This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Apollo

OTD 1962: 3 Year Old NASA Was Challenged To Go To The Moon

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
September 12, 2018
Filed under

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

23 responses to “OTD 1962: 3 Year Old NASA Was Challenged To Go To The Moon”

  1. Donald Barker says:
    0
    0

    And now, a 60 year old NASA, seemingly headed into an uneventful retirement. Supposedly age should have brought wisdom and understanding, instead of continuously wavering and wobbling down a disorganized, unclear and non-sustainable path. Me thinks she needs some corrective lenses. 🙁

    • tesh says:
      0
      0

      In theory, we, as a society should be wise, full stop. There have been billions who have existed and exist now that are old (i.e. 60 and over) and yet society is seemingly going to pot….

      Maybe age does not bring wisdom but rather poor health and judgement. Youth is where it is at – a scary thought indeed!

    • Phil Stooke says:
      0
      0

      Donald, that wavering and wobbling is directed from above. NASA’s not ready for retirement and the coming years will not be uneventful.

    • Michael Spencer says:
      0
      0

      We created this mess by relentlessly criticizing every single American institution.

      This isn’t to say that criticism is in itself a bad thing.

    • Jeff2Space says:
      0
      0

      Part of the problem is that NASA has a far smaller budget than they did at the peak of Apollo/Saturn in the mid 1960s. NASA is also trying to recreate a “next generation” expendable (expensive) Saturn V using shuttle era technology (more than $2 billion each year goes to SLS).

      SLS needs to die. It’s an expensive large expendable in an era where reusables are coming into their own.

    • Paul451 says:
      0
      0

      And yet to a large extent, it was the NASA created by the needs of Apollo that are the reason today’s NASA is in such a mess.

  2. sunman42 says:
    0
    0

    I realize, as I head to my own retirement, how much this speech and the spirit behind it have motivated me for the last 56 years. (Correction: OTD 1962; there’s even a reference in the speech to “the Atlas that launched John Glenn.”)

  3. chuckc192000 says:
    0
    0

    I always liked his little joke, “Why does Rice play Texas?”. lol

    • Gerald Cecil says:
      0
      0

      It’s brilliant rhetoric … notice how the audience is drifting at that point. He knows his punchline “We choose to go to the Moon” is next so he sets them up with this Rice comment and they applaud cheerfully just as he utters his famous words. Where would we be now if he had lived his 2 terms?

      • ThomasLMatula says:
        0
        0

        He would have made a deal to take a few Russians along and then ended Project Apollo.

        https://blogs.scientificame

        The Forgotten JFK Proposal: A Joint U.S.-Soviet Moon Landing

        “But in a span of a year, Kennedy came to have second thoughts on the Apollo program as costs rose, budgets exploded and the scientific value of a moon mission came under question. In a speech to the U.N. General Assembly in September 1963, Kennedy actually made a bold statement that is seldom repeated: he suggested that the U.S. and Soviet Union could work together to reach the moon.”

  4. Vladislaw says:
    0
    0

    ah … a simple world .. with nuclear armagedon looking us in the eye .. but we took the big step. I wish Kennedy would have said America will buy tickets and the program will be commercialized upon completion.

    • Michael Spencer says:
      0
      0

      We had an entirely different view of government then.

      We actually trusted it.

      • ThomasLMatula says:
        0
        0

        We had a very different view of the world then, namely that technology and economic progress were good and scientists were to be trusted. Then Earth Day happened.

        • Michael Spencer says:
          0
          0

          Earth Day! The Day The Scientific World Collapsed!

          • ThomasLMatula says:
            0
            0

            It was the start of the anti-nuclear movement which rejected the research of scientists and engineers on the safety on nuclear energy. It was also the era when folks started predicting that technology would fail to provide the resources needed to sustain the world economy and made predictions, like the Club of Rome, it would collapse. It was supposedly when ‘peak oil’ was achieved in America…

            BTW did you know the United States has just passed Saudi Arabia and Russia to become the largest petroleum producing country in the world, again. Some petroleum geologists believe Texas alone has enough oil, thanks to advances in science, to supply the nation’s needs for 500 years. ?

          • chuckc192000 says:
            0
            0

            That’s not necessarily a good thing. We need to continue moving away from fossil fuels for a variety of reasons, even if they’re readily available.

          • Daniel Woodard says:
            0
            0

            It isn’t clear, at least here in Florida, that we can afford to burn fossile fuels for 500 years. We need to utilize science to model the Earth and the effects of our technological and political choices. That was the message of Earth Day. Assome of us remember, it wascatalyzed by a picture taken from Apollo 8, the first to show, in a single image, the entire Earth, letting us visualize it as a single, closed system.

  5. Michael Spencer says:
    0
    0

    Thanks, Keith, for reminding us of a time when we weren’t ashamed of looking up to inspiring leaders.

    JFK was far from perfect. But the nation understood the message.

  6. Bill says:
    0
    0

    Thanks for the reminder, but pretty sure it was 1962.

  7. Bill Housley says:
    0
    0

    “The growth of our science and education will be enriched by new knowledge of our universe and environment, by new techniques of learning and mapping and observation, by new tools and computers for industry, medicine, the home as well as the school. Technical institutions, such as Rice, will reap the harvest of these gains”

    This occurred. This prediction of spin-offs and other advances was taken at face value then, without specifics, and it happened. Now, some of us on our blogs and other public comments say the same about a human return the Moon and putting boots on the ground on Mars and folks call us crazy.

    This is not an empty promise and it is not Faith–it is a consistently fulfilled prediction. After Apollo, it is a very safe prediction for anyone here to make. Now, the critics say, “Tell me specifically what will be invented because of going to Mars!” and when we can’t provide those details they say that we shouldn’t go. Those people have chosen to blind themselves on the history of the benefits of Space Exploration.

    I’ll get off my soapbox now.

  8. ThomasLMatula says:
    0
    0

    The book “Requiem for the Space Age” by Matthew Tribbe details well how the cultural shift of the late 1960’s turned against scientific progress and space exploration. James Michener’s novel “Space” also covers the shift in public attitudes during that era. It’s way past time to get the new generation dreaming again.

  9. Daniel Woodard says:
    0
    0

    Part of the difficulty NASA has is that Kennedy’s motivation is misunderstood. Many of the nonaligned nations were struggling with development and the Communist model seemd to provide a faster path to industrialization. The US was hemmed in by nations with close ties to the USSR. The ideological conflict between the US and the USSR had become focussed on a perilous race in nuclear arms, we huddled under our desks in air raid drills, never more than 20 minutes from annihilation. It was only a matter of time before somone pushed the button. Kennedy could not avoid the ideological conflict. He felt the best chance for human survival was to divert its focus from the nuclear arms race to a symbolic contest. But he needed a goal so prestigious that neither side could ignore it, and so difficult that it would require all the resources either side could bring to bear. That was the purpose of the Moon race; to serve as a symbolic substitute for a nuclear war that seemed almost inevitable and could have destroyed civilization.

  10. objose says:
    0
    0

    In THIS speech, the WE referred to was the United States. If you post this video, then the context has to be included.