Jump to content

55 Years Ago: One Year Before the Moon Landing


Recommended Posts

  • Publishers
Posted

In July 1968, much work still remained to meet the goal President John F. Kennedy set in May 1961, to land a man on the Moon and return him safely to the Earth before the end of the decade. No American astronaut had flown in space since the November 1966 flight of Gemini XII, the delay largely a result of the tragic Apollo 1 fire. Although the Apollo spacecraft had successfully completed several uncrewed test flights, the first crewed mission still lay three months in the future. The delays in getting the Lunar Module (LM) ready for its first flight caused schedule concerns, but also presented an opportunity for a bold step to send the second crewed Apollo mission, the first crewed flight of the Saturn V, on a trip to orbit the Moon. Using an incremental approach, three flights later NASA accomplished President Kennedy’s goal.

view of fire damage to cm at pad 34apollo 4 launchmating of lm1 to sla nov 22 1967apollo 6 recoveryLeft: The charred remains of the Apollo 1 spacecraft following the tragic fire that claimed the lives of astronauts Virgil I. “Gus” Grissom, Edward H. White, and Roger B. Chaffee. Middle left: The first launch of the Saturn V rocket on the Apollo 4 mission. Middle right: The first Lunar Module in preparation for the Apollo 5 mission. Right: Splashdown of Apollo 6, the final uncrewed Apollo mission.

The American human spaceflight program suffered a jarring setback on Jan. 27, 1967, with the deaths of astronauts Virgil I. Grissom, Edward H. White, and Roger B. Chaffee in the Apollo 1 fire. The fire and subsequent Investigation led to wholesale changes to the spacecraft, such as the use of fireproof materials and redesign of the hatch to make it easy to open. The early Block I spacecraft, such as Apollo 1, would now only be used for uncrewed missions, with crews flying only aboard the more advanced Block II spacecraft. The fire and its aftermath also led to management changes. For example, George M. Low replaced Joseph F. Shea as Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager. The first Apollo mission after the fire, the uncrewed Apollo 4 in November 1967, included the first launch of the Saturn V Moon rocket as well as a 9-hour flight of a Block I Command and Service Module (CSM). Apollo 5 in January 1968 conducted the first uncrewed test of the LM, and despite a few anomalies, managers considered it successful enough that they canceled a second uncrewed flight. The April 1968 flight of Apollo 6, planned as a near-repeat of Apollo 4, encountered several significant anomalies such as first stage POGO, or severe vibrations, and the failure of the third stage to restart, leading to an alternate mission scenario. Engineers devised a solution to the POGO problem and managers decided that the third flight of the Saturn V would carry a crew.

apollo 7 water egress training aug 5 1968apollo 7 stackingapollo 7 crew outside simulator kscLeft: Apollo 7 astronauts R. Walter Cunningham, left, Donn F. Eisele, and Walter M. Schirra participate in water egress training. Middle: Workers stack the Apollo 7 spacecraft on its Saturn IB rocket at Launch Pad 34. Right: Schirra, left, Cunningham, and Eisele stand outside the spacecraft simulator.

As of July 1968, NASA’s plan called for two crewed Apollo flights in 1968 and up to five in 1969 to achieve the first lunar landing to meet President Kennedy’s deadline, with each mission incrementally building on the success of the previous ones. The first mission, Apollo 7, would return American astronauts to space following a 23-month hiatus. Planned for October 1968, the crew of Walter M. Schirra, Donn F. Eisele, and R. Walter Cunningham would launch atop a Saturn IB rocket and conduct a shakedown flight of the Block II CSM in Earth orbit, including testing the Service Propulsion System engine, critical on later lunar missions for getting into and out of lunar orbit. The flight plan remained open-ended, but managers expected to complete a full-duration 11-day mission, ending with a splashdown in the Atlantic Ocean. Preparations for Apollo 7 proceeded well during the summer of 1968. Workers had stacked the two-stage Saturn IB rocket on Launch Pad 34 back in April. In KSC’s Manned Spacecraft Operations Building (MSOB), Schirra, Eisele, and Cunningham completed altitude chamber tests of their spacecraft, CSM-101, on July 26 followed by their backups three days later. Workers trucked the spacecraft to the launch pad on Aug. 9 for mating with the rocket. Among major milestones, Schirra, Eisele, and Cunningham completed water egress training in the Gulf of Mexico on Aug. 5, in addition to spending time in the spacecraft simulators at KSC and at the Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC), now NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.

apollo 9 crew during training jun 19 1968lm 3 arrives ksc super guppys ii stacking jul 24 1968Left: The original Apollo 8 crew of Russell L. Schweickart, left, David R. Scott, and James A. McDivitt during training in June 1968. Middle: Lunar Module-3 arrives at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida in June 1968. Right: In July 1968, workers in KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building stack the Saturn V rocket for the Apollo 8 mission.

The second flight, targeting a December 1968 launch, would feature the first crewed launch of the Saturn V rocket. The Apollo 8 crew of James A. McDivitt, David R. Scott, and Russell L. Schweickart would conduct the first crewed test of the LM in the relative safety of low Earth orbit. McDivitt and Schweickart would fly the LM on its independent mission, including separating the ascent stage from the descent stage to simulate a takeoff from the Moon, while Scott remained in the CSM. After redocking, Schweickart would conduct a spacewalk to practice an external transfer between the two vehicles. Workers completed stacking the three-stage Saturn V rocket (SA-503) in KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) on Aug. 14. The first component of the spacecraft, LM-3, arrived at KSC on June 9, while CSM-103, arrived on Aug. 12. Workers in the MSOB began to prepare both spacecraft for flight.

borman collins anders crew mar 1968lm 3 in msob aug 27 1968apollo 8 rollout oct 9 1968Left: The original Apollo 9 crew of William A. Anders, left, Michael Collins, and Frank Borman during training in March 1968. Middle: Lunar Module-3 during preflight processing at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center (KSC) in Florida in August 1968. Right: Following the revision of the mission plans for Apollo 8 and 9 and crew changes, the Apollo 8 crew of James A. Lovell, Anders, and Borman stand before their Saturn V rocket as it rolls out of KSC’s Vehicle Assembly Building in October 1968.

The third flight, planned for early 1969, and flown by Frank Borman, Michael Collins, and William A. Anders, would essentially repeat the Apollo 8 mission, but at the end would fire the SPS engine to raise the high point of their orbit to 4,600 miles and then simulate a reentry at lunar return velocity to test the spacecraft’s heat shield. On July 23, Collins underwent surgery for a bone spur in his neck, and on August 8, NASA announced that James A. Lovell from the backup crew would take his place. Later missions in 1969 would progress to sending the CSM and LM combination to lunar orbit, leading to the first landing before the end of the year. Construction of the rocket and spacecraft components for these future missions continued at various contractor facilities around the country.

kraft gilruth low in mcc during apollo 6slayton portraitdebus portraitvon braun portraitLeft: In Mission Control during the Apollo 6 mission, Director of Flight Crew Operations Christopher C. Kraft, left, Director of the Manned Spacecraft Center, now NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston Robert R. Gilruth, and Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager George M. Low. Middle left: Chief of Flight Crew Operations Donald K. “Deke” Slayton. Middle right: Director of NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida Kurt H. Debus. Right: Director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

Challenges to this plan began to arise in June 1968. Managers’ biggest concern centered around the readiness of LM-3. After its delivery to KSC on June 9, managers realized the vehicle needed much more work than anticipated and it would not meet the planned December Apollo 8 launch date. Best estimates put its flight readiness no earlier than February 1969. That kind of delay would jeopardize meeting President Kennedy’s fast-approaching deadline. To complicate matters, intelligence reports indicated that the Soviets were close to sending cosmonauts on a trip around the Moon, possibly before the end of the year, and also preparing to test a Saturn V-class rocket for a Moon landing mission.

Apollo Spacecraft Program Manager Low formulated a plan both audacious and risky. Without a LM, an Earth orbital Apollo 8 mission would simply repeat Apollo 7’s and not advance the program very much. By sending the CSM on a mission around the Moon, or even to orbit the Moon, NASA would gain valuable experience in navigation and communications at lunar distances. To seek management support for his plan, on Aug. 9 Low met with MSC Director Robert R. Gilruth, who supported the proposal. They called in Christopher C. Kraft, director of flight operations, for his opinion. Two days earlier, Low had asked Kraft to assess the feasibility of a lunar orbit mission for Apollo 8, and Kraft deemed it achievable from a ground control and spacecraft computer standpoint. Chief of Flight Crew Operations Donald K. “Deke” Slayton joined the discussion, and all agreed to seek support for the plan from the directors of KSC and of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in Huntsville, Alabama, as well as NASA Headquarters (HQ) in Washington, D.C. That afternoon, the four flew to Huntsville and met with MSFC Director Wernher von Braun, KSC Director Kurt H. Debus, and HQ Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips. By the end of the meeting, the group identified no insurmountable technical obstacles to the lunar mission plan, with the qualification that the Apollo 7 mission in October concluded successfully. Von Braun had confidence that the Saturn V would perform safely, and Debus believed KSC could support a December launch.

Slayton called Borman, who was with Lovell and Anders conducting tests with their spacecraft in Downey, California. He ordered Borman to immediately fly to Houston, where he offered him command of the new circumlunar Apollo 8 mission, which Borman accepted. His crew would swap missions with McDivitt’s, who agreed to fly an Earth orbital test of the LM in February 1969, putting that crew’s greater experience with the LM to good use. The training challenge fell on Borman’s crew, who now had just four months to train for a flight around the Moon.

samuel phillips portraitgeorge mueller portraitpaine portrait w lmjames webb portraitLeft: Apollo Program Director Samuel C. Phillips. Middle left: Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller. Middle right: Deputy Administrator Thomas O. Paine. Right: Administrator James E. Webb.

On Aug. 14, representatives from MSC, MSFC, and KSC attended a meeting in Washington with NASA Deputy Administrator Thomas O. Paine and Apollo Program Director Phillips, the senior Headquarters officials present as NASA Administrator James E. Webb and Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight George E. Mueller attended a conference in Vienna. The group discussed Low’s proposal and agreed on the technical feasibility of accomplishing a circumlunar flight with Apollo 8 in December. During the discussion, Mueller happened to call from Vienna and when they presented him with the proposal, he was at first reticent, especially since NASA had yet to fly Apollo 7. He requested more information and more time to consider the proposal so he could properly brief Webb. Paine then polled each center director for his overall assessment. Von Braun, who designed the Saturn V rocket, stated that whether it went to the Moon or stayed in Earth orbit didn’t matter too much. Debus stated that KSC could support a Saturn V launch in December – as noted above, his team was already processing both the rocket and the spacecraft. Gilruth agreed that the proposal represented a key step in achieving President Kennedy’s goal, and emphasized that the mission should not just loop around the Moon but actually enter orbit. Following additional discussions after Webb’s return from Vienna, he agreed to the plan, but would not make a formal decision until after a successful Apollo 7 flight in October. NASA kept the lunar orbit plan quiet even as the crews began training for their respective new missions. An announcement on Aug. 19 merely stated that Apollo 8 would not carry a LM, as the agency continued to assess various mission objectives. Ultimately, the plan required President Lyndon B. Johnson’s approval.

llrv 1 accident may 6 1968 armstrong ejectinglta8 test irwin bull mar 2 1968apollo 2tv-1 testingapollo parachute testing at el centro jun 16 1968Left: Astronaut Neil A. Armstrong ejects just moments before his Lunar Landing Research Vehicle crashed. Middle left: Pilot Gerald P. Gibbons, left, and astronaut James B. Irwin prepare to enter an altitude chamber for one of the Lunar Module Test Article-8 (LTA-8) vacuum tests. Middle right: Astronauts Joe H. Engle, left, Vance D. Brand, and Joseph P. Kerwin preparing for the 2TV-1 altitude test. Right: One of the final Apollo parachute tests.

As those discussions took place, work around the country continued to prepare for the first lunar landing, not without some setbacks. On May 8, astronaut Neil A. Armstrongejected just in the nick of time as the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV) he was piloting went out of control and crashed. Managers suspended flights of the LLRV and its successor, the Lunar Landing Training Vehicle (LLTV), until Oct. 3. Astronauts used the LLRV and LLTV to train for the final few hundred feet of the descent to the Moon’s surface. On May 27, astronaut James B. Irwin and pilot Gerald P. Gibbons began a series of altitude tests in Chamber B of the Space Environment Simulation Laboratory (SESL) at MSC. The tests, using the LM Test Article-8 (LTA-8), evaluated the pressure integrity of the LM as well as the new spacesuits designed for the Apollo program. The first series of LTA-8 tests supported the Earth-orbital flight of LM-3 on Apollo 9 while a second series in October and November supported the LM-5 flight of Apollo 11, the first lunar landing mission. In June, using SESL’s Chamber A, astronauts Joseph P. Kerwin, Vance D. Brand, and Joe H. Engle completed an eight-day thermal vacuum test using the Apollo 2TV-1 spacecraft to certify the vehicle for Apollo 7. A second test in September certified the vehicle for lunar missions. July 3 marked the final qualification drop test of the Apollo parachute system, a series begun five years earlier. The tests qualified the parachutes for Apollo 7.

History records that Apollo 11 accomplished the first human landing on the Moon in July 1969. It is remarkable to think that just one year earlier, with the agency still recovering from the Apollo 1 fire, NASA had not yet flown any astronauts aboard an Apollo spacecraft. And further, the agency took the bold step to plan for a lunar orbital mission on just the second crewed mission. With a cadence of a crewed Apollo flight every two months between October 1968 and July 1969, NASA accomplished President Kennedy’s goal of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.

John Uri
NASA Johnson Space Center

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By NASA
      6 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      This artist’s concept shows the Moon’s hot interior and volcanism about 2 to 3 billion years ago. It is thought that volcanic activity on the lunar near side (the side facing Earth) helped create a landscape dominated by vast plains called mare, which are formed by molten rock that cooled and solidified. NASA/JPL-Caltech Analyzing gravity data collected by spacecraft orbiting other worlds reveals groundbreaking insights about planetary structures without having to land on the surface.
      Although the Moon and the asteroid Vesta are very different, two NASA studies use the same technique to reveal new details about the interiors of both.
      In the lunar study, published May 14 in the journal Nature, researchers developed a new gravity model of the Moon that includes tiny variations in the celestial body’s gravity during its elliptical orbit around Earth. These fluctuations cause the Moon to flex slightly due to Earth’s tidal force — a process called tidal deformation — which provides critical insights into the Moon’s deep internal structure.
      Using their model, the researchers produced the most detailed lunar gravitational map yet, providing future missions an improved way to calculate location and time on the Moon. They accomplished this by analyzing data on the motion of NASA’s GRAIL (Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory) mission, whose spacecraft, Ebb and Flow, orbited the Moon from Dec. 31, 2011, to Dec. 17, 2012.
      These views of the Moon’s near side, left, and far side were put together from observations made by NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. NASA/JPL-Caltech In a second study, published in the journal Nature Astronomy on April 23, the researchers focused on Vesta, an object in the main asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter. Using NASA’s Deep Space Network radiometric data and imaging data from the agency’s Dawn spacecraft, which orbited the asteroid from July 16, 2011, to Sept. 5, 2012, they found that instead of having distinct layers as expected, Vesta’s internal structure may be mostly uniform, with a very small iron core or no core at all.
      “Gravity is a unique and fundamental property of a planetary body that can be used to explore its deep interior,” said Park. “Our technique doesn’t need data from the surface; we just need to track the motion of the spacecraft very precisely to get a global view of what’s inside.”
      Lunar Asymmetry
      The lunar study looked at gravitational changes to the Moon’s near and far sides. While the near side is dominated by vast plains — known as mare — formed by molten rock that cooled and solidified billions of years ago, the far side is more rugged, with few plains.
      NASA’s Dawn mission obtained this image of the giant asteroid Vesta on July 24, 2011. The spacecraft spent 14 months orbiting the asteroid, capturing more than 30,000 images and fully mapping its surface. NASA/JPL-Caltech/UCLA/MPS/DLR/IDA Both studies were led by Ryan Park, supervisor of the Solar System Dynamics Group at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California, and were years in the making due to their complexity. The team used NASA supercomputers to build a detailed map of how gravity varies across each body. From that, they could better understand what the Moon and Vesta are made of and how planetary bodies across the solar system formed.
      Some theories suggest intense volcanism on the near side likely caused these differences. That process would have caused radioactive, heat-generating elements to accumulate deep inside the near side’s mantle, and the new study offers the strongest evidence yet that this is likely the case.
      “We found that the Moon’s near side is flexing more than the far side, meaning there’s something fundamentally different about the internal structure of the Moon’s near side compared to its far side,” said Park. “When we first analyzed the data, we were so surprised by the result we didn’t believe it. So we ran the calculations many times to verify the findings. In all, this is a decade of work.”
      When comparing their results with other models, Park’s team found a small but greater-than-expected difference in how much the two hemispheres deform. The most likely explanation is that the near side has a warm mantle region, indicating the presence of heat-generating radioactive elements, which is evidence for volcanic activity that shaped the Moon’s near side 2 billion to 3 billion years ago.
      Vesta’s Evolution
      Park’s team applied a similar approach for their study that focused on Vesta’s rotational properties to learn more about its interior.  
      “Our technique is sensitive to any changes in the gravitational field of a body in space, whether that gravitational field changes over time, like the tidal flexing of the Moon, or through space, like a wobbling asteroid,” said Park. “Vesta wobbles as it spins, so we could measure its moment of inertia, a characteristic that is highly sensitive to the internal structure of the asteroid.”
      Changes in inertia can be seen when an ice skater spins with their arms held outward. As they pull their arms in, bringing more mass toward their center of gravity, their inertia decreases and their spin speeds up. By measuring Vesta’s inertia, scientists can gain a detailed understanding of the distribution of mass inside the asteroid: If its inertia is low, there would be a concentration of mass toward its center; if it’s high, the mass would be more evenly distributed.
      Some theories suggest that over a long period, Vesta gradually formed onion-like layers and a dense core. But the new inertia measurement from Park’s team suggests instead that Vesta is far more homogeneous, with its mass distributed evenly throughout and only a small core of dense material, or no core.
      Gravity slowly pulls the heaviest elements to a planet’s center over time, which is how Earth ended up with a dense core of liquid iron. While Vesta has long been considered a differentiated asteroid, a more homogenous structure would suggest that it may not have fully formed layers or may have formed from the debris of another planetary body after a massive impact.
      In 2016, Park used the same data types as the Vesta study to focus on Dawn’s second target, the dwarf planet Ceres, and results suggested a partially differentiated interior.
      Park and his team recently applied a similar technique to Jupiter’s volcanic moon Io, using data acquired by NASA’s Juno and Galileo spacecraft during their flybys of the Jovian satellite as well as from ground-based observations. By measuring how Io’s gravity changes as it orbits Jupiter, which exerts a powerful tidal force, they revealed that the fiery moon is unlikely to possess a global magma ocean.
      “Our technique isn’t restricted just to Io, Ceres, Vesta, or the Moon,” said Park. “There are many opportunities in the future to apply our technique for studying the interiors of intriguing planetary bodies throughout the solar system.”
      News Media Contacts
      Ian J. O’Neill
      Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
      818-354-2649
      ian.j.oneill@jpl.nasa.gov
      Karen Fox / Molly Wasser
      NASA Headquarters, Washington
      202-358-1600
      karen.c.fox@nasa.gov / molly.l.wasser@nasa.gov
      Share
      Details
      Last Updated May 14, 2025 Related Terms
      Vesta Dawn Earth's Moon GRAIL (Gravity Recovery And Interior Laboratory) Jet Propulsion Laboratory Planetary Science Small Bodies of the Solar System The Solar System Explore More
      7 min read Webb’s Titan Forecast: Partly Cloudy With Occasional Methane Showers
      Saturn’s moon Titan is an intriguing world cloaked in a yellowish, smoggy haze. Similar to…
      Article 3 hours ago 5 min read NASA’s Europa Clipper Captures Mars in Infrared
      Article 2 days ago 5 min read NASA’s Webb Reveals New Details, Mysteries in Jupiter’s Aurora
      NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope has captured new details of the auroras on our solar…
      Article 2 days ago Keep Exploring Discover Related Topics
      Missions
      Humans in Space
      Climate Change
      Solar System
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      5 min read
      Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
      ICON’s next generation Vulcan construction system 3D printing a simulated Mars habitat for NASA’s Crew Health and Performance Exploration Analog (CHAPEA) missions.ICON One of the keys to a sustainable human presence on distant worlds is using local, or in-situ, resources which includes building materials for infrastructure such as habitats, radiation shielding, roads, and rocket launch and landing pads. NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate is leveraging its portfolio of programs and industry opportunities to develop in-situ, resource capabilities to help future Moon and Mars explorers build what they need. These technologies have made exciting progress for space applications as well as some impacts right here on Earth. 
      The Moon to Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technology (MMPACT) project, funded by NASA’s Game Changing Development program and managed at the agency’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, is exploring applications of large-scale, robotic 3D printing technology for construction on other planets. It sounds like the stuff of science fiction, but demonstrations using simulated lunar and Martian surface material, known as regolith, show the concept could become reality. 
      Lunar 3D printing prototype.Contour Crafting With its partners in industry and academic institutions, MMPACT is developing processing technologies for lunar and Martian construction materials. The binders for these materials, including water, could be extracted from the local regolith to reduce launch mass. The regolith itself is used as the aggregate, or granular material, for these concretes. NASA has evaluated these materials for decades, initially working with large-scale 3D printing pioneer, Dr. Behrokh Khoshnevis, a professor of civil, environmental and astronautical engineering at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles.  
      Khoshnevis developed techniques for large-scale extraterrestrial 3D printing under the NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) program. One of these processes is Contour Crafting, in which molten regolith and a binding agent are extruded from a nozzle to create infrastructure layer by layer. The process can be used to autonomously build monolithic structures like radiation shielding and rocket landing pads. 
      Continuing to work with the NIAC program, Khoshnevis also developed a 3D printing method called selective separation sintering, in which heat and pressure are applied to layers of powder to produce metallic, ceramic, or composite objects which could produce small-scale, more-precise hardware. This energy-efficient technique can be used on planetary surfaces as well as in microgravity environments like space stations to produce items including interlocking tiles and replacement parts. 
      While NASA’s efforts are ultimately aimed at developing technologies capable of building a sustainable human presence on other worlds, Khoshnevis is also setting his sights closer to home. He has created a company called Contour Crafting Corporation that will use 3D printing techniques advanced with NIAC funding to fabricate housing and other infrastructure here on Earth.  
      Another one of NASA’s partners in additive manufacturing, ICON of Austin, Texas, is doing the same, using 3D printing techniques for home construction on Earth, with robotics, software, and advanced material.  
      Construction is complete on a 3D-printed, 1,700-square-foot habitat that will simulate the challenges of a mission to Mars at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. The habitat will be home to four intrepid crew members for a one-year Crew Health and Performance Analog, or CHAPEA, mission. The first of three missions begins in the summer of 2023. The ICON company was among the participants in NASA’s 3D-Printed Habitat Challenge, which aimed to advance the technology needed to build housing in extraterrestrial environments. In 2021, ICON used its large-scale 3D printing system to build a 1,700 square-foot simulated Martian habitat that includes crew quarters, workstations and common lounge and food preparation areas. This habitat prototype, called Mars Dune Alpha, is part of NASA’s ongoing Crew Health and Performance Exploration Analog, a series of Mars surface mission simulations scheduled through 2026 at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.  
      With support from NASA’s Small Business Innovation Research program, ICON is also developing an Olympus construction system, which is designed to use local resources on the Moon and Mars as building materials. 
      The ICON company uses a robotic 3D printing technique called Laser Vitreous Multi-material Transformation, in which high-powered lasers melt local surface materials, or regolith, that then solidify to form strong, ceramic-like structures. Regolith can similarly be transformed to create infrastructure capable of withstanding environmental hazards like corrosive lunar dust, as well as radiation and temperature extremes.  
      The company is also characterizing the gravity-dependent properties of simulated lunar regolith in an experiment called Duneflow, which flew aboard a Blue Origin reusable suborbital rocket system through NASA’s Flight Opportunities program in February 2025. During that flight test, the vehicle simulated lunar gravity for approximately two minutes, enabling ICON and researchers from NASA to compare the behavior of simulant against real regolith obtained from the Moon during an Apollo mission.    
      Learn more: https://www.nasa.gov/space-technology-mission-directorate/  
      Facebook logo @NASATechnology @NASA_Technology Keep Exploring Discover More …
      Space Technology Mission Directorate
      NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts
      STMD Solicitations and Opportunities
      Technology
      Share
      Details
      Last Updated May 13, 2025 EditorLoura Hall Related Terms
      Space Technology Mission Directorate NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Program Technology View the full article
    • By NASA
      Artemis II crew members, shown inside the Neil Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, stand in front of their Orion crew module on Aug. 8, 2023. Pictured from left are CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut Jeremy Hansen, and NASA astronauts Victor Glover, Reid Wiseman, and Christina Koch.Credit: NASA/Kim Shiflett NASA will host a live Twitch event to highlight the ongoing Moon Mascot Challenge, which invites the public to design a zero gravity indicator for the agency’s Artemis II crewed test flight around the Moon. Viewers will have the opportunity to provide real-time input to an artist who will create an example of a zero gravity indicator during the livestream. 
      Zero gravity indicators are small, plush items carried aboard spacecraft to provide a visual indication of when the crew reaches space.
      The event will begin at 3 p.m. EDT on Tuesday, May 13, on the agency’s official Twitch channel:
      https://www.twitch.tv/nasa
      The contest invites global creators of all ages to submit design ideas for a zero gravity indicator that will fly aboard the agency’s Artemis II test flight, the first crewed mission under NASA’s Artemis campaign.
      Up to 25 finalists, including entries from a K-12 student division, will be selected. The Artemis II crew will choose one design that NASA’s Thermal Blanket Lab will fabricate to fly alongside the crew in the Orion spacecraft.
      During this Twitch event, NASA experts will discuss the Moon Mascot Challenge while the artist incorporates live audience feedback into a sample design. Although the design example will not be eligible for the contest, it will demonstrate how challenge participants can develop their own zero gravity indicator designs. The example will be shared on the @NASAArtemis social media accounts following the Twitch event.
      The Artemis II test flight will take NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch, and CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut Jeremy Hansen on a 10-day journey around the Moon and back. The mission is another step toward missions on the lunar surface to help the agency prepare for future human missions to Mars.
      To learn more about NASA’s missions, visit:
      https://www.nasa.gov
      -end-
      Rachel Kraft
      Headquarters, Washington
      202-358-1600
      rachel.h.kraft@nasa.gov
      Share
      Details
      Last Updated May 12, 2025 EditorJessica TaveauLocationNASA Headquarters Related Terms
      Artemis 2 Earth's Moon Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate Social Media View the full article
    • By NASA
      NASA/Charles Beason Students from the University of Massachusetts Amherst team carry their high-powered rocket toward the launch pad at NASA’s 2025 Student Launch launch day competition in Toney, Alabama, on April 4, 2025. More than 980 middle school, high school, and college students from across the nation launched more than 40 high-powered amateur rockets just north of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. This year marked the 25th anniversary of the competition.
      To compete, students follow the NASA engineering design lifecycle by going through a series of reviews for nine months leading up to launch day. Each year, a payload challenge is issued to the university teams, and this year’s task focused on communication. Teams were required to have “reports” from STEMnauts, non-living objects inside their rocket, that had to relay real-time data to the student team’s mission control. This Artemis Student Challenge took inspiration from the agency’s Artemis missions, where NASA will send astronauts to explore the Moon for scientific discovery, economic benefit, and to build the foundation for the first crewed missions to Mars.
      See highlights from the 2025 Student Launch.
      Text credit: NASA/Janet Sudnik
      Image credit: NASA/Charles Beason
      View the full article
    • By NASA
      Technicians move the Orion spacecraft for NASA’s Artemis II test flight out of the Neil A. Armstrong Operations and Checkout Building to the Multi-Payload Processing Facility at Kennedy Space Center in Florida on Saturday, May 3, 2025. NASA/Kim Shiflett Engineers, technicians, mission planners, and the four astronauts set to fly around the Moon next year on Artemis II, NASA’s first crewed Artemis mission, are rapidly progressing toward launch.

      At the agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida, teams are working around the clock to move into integration and final testing of all SLS (Space Launch System) and Orion spacecraft elements. Recently they completed two key milestones – connecting the SLS upper stage with the rest of the assembled rocket and moving Orion from its assembly facility to be fueled for flight.

      “We’re extremely focused on preparing for Artemis II, and the mission is nearly here,” said Lakiesha Hawkins, assistant deputy associate administrator for NASA’s Moon to Mars Program, who also will chair the mission management team during Artemis II. “This crewed test flight, which will send four humans around the Moon, will inform our future missions to the Moon and Mars.”
      Teams with NASA’s Exploration Ground Systems Program begin integrating the interim cryogenic propulsion stage to the SLS (Space Launch System) launch vehicle stage adapter on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, inside the Vehicle Assembly Building at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. NASA/Isaac Watson On May 1, technicians successfully attached the interim cryogenic propulsion stage to the SLS rocket elements already poised atop mobile launcher 1, including its twin solid rocket boosters and core stage, inside the spaceport’s Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB). This portion of the rocket produces 24,750 pounds of thrust for Orion after the rest of the rocket has completed its job. Teams soon will move into a series of integrated tests to ensure all the rocket’s elements are communicating with each other and the Launch Control Center as expected. The tests include verifying interfaces and ensuring SLS systems work properly with the ground systems.

      Meanwhile, on May 3, Orion left its metaphorical nest, the Neil Armstrong Operations & Checkout Facility at Kennedy, where it was assembled and underwent initial testing. There the crew module was outfitted with thousands of parts including critical life support systems for flight and integrated with the service module and crew module adapter. Its next stop on the road to the launch pad is the Multi-Payload Processing Facility, where it will be carefully fueled with propellants, high pressure gases, coolant, and other fluids the spacecraft and its crew need to maneuver in space and carry out the mission.

      After fueling is complete, the four astronauts flying on the mission around the Moon and back over the course of approximately 10 days, will board the spacecraft in their Orion Crew Survival System spacesuits to test all the equipment interfaces they will need to operate during the mission. This will mark the first time NASA’s Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch, and CSA (Canadian Space Agency) astronaut Jeremy Hansen, will board their actual spacecraft while wearing their spacesuits. After the crewed testing is complete, technicians will move Orion to Kennedy’s Launch Abort System Facility, where the critical escape system will be added. From there, Orion will move to the VAB to be integrated with the fully assembled rocket.

      NASA also announced its second agreement with an international space agency to fly a CubeSat on the mission. The collaborations provide opportunities for other countries to work alongside NASA to integrate and fly technology and experiments as part of the agency’s Artemis campaign.

      While engineers at Kennedy integrate and test hardware with their eyes on final preparations for the mission, teams responsible for launching and flying the mission have been busy preparing for a variety of scenarios they could face.

      The launch team at Kennedy has completed more than 30 simulations across cryogenic propellant loading and terminal countdown scenarios. The crew has been taking part in simulations for mission scenarios, including with teams in mission control. In April, the crew and the flight control team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston simulated liftoff through a planned manual piloting test together for the first time. The crew also recently conducted long-duration fit checks for their spacesuits and seats, practicing several operations while under various suit pressures.
      NASA astronaut Christina Koch participates in a fit check April 18, 2025, in the spacesuit she will wear during Artemis II. NASA/Josh Valcarcel Teams are heading into a busy summer of mission preparations. While hardware checkouts and integration continue, in coming months the crew, flight controllers, and launch controllers will begin practicing their roles in the mission together as part of integrated simulations. In May, the crew will begin participating pre-launch operations and training for emergency scenarios during launch operations at Kennedy and observe a simulation by the launch control team of the terminal countdown portion of launch. In June, recovery teams will rehearse procedures they would use in the case of a pad or ascent abort off the coast of Florida, with launch and flight control teams supporting. The mission management team, responsible for reviewing mission status and risk assessments for issues that arise and making decisions about them, also will begin practicing their roles in simulations. Later this summer, the Orion stage adapter will arrive at the VAB from NASA’s Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, and stacked on top of the rocket.

      NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman (foreground) and Victor Glover participate in a simulation of their Artemis II entry profile on March 13, 2025.NASA/Bill Stafford Through Artemis, NASA will send astronauts to explore the Moon for scientific discovery, economic benefits, and build the foundation for the first crewed missions to Mars.
      View the full article
  • Check out these Videos

×
×
  • Create New...