RSS Feed     Twitter     Facebook

Posts Tagged ‘Space technology’

The evidence Bush tried to hide

Photos from US spy satellites declassified by the Obama White House provide the first graphic images of how the polar ice sheets are retreating in the summer. The effects on the world’s weather, environments and wildlife could be devastating

Graphic images that reveal the devastating impact of global warming in the Arctic have been released by the US military. The photographs, taken by spy satellites over the past decade, confirm that in recent years vast areas in high latitudes have lost their ice cover in summer months.

The pictures, kept secret by Washington during the presidency of George W Bush, were declassified by the White House last week. President Barack Obama is currently trying to galvanise Congress and the American public to take action to halt catastrophic climate change caused by rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

One particularly striking set of images – selected from the 1,000 photographs released – includes views of the Alaskan port of Barrow. One, taken in July 2006, shows sea ice still nestling close to the shore. A second image shows that by the following July the coastal waters were entirely ice-free.

The photographs demonstrate starkly how global warming is changing the Arctic. More than a million square kilometres of sea ice – a record loss – were missing in the summer of 2007 compared with the previous year.

Nor has this loss shown any sign of recovery. Ice cover for 2008 was almost as bad as for 2007, and this year levels look equally sparse.

“These are one-metre resolution images, which give you a big picture of the summertime Arctic,” said Thorsten Markus of Nasa’s Goddard Space Flight Centre. “This is the main reason why we are so thrilled about it. One-metre resolution is the dimension that’s been missing.”

Disappearing summer sea ice poses considerable dangers, scientists have warned. Ice shelves are used by animals such as polar bears as platforms for hunting seals and other sea creatures. Without them, they could starve. In addition, ice reflects solar radiation. Without that process, the Arctic sea could warm up even more. The phenomenon threatens to set off runaway heating of the planet, say climatologists.

The latest revelations have triggered warnings from scientists that they no longer have the funds to keep a comprehensive track of climate change. Last week the head of the US’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Professor Jane Lubchenco, warned that the gathering of satellite data – crucial to predicting future climate changes – was now at “great risk” because America’s ageing satellite fleet was not being replaced.

“Our primary focus is maintaining the continuity of climate observations, and those are at great risk right now because we don’t have the resources to have satellites at the ready and taking the kinds of information that we need,” said Lubchenco, who was appointed by Obama. “We are playing catch-up.”

Even before her warning, scientists were saying that America, the world’s scientific superpower, was virtually blinding itself to climate change by cutting funds to the environmental satellite programmes run by the Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Nasa. A report by the National Academy of Sciences this year warned that the environmental satellite network was at risk of collapse.

In February, a Nasa satellite carrying instruments to produce the first map of the Earth’s carbon emissions crashed near Antarctica only three minutes after lift-off.

The satellite would have measured carbon emissions at 100,000 points around the planet every day, providing a wealth of data compared to the 100 or so fixed towers currently in operation in a land-based network.

The NOAA is under additional pressure to provide environmental data because of the re-emergence of the El Niño climate phenomenon, where warming of the tropical Pacific causes heatwaves, droughts and flooding around the world. June’s land and sea surface temperatures were the second hottest on record, and scientists are predicting this will be the warmest decade in recorded history. The last major El Niño was in 1998, the hottest year in recorded history.

The Obama administration has already taken steps to tackle America’s flagging scientific lead. The president’s economic recovery plan allotted $170m (£100m) to help close the gaps in climate modelling. The NOAA is seeking an additional $390m in its 2010 budget to upgrade environmental satellites, and help make data more available to researchers and government officials.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


UK space research centre opens

New facility will focus on climate change science and robotic space exploration, and will develop procedures to ensure future missions do not contaminate other planets with chemicals and microorganisms from Earth

The European Space Agency has opened its first research centre in the UK in a move designed to bring more British scientists and engineers into contact with the space industry. The agency has earmarked £1.3m for the facility’s first year of operation.

Work at the centre, which is based in a former computing lab built in the 1960s at Harwell science park in Oxfordshire, will focus on climate change science and robotic missions. Other plans include a “planetary protection facility” that will develop procedures to ensure missions to other planets do not contaminate them with terrestrial chemicals or bugs.

The centre will also operate as a storage facility for moon rock, meteorites and other material brought back from space that needs to be kept under clean-room conditions to protect it from the environment.

At an official opening ceremony in London, Esa’s director general Jean-Jacques Dordain said: “The European Space Agency is landing in the UK, one hundred years after Louis Blériot,” in a reference to the French aviator who became the first person to cross the English Channel in an aeroplane in 1909.

Britain’s science minister, Lord Drayson, said the centre was part of Britain’s “space renaissance”. Earlier this year Esa announced that it had chosen Major Tim Peake as the country’s first official astronaut.

“In a few years’ time, we’ll look back on this period and see it as a generational change in space technology,” Lord Drayson said.

The Harwell facility will be run by Martin Ditter, an Esa engineer. Climate scientists from the space agency will arrive at the facility in September.

The centre’s climate change unit will work on data from environmental monitoring satellites, helping to refine models of climate change impact. Other projects will look at how to put space technology to good use on Earth, for example to improve transport information and mobile communications.

Further work is planned on robotics and the use of radioactive materials as power sources for space probes.

Earlier this week, Lord Drayson opened a 12-week public consultation on whether Britain should have its own dedicated space agency which would have the power to initiate its own missions.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Apollo 11: Landing the Eagle

Neil Armstrong skilfully pilots Apollo 11′s Eagle lunar module to the moon’s surface


Science Weekly Extra: Nasa’s Mars vision

Dr John Olson from Nasa discusses America’s plans for manned missions to the moon and Mars


A one-way ticket to the final frontier

• Nasa director says mission recalls US pioneers
• No way back ‘would not deter volunteers’

It is often described as “the final frontier”, and not just by those who follow the adventures of Captain Kirk and the crew of the USS Enterprise. The phrase, though, may take an even more literal meaning for those exploring space in the future.

The next generation of astronauts may hurtle through the cosmos for years or decades on a mission to explore distant planets and stars – and never return.

A senior Nasa official has told the Guardian that the world’s space agencies, or the commercial firms that may eventually succeed them, could issue one-way tickets to space, with the travellers accepting that they would not come back.

The prospect of spending years cooped in a spacecraft would not deter people from applying, he said.

“You would find no shortage of volunteers,” said John Olson, Nasa’s director of exploration systems integration. “It’s really no different than the pioneering spirit of many in past history, who took the one-way trip across the ocean, or the trip out west across the United States with no intention of ever returning.”

In May 1961, President John F Kennedy challenged the US to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade and return him safely to Earth. In an effort costing an estimated $1.4tn in 2009 dollars, Apollo 11 astronauts Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first humans to set foot on the moon 40 years ago today. Now, Nasa hopes to reignite the public’s interest in manned space flight and win support for a massive investment in new trips to space.

If, as Olson predicts, humans reach Mars by the middle of this century, engineers and astronauts may then set their sights on the frozen planets, fiery moons and stars beyond.

“We’re going back to the moon, not for flags and footsteps but for a sustained presence,” Olson said. “We’re going to use the moon as a stepping stone to Mars and we’re going to look at other interesting spots, like asteroids and near-Earth objects, and we’re going to look at all the other exciting places to go in this solar system.”

Since Kennedy’s speech, the US has lost 17 astronauts. Three perished in a fire during early testing for the Apollo programme and 14 died in the wreckage of the space shuttles Challenger and Columbia. In 1970, Nasa engineers saved three astronauts when Apollo 13 malfunctioned 200,000 miles from Earth. But no US astronaut has ever suffered the slow oxygen starvation and freeze that would doom a spacecraft lost beyond the Earth’s orbit.

Nasa is currently bound by Kennedy’s directive to bring its astronauts home, Olson said. But the other nations rapidly developing space programmes may shed the constraint, as could the commercial companies that may supplant national efforts. “Space is no longer for power and prestige; it’s truly for economic benefit,” the Apollo 11 flight director Eugene Kranz said. “The technology that emerges from high-risk, high-profile, extremely difficult missions is the technology that will keep the economic engine of our nation continuing to go through the years.”

With currently foreseeable technology, a round trip to Mars launched from a lunar outpost would take two to three years – a journey of six to nine months each way and a year-long mission on the surface.

The star nearest Earth’s solar system, Alpha Centauri, is 4.37 light years away, or more than 2.5tn miles, and a round-trip spacecraft would have to carry enough fuel to brake and propel itself back to Earth.

Robert Park, a physicist and prominent critic of manned space flight, said that even a one-way trip to Alpha Centauri was beyond the laws of physics.

The energy required to push a spacecraft up to the speed needed to get to the star within 50 years was so great as to be barely conceivable. He described the measurement as a fantastic multiple of the energy consumed by the entire world in a year.

“We don’t have a warp drive,” he said, referring to the interstellar engines of Star Trek fantasy. “A multigenerational space ark would doom the children raised to continue the mission never to see Earth and would decide their destiny before their birth, raising profound ethical questions.”

Rather than devote immeasurable resources to sending humans into space, Park said science should instead build stronger telescopes to better study distant stars and planets.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Apollo 11′s lunar mission: a guide

What you need to know about the mission that marked the zenith of the US-Soviet space race


The docking of Apollo 11

Three hours after launch, the Columbia docks nose-to-nose with the lunar module



Nasa tapes over original moon walk footage

• Moon walk video restored despite the loss of original footage
• Loss of tapes went unnoticed for 35 years

It was mankind’s crowning achievement, with millions around the world glued to their television sets as astronaut Neil Armstrong took the first steps on the surface of the moon 40 years ago.

But in the scientific equivalent of recording an old episode of EastEnders over the prized video of your daughter’s wedding day, Nasa likely taped over its only high resolution images of the first moonwalk with electronic data from a satellite or a later manned space mission, officials said today.

It means that the familiar grainy and ghosting images of Armstrong’s “giant leap for mankind” are all that remain from the mission, though as a consolation prize the space agency has managed to digitally restore the footage into new broadcast-quality pictures that it released today.

“I don’t think anyone in the Nasa organisation did anything wrong. It slipped through the cracks, and nobody’s happy about it,” said Dick Nafzger, one of the last Apollo-era video engineers still working for the agency at Maryland’s Goddard Space Flight Centre.

In a technological feat that rivalled even putting Armstrong and shipmate Buzz Aldrin on the lunar surface, and one that has been largely overlooked since, a team of Nasa engineers and contractors fed live video from the moon via a series of relay stations in Australia and the US to homes around the world.

While Armstrong, Aldrin and Apollo 11 pilot Michael Collins trained for the mission, Nafzger and his partners were tasked with figuring out how to broadcast live from 240,000 miles away.

The images of Armstrong and Aldrin stepping onto the lunar surface and planting the US flag in the grey dust were seen by an estimated 600 million people. The tape recordings, taken for backup, were an afterthought, Nafzger told reporters in Washington today. “We all wish that somebody had said ‘those tapes are special, let’s pull them aside,’” he said.

Instead, their loss apparently went unnoticed for 35 years, until 2004 when an archive in Australia alerted Nasa that it believed it had found the “lost tapes” from the Apollo 11 mission. It shipped the tapes to Goddard, where Nasa maintains what officials say is the only machine in the world capable of reading the old tape technology. The first tapes did not have moon footage but touched off a massive search through archives stored in dusty basements across the world for those that did.

Nasa believed the original tapes might contain digital data sent from the moon that could be converted into much sharper pictures of the landing than those broadcast on the day, which were taken by a TV camera pointed at a giant wall monitor at mission control in Houston – effectively a copy of a copy.

But a standard Nasa money-saving measure in those days was to reuse the 14-inch tape reels after several years in storage. Agency officials ultimately concluded that the original Apollo 11 tapes were buried among an estimated 350,000 that were recycled in the 1970s and 80s and the data was lost forever. The newly released footage was taken from four copies, including one in a CBS television archive. It is undergoing restoration by a firm that specialises in cleaning up old Hollywood movies.

“I don’t believe that the tapes exist today at all,” Stan Lebar, the designer of the original lunar camera, told America’s National Public Radio. “It was a hard thing to accept. But there was just an overwhelming amount of evidence that led us to believe that they just don’t exist anymore.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds



Apollo 11: We have liftoff

A Saturn V rocket launches Apollo 11 on the first leg of its journey to the moon on 16 July 1969. Apollo expert Christopher Riley commentates


Space shuttle Endeavour thunders into orbit

After more than a month’s delay Endeavour began its flight to the international space station on the eve of the 40th anniversary of the liftoff of man’s first moon landing

After more than a month’s delay, space shuttle Endeavour and seven astronauts have thundered into orbit in a flight to the international space station, hauling up a veranda for Japan’s enormous lab and looking to set a crowd record.

Success came on launch try number 6, on the eve of the 40th anniversary of the liftoff of man’s first moon landing.

But the mood was dampened somewhat when Nasa managers watched the launch video.

Eight or nine pieces of foam insulation came off the external fuel tank during liftoff, and the shuttle was hit at least two or three times, said Bill Gerstenmaier, Nasa’s space operations chief. Some scuff marks were spotted, but that probably is coating loss and considered minor, he said.

In fact, Mission Control told the astronauts that the damage which occurred not quite two minutes into the flight looked to be less extensive than what occurred on the last flight. The impacts were around the edge of the shuttle where the right wing joins the fuselage.

Engineers immediately began reviewing all the launch pictures, standard procedure ever since flights resumed following the Columbia disaster. Gerstenmaier said zoom-in photos will be taken of the entire shuttle right before it docks with the space station on Friday, to ascertain whether it suffered any serious damage. It will take days to go through all the data.

At a news conference, Gerstenmaier noted that the Endeavour crew has shuttle repair kits on board. In case of irreparable damage, the astronauts could move into the space station for two to three months and await rescue by another shuttle.

Columbia was destroyed during re-entry in 2003 because of a hole in its wing, left there by flyaway foam at liftoff.

Endeavour blasted off a little after 6pm from its seaside pad the same one used to launch Apollo 11 on 16 July 1969 a welcome sight for shuttle workers who had to overcome hydrogen gas leaks last month and, since the weekend, thunderstorms.

The skies finally cleared, allowing commander Mark Polansky and his crew to embark on their 16-day adventure. One more holdup and they would have tied a record for the most shuttle launch delays.

Later, from orbit, Polansky radioed, “For all of us, it was a pretty decent wait, but we are thrilled to be here.”

The astronauts will catch up on Friday afternoon with the space station, which was soaring more than 220 miles above the Pacific at launch time. When they do, it will be the first time 13 people are together in space. Ten is the previous record.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Eno on his moon-inspired album

Former Roxy Music member Brian Eno is known as the father of ambient music. To celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing, he will introduce the first live performances of his 1983 composition Apollo: Atmospheres and Soundtracks at the Science Museum, London, on 20 and 21 July

In 1983, Brian Eno released an album inspired by Apollo 11. It has now been reworked for its first live performance. Here he talks to Roger Highfield, the editor of New Scientist, about the project.

You were 21 when the moon landings took place. What do you recall?
I remember it very, very well. I watched it in the house of my painting tutor at art school, and I remember the very eerie sensation of watching on his little black and white television and then looking up at the moon and being absolutely shocked at the idea of what was happening there at that moment in time. It was one of those strange moments when time closes up on you and something that seems fictional and fantastic suddenly becomes real.

You are credited with inventing ambient music. How do the Apollo moon missions fit in with its development?
Around the time of Apollo I was listening to a lot of film soundtracks. What I liked was that they represented a form of incomplete music, where the missing element was the visual element. I liked making music that somehow allowed the listener to imagine a visual element themselves.

How did you feel when London’s Science Museum approached you about the concert?
It was their suggestion to make a performance. Apollo was only ever made in a recording studio, and I said it would be difficult to perform. It does not exist outside of the studio and would have to be rewritten. We hit on the idea of getting a young composer [Korean Jun Lee] who would take Apollo as a starting point for a new composition. It is a remake, not a half-hearted facsimile, performed by amplified ensemble Icebreaker with BJ Cole on pedal steel guitar.

Why is there pedal steel guitar in the Apollo composition?
When director Al Reinert approached me about doing the Apollo music – which ended up in the 1989 film For All Mankind – he told me there was music on the moon shot. Every astronaut was allowed to take one cassette of their favourite music. All but one took country and western. They were cowboys exploring a new frontier, this one just happened to be in space. We worked the piece around the idea of zero-gravity country music.

Would you like to go into space?
I would love to. But not yet. I would prefer others to do the exploratory journeys [laughs]. My friend Jeff Bezos of Amazon has set up a spaceflight company, Blue Origin. I am sure that if it comes up I can get a seat for an appropriate sum.

Prize draw

Would you like to see Brian Eno’s Apollo performed at the Science Museum in London? New Scientist has five pairs of tickets to give away. Email your name, address and phone number to competition@newscientist.com. The first five entries out of the hat will win. You must make your own travel arrangements. The closing date is 5pm on 16 July. For terms and conditions see http://www.newscientist.com/info/in312

This interview appears in the latest issue of New Scientist magazine

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Science Weekly: Apollo 11 special

In exactly two weeks, Nasa will celebrate the 40th anniversary of one of its most remarkable achievements. On 20 July 1969, Neil Armstrong, “Buzz” Aldrin and Michael Collins reached the moon in Apollo 11.

In this Science Weekly special, we’re joined by the mission’s biggest fan, author of the new Haynes manual for Apollo 11 Dr Christopher Riley, and the Guardian’s David Adam to remember the historic moment and its legacy.

Andy Duckworth has been on location at Nasa in Washington DC to look at out how the US will be marking the anniversary.

Plus, Steven Moss meets the second person to set foot on the moon – Buzz Aldrin - to talk about how he faced the inevitable comedown after such a pinnacle achievement.

Hold onto your seats for blast-off, this is Science Weekly from the Guardian.


The second man on the moon

Buzz Aldrin talks to Stephen Moss about the Apollo 11 mission 40 years ago


Apollo 11: training for the moon

Armstrong and Aldrin walk the Earth in their cumbersome spacesuits


First man on the moon, 40 years on

The landing was a moment of intense human drama, played out with fragile, gleaming technology against a backcloth of infinity

Even at the time, we understood that our world had changed and that we could pinpoint this change to almost the second. We didn’t have to wait for Neil Armstrong to get out of the lunar module and fumble a portentous remark about a small step for a man. When we heard the words “Houston, Tranquillity Base here, the Eagle has landed,” it didn’t quite sink in, but then after a short, eerie pause the man at Houston, known only as Capcom, choked a bit and stumbled and then said: “We copy you on the ground. You’ve got a bunch of guys about to turn blue. We’re breathing again.” That was the moment a hundred million people around the world also started breathing again.

Apollo was momentous in a way that Yuri Gagarin’s first, heroic orbit could never have been. Gagarin had circled the Earth in 92 minutes in 1961. He had travelled 24,000 miles in an hour and a half; he had made history; he had confirmed Soviet space supremacy; he had done a thing that many thought could never be done. But two things separated him from the Apollo team eight years later.

One was that Gagarin had done all these things before anyone in the world knew about them, or could have known about them. We cheered his triumph, but missed the drama. The other was that he never really left the Earth; he flew higher than anybody had ever done, but he was still a prisoner of the planet’s tug. He was never much further from Earth than Manchester is from London.

Everything about the Apollo landing, though, was high adventure. It was the climax of a space race that had been so tightly contested that, right up to that moment on the Sea of Tranquillity, it had seemed possible that the Russians might get there first. This race had developed, although we could not know the details at the time, from a duel of wits between two men.

One was Wernher von Braun, the former Waffen-SS officer who had devised, built, tested and deployed what, in 1944, had been the ultimate weapon: the Vergeltungswaffe-2, the vengeance weapon, the V2 . He pioneered the American technocracy. His Soviet opponent was a figure so shadowy that even in the USSR he was known only as “the Chief Designer”. In fact, Sergei Kolorev was an even more remarkable man who had lost his teeth, his health and very nearly his life in Stalin’s prison camps, but most of us knew nothing about him, not even his name, until 1990.

The decision to finance a moon race was a dramatic manoeuvre in cold war politics, the ultimate in one-upmanship, a seizure of the commanding heights of space, begun by President Kennedy as a riposte to the Soviet Union’s boastful Nikita Khrushchev.

But the sprint for the moon also united an implacably divided world. It gave us our first sense of the loneliness and the beauty of our planet, seen from a distance of a quarter of a million miles. And it was the first direct step in the search for extraterrestrial life. We forget this now, but in 1969, the fear of global infection by alien lunar organisms seemed real enough to ensure that the three astronauts went straight into biological isolation when they came home.

Above all, it was a moment of human drama, played out with fragile, gleaming technology against a backcloth of infinity. Like a billion other people, I listened, on an old junkshop radio with an improvised antenna, in the small parlour of a two-up, two-down railwayman’s cottage in Kent, while my wife, son and daughter slept overhead. I wasn’t, at the time, a science reporter, but I had joined a newspaper at 16 in 1957, just in time for Sputnik 1 and, like millions of others, I had followed every step of the drama that, on the night of 20 July 1969, reached its highest point.

Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Mike Collins had left the Earth altogether. They had travelled a quarter of a million miles, and then two of them had climbed into a little module that looked then, and still looks now, implausible, and descended to leave their footprints in the dust of an alien world, and they did these things while almost the whole of the human race watched and listened and, yes, held its breath. Eagle’s touchdown on the moon was the unforgettable moment: one in which we might eavesdrop on triumph or tragedy. We knew that astronauts could get out of a spacecraft and walk in space; it would be no problem to get out and walk on the moon. That much was a formality, a performance for the cameras they carried with them. What was not certain was that the Eagle could land at all.

Consider the problem: Eagle had to detach itself from the mothership Apollo at the right moment, and begin a precise descent that had to be completed while still on the side of the moon always facing Earth: radio transmission was impossible from the far side. Although Aldrin and Armstrong were astronauts, test pilots and history-makers, they were also the agents of the most ambitious peacetime co-operative enterprise ever: they were emissaries from Earth, touching down on another world. They were part of a corporate journey into the unknown that could go terribly wrong at any point, and they had to do it while mission control at Houston could monitor the technology, and while the world watched.

“Apollo 11 was a half-a-million-mile daisy chain draped around the moon, a chain that was as fragile as it was long,” Collins wrote afterwards. “I figured our chances for a successful landing and return were not much better than 50-50.” Nasa’s safety chief during the Apollo 8 mission, the one that flew round the moon in 1968, had calculated that the spaceship had 5,600,000 moving parts and “even if all functioned with 99.9% reliability, we could expect 5,600 defects”.

But how much more potentially calamitous was the flight of the Eagle, the module that landed on the moon. There were no circumstances in which anyone could really complete a test flight of the ungainly little vehicle with its ridiculous legs. You could not simulate lunar gravity on Earth; you could not simulate a 60-mile journey in a vacuum anywhere here; and you could not mock-up the fine detail of a lunar surface – the dust, stones, boulders, crags, crevices, chasms and craters – because until the touchdown, nobody had ever seen the fine detail.

Could Eagle find a level surface? Or might it land on a slope, on unstable ground, on a protruding rock, and topple over, so much expensive wreckage on a hostile shore? And even if it could land safely upright, might it not sink into the dust, to be trapped in lunar quicksand, never to escape? There was no precedent, no information and almost no room for error at any point in the landing, that night of 20 July, and everybody in the world knew it.

We knew that the entire endeavour was hazardous then; but its magnitude, variety and unpredictability became even more starkly clear years later, as astronauts began to tell, and sell, their stories. The mission lasted eight days, and everything had to go right.

First, they had to get there. It meant taking off at the pinnacle of a Saturn rocket: a controlled incendiary device that would accelerate the trio to a speed of 25,000 miles per hour and allow them to scramble above the well of terrestrial gravity and then begin the long fall towards the alien embrace of the moon.

They had to be on exactly the right course. In the 1960s, the world marvelled at Nasa’s state-of-the-art computers, but one forgets how new this art was. Any household washing machine now has greater memory, more sophisticated programming and faster processing power than the entire sum of Nasa’s computing resources at the time. Like Captain Cook and other 18th-century mariners before them, the astronauts had to back up their computer-guided navigation system by making star sightings with a sextant. Essentially, the whole $24bn operation rested on Newtonian mechanics, slide-rule mathematics, the watchfulness of 60,000 Nasa chiefs, scientists and engineers, and the labour of 400,000 men and women employed by 20,000 private contractors.

This enormous army of achievers had to work as one and yet at the same time think of everything, including the temperature of space through which Apollo and Eagle, locked together, made the journey. Space is very cold, but sunlight is very hot: the difference between light and shade in high orbit is more than 200C. If one side of the spacecraft got too hot, while the other got too cold, the electrical wiring that maintained the guidance system and the oxygen supply might collapse. So Apollo had to rotate at intervals all the way to the moon and back. The astronauts had to worry about how they moved: sudden lunges might send the fluid in their inner ears sloshing about, inducing giddiness and nausea. Nausea meant vomiting – it has happened often enough in space – but floating vomit inside a space helmet would be catastrophic.

When it reached the moon, the mother ship had to go into a precise circular orbit around the new world, because Armstrong and Aldrin had to take their little lifeboat down there and then back again. It was one thing to touch down on the Moon – they could hardly miss. But it would be quite another thing to take off in what was little more than a tent wrapped in foil and perched on stilts, and make a rendezvous with something the size of a small caravan moving at thousands of miles an hour. So everything had to go right.

And of course, things went wrong. The alarm systems on board Eagle started complaining as it began its descent: engineers and mission controllers and the astronauts themselves had to make a terrible calculation. Was it just the warning technology playing up, or was there something really wrong? Should they abort? And could they successfully abort? Collins, the man who stayed behind aboard Apollo, whirling round and round the moon, had a checklist of 18 different rescue scenarios clipped to his pressure suit, in case things went wrong. Some of these had to be executed immediately, and flawlessly, to avert tragedy.

Collins, too, while waiting for the touchdown, the moon walk, the show for an estimated billion television viewers, and the take-off, had more time than the others to think about things that might go wrong. If the ascent engine wouldn’t fire, then Armstrong and Aldrin would be marooned with just a day’s supply of oxygen. “How would Nasa handle that? Would Nasa pull the plug or keep broadcasting their final words to the world? What would I say or do?” he wrote years later in his memoir Liftoff.

The duo made it safely, in a cliff-hanger landing. They also began their 2½-hour extra- vehicular activity (EVA) and stepped from Eagle to the dust of the moon seven hours earlier than planned, because, as Aldrin put it in his book Men from Earth, “Whoever signed off on that plan didn’t know much psychology … Telling us to try to sleep before the EVA was like telling kids on Christmas morning they had to stay in bed till noon.”

They stepped down, Armstrong said the bit that everybody in the world can quote, and then he said what he really felt: he turned to Aldrin and said: “Isn’t that something?” What followed happened according to a script already arranged, with an awkward few minutes of improvisation when President Nixon telephoned from the White House: “Neil and Buzz … this certainly has to be the most historic telephone call ever made.” The pair planted a flag and left a plaque (“We came in peace …”) and a medal for the late Yuri Gagarin. They walked no more than 60 metres from the lander, gathered 40lb of moon rocks, and set up two experiments, one of which failed in the harsh lunar climate and one of which worked for 40 years. After that they prepared for the return journey.

It was then that they discovered something that very few others knew about at the time: one of them, in turning inside the lunar module while wearing the oxygen pack and helmet, had snapped off a little plastic circuit breaker. It was the circuit that would send electrical power to the engine to fire the rockets that would get them off the moon. Both men were by this time suffering from severe fatigue – they had barely slept at all in 36 hours – but, as Aldrin put it afterwards, “this got our attention”. They shoved a felt-tip pen into the slot, and luckily, it fitted. They consulted mission control, began the countdown and took off. This time everything went right: four hours later, they had docked with Apollo.

The return journey had its dangers. They had to hit the Earth’s atmosphere at a very precise angle at 25,000mph. The capsule had to survive friction that would generate several thousand degrees of heat. The parachutes had to open. And the splashdown had to be sufficiently near to the waiting naval craft and its frogmen.

But by 1969, US astronauts and Soviet cosmonauts had survived many such landings. They could do it. The real heart-in-mouth moments had been when Eagle skimmed low over the surface of the moon, looking for somewhere it could safely land, and when it did, we all understood that an epoch had begun. A new era was to begin: there would one day be huge satellite cities in space, colonies on the moon, an outpost on Mars, and all before 2001.

A few days later Senator Teddy Kennedy, brother of the late John Kennedy, was trying to explain the mysterious death of a girl off a bridge at Chappaquiddick, Nixon was talking again about the war in Vietnam and Britain abolished the halfpenny. Somehow, we were back to business as usual.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds