hamiltongrad.

[hamiltongrad]

That is not true. I just tell it like it is. My theory is that Blame has no place in modern informed society, as all of society has a role. Often women are accused and punished, after they "snap" from prolonged abuse. Take for instance, Ted Kennedy and what happen 40 years ago as an example how men are treated in our society. These abuses build up, and most women at that time were wondering if they too could end up that way , and their "man" gets off Scotty Free.
Men too act out, I am afraid to day, when the contract of marriage has been changed. I am equally for men and women. Men deserve to celebrte being men. Men and women are different. Does that make me a man hater ??
Therefore, blaming is not modern, if we do not take gender factors into account, and instead use Dialogue and reasoning. not punishment. I am consistent, and not a hater.

[pkmr-2009]

I happen to know James Lovell, one of the "doomed" astronauts from Apollo 13. I also have met Scott Carpenter. Ask these brave men if the moon landing was a hoax. Shame on those of you that think so.

[hamiltongrad]

Only crazy people think that way, about the same % think Elvis is (still) alive. Michael Jackson, coming back too ? I would say about 4 % are really nuts.

[truth_police]

The most important video images in NASA history and these geniuses accidently destroyed it? That says it all. Misfits on a Fool's Errand. The fact is, we have damnn little to show for the enormous amounts of money we have thrown at NASA. Many point to things like space blankets and memory foam as examples of direct, concrete public benefits garnered from space exploration. Yet that just aggravates opponents' rage over the squandering of such enormous amounts of taxpayer money. Why is it that every single NASA 'benefit' ever cited ended up going to private corporations, with private corporations owning the patents and gouging the consumer for that invention, which now has no competition in the marketplace (because of the patent)? Taxpayer dollars were used to enrich the rich and to gouge the taxpayer. And all you need to know about alternative uses for that money is that, NO hungry destitute creature who is fed, clothed and given shelter by that money would ever characterize it as 'wasted' or as "failing to solve the problem" of hunger and poverty.

[seafang]

Well while we are all celebrating the first moon landing; and Neil Armstrong's famous "one small step for man" speech; just remember that at the very second he was delivering that speech, the "most trusted man in America" was flapping off at the mouth on CBS TV about some inconsequential drivel that absolutely nobody was interested in hearing. Check out the movie Apollo 13 where they replayed that "news clip".

Nothing has changed; news people still think the news is all about them.

[hamiltongrad]

this was a life changing 40 year anniversy. Sadly it also saw Ted Kenndy tragic loss of any hope for being President by his stupid mistake and worse the coverup. Thus denying us his turn at being number 1. July 19, 1968.
That was a great week for Nixon.

[hamiltongrad]

I have to ponder this. But, do you really believe that women do the most blaming ? I am not saying no, and am very impressed by your analysis. Give me a few to think.

[erasmus111]

by hamiltongrad July 20, 2009 6:29 PM EDT
I have to ponder this. But, do you really believe that women do the most blaming ?


Hamiltongrad, you are talking to a woman-hater.

Geez, we have a woman-hater talking to a man-hater.