back to article NASA celebrates 50-year anniversary of first spaceship docking in orbit

March 16 is a double anniversary for space travel – it's the 90th anniversary of the launch of the first liquid-fueled rocket by Dr. Robert Goddard, but also the 50th of the first time mankind successfully docked two spaceships, with the flight of Gemini VIII. People tend to forget NASA's Gemini missions – so named because the …

  1. TimeMaster T
    Unhappy

    And in three years ...

    In 2019 it will be the 50th anniversary of the first moon landing.

    And in that 50 years there have only been 12 humans who have walked on the moon.

    I grew with the Apollo missions and I remember how there was all this talk of permanent bases on the moon and missions to Mars by the year 2000.

    Then America stumbled somewhere along the way and never got it's stride back, and now its not really even in the race anymore.

    What the Hells went wrong?

    1. John McCallum

      Re: And in three years ...

      In a word Politics.

      1. Mark 85

        Re: And in three years ...

        You're right and that's the saddest part of all. Politics took away the hopes and dreams of a generation who followed Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo in the news. We lived it. It gave us something to aspire to. It was a sad day when they announced they were going to concentrate on the Shuttle and we heard about thousands being laid off because "moon rocket" skills weren't needed for the Shuttle.

        Somewhere, we as a civilization got sidetracked by the quest for power and profit. I hope the goal of landing people on Mars comes to pass. I'm 67 and I doubt that I'll live to see it. But I hope humankind makes it there.

    2. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: And in three years ...

      "...never got it's stride back, and now its not really... What....went wrong?"

      It all started going downhill when people began confusing "it's" and "its".

      1. werdsmith Silver badge

        Re: And in three years ...

        There are too many loud people who are missing a piece of humanity, that part of the human spirit that wants to push on and explore, advance and go further. If you add those people to those that are only interested in quick bucks and short term gains then it makes it a tough journey.

        The same problem hold held back development of SST. Too many loud people pointing out the flaws in Concorde, not enough people looking answers and solutions to improve it.

        My hope of transport is with visionary Reaction Engines Sabre2. My hope for space exploration lies with those developing nations providing completion to spur the rest on.

      2. m0rt

        Re: And in three years ...

        'It all started going downhill when people began confusing "it's" and "its".'

        Apostrophes and confusing units of measure. The two things that tripped up mankind in their quest to become seated at the galatic table. Or even footstool.

        1. BinkyTheMagicPaperclip Silver badge

          Re: And in three years ...

          I'd still rather see lots and lots of probes rather than very expensive bases that probably won't provide as much science or pretty pictures, and will almost certainly lead to astronauts dying out on Mars (being unable to return) if they're sent at the moment.

          I'm not saying a base on the Moon or Mars wouldn't be cool (it would), but I'd far sooner we landed on more comets, asteroids, and moons, plus instruments in space. I wonder if a rover on Venus will ever happen..

    3. John Savard

      Re: And in three years ...

      It's true that the Apollo program was cut short by Nixon, ending with Apollo 17 when it should have continued to Apollo 20. However, the main motive for the Apollo program was, in the wake of Sputnik, to prove that America, not Russia, was the technical leader of the world.

      Today, with the world using Microsoft Windows on Intel (or AMD) processors, and with the fall of the Soviet Union, there's no need to spend billions to make that point. Building a base on the Moon, sending men to Mars, colonizing Mars - these things certainly are desirable.

      But are they desirable enough that most people agree they're a worthwhile expenditure of tax dollars? That's not bad politics - it's bad politics when the pork-barrel leads to the design for the SLS not using the best and cheapest engine for its boosters, but it's politics the way it should be when the wishes of the electorate are correctly represented.

    4. The bigger, blacker box.
      Boffin

      Re: And in three years ...

      It was all totally political, rockets exist because of politics, the Russians were beating the Americans hands down, first man made object in solar orbit, first man in space, first woman in space, first two, three person rocket, first fully automated docking, first space walk, first "hard" landing on the moon (and first deliberate crash), first "soft" landing, first "far side" pictures of the moon, first automated sample return, the first pictures from the moon's surface.

      In many ways, both practically and semantically the Russians won the space race, over and over again, and of course - are still winning, by actually having a space program, the U.S. had the first man on the moon, this was such an amazing technical achievement, many considered it "the goal" and declared the U.S. "The Winner", you'll even see the moon missions broken down into multiple achievements (first human to fly to the moon, first to land, first to leave) you'll see the space station ignored as an achievement despite the Russians doing it two years before the U.S.

      America jumped ahead of the Russians for a brief moment with the manned moon landings, this was sheer will, and of course money, the U.S. spent about $25bn (non adjusted) to get to the moon, Russia's budget for the next 10 years is $20bn, the potential moon base has a finger in the air of $50bn - these are not adjusted figures, adjust for inflation over the last 50 years and you see just how massive the investment was.

      The space shuttle was a big white elephant, it's inability to leave LEO meant no more moon for the foreseeable future, the design constraint of launching (and retrieving) from a bay meant it's capacity wasn't as great as other heavy lift.

      There's a bit of rewriting history going on as well, Goddard is credited with the first liquid propulsion rocket, but Ivan Platonovich Grave flew liquid propelled rockets earlier, ahh... the cry is "they were rudimentary and not controlled", but nor were Goddard's - yes Goddard's were better, but Sergei Korolev's were the first to have control vanes - this made it practical, so why does history ignore the two Russians and credit the American? for the same reason why the Wright brothers were credited with "inventing the aircraft" (despite being beaten to it many times before) - the reason is that the history books we in the west read credits westerners, the western history books decide what the winning post is.

      And I didn't even mention Nazi's and war criminals once - apart from then, sorry.

    5. anothercynic Silver badge

      Re: And in three years ...

      its stride. ITS. Not it's.

      Same goes for you Iain... you're also too liberal with your apostrophes!

      *switches grammar nazi mode off* *crawls back into his hole*

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "What the Hells went wrong?"

      What went wrong is that people looked at the bills, looked at the benefits, and decided they had better things to do.

      The moon landings happened due to NASA guzzling as much as 4.5% of the entire federal budget. If you want to recapture those glory days, all you have to do is persuade your fellow citizens to cough up an additional hundred billion dollars a year, every year, for a decade or two.

      It's definitely doable, its no more money than has been pissed away on the Iraq adventure - but it's a tough sell when the cupboards empty and they're frantically printing money to finance e.g. the war on being afraid of beards.

  2. notowenwilson

    The docking of the CSM to the LM after trans-lunar injection (mentioned in the article) was much less significant than the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking. If the first docking screwed up then no-one was landing on the moon. If the second one had screwed up, 2 men would have slowly died.

    1. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking

      Not quite that bad.

      Either vehicle could manoeuvre. If the LM went dead, then the CSM could wander over and dock.

      If the docking mechanism failed, they could station keep and EVA the transfer.

      As long as the LM got into Lunar orbit, they'd probably be ok.

      Now, as long as Buzz doesn't accidentally snap off the circuit breaker for the Ascent Motor...

      1. imanidiot Silver badge
        Boffin

        Re: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking

        The difficulty in an Orbital Rendezvous isn't the docking. It's the rendezvous. By the time Gemini 8 rolled around they were only just starting to understand how making 2 vehicles meet in orbit works. Because it's very counter intuitive. Being in a lower orbit means you will be moving faster than your target, but slowing down to meet the target speed at that lower orbit means you drop into an even LOWER orbit. So you have to speed UP to slow down relative to your target and reach its orbit. On top of that pro-grade and retro-grade burns have an effect on the opposite site of the orbit, so a burn you make NOW could have an effect on your relative position 12 minutes later.

        Once you get in close enough these effects become more negligable but still noticable. (It is exploited by vehicles visiting the ISS for instance, where they come up from a lower orbit right up "into" the ISS in such a way that they slow down relative to the docking port naturally without needing thrusters to do so. They then only need to make a slight burn to match speeds once they get in very close.

        Vehicles like Dragon and Cygnus are purposefully put into a slight lower orbit with the robot arm so that once they undock they naturally drift away from the ISS even without using power.

        1. JeffyPoooh
          Pint

          Re: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking

          [No you're not]: "...difficulty in an Orbital Rendezvous isn't the docking. It's the rendezvous. ...it's very counter intuitive."

          A complete non-issue for the very first Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (Apollo 11).

          They had Buzz Aldrin on board.

          His doctoral (PhD) thesis was titled, 'Line-Of-Sight Guidance Techniques For Manned Orbital Rendezvous'.

          He wrote the book. Literally. "Dr. Rendezvous"

          1. imanidiot Silver badge

            Re: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking

            The fact that someone needed to write a doctoral thesis on the matter pretty much shows that it's not trivial though :P

      2. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

        Re: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking

        No biggie. Not only did they come in peace and for all mankind - they also brought duct tape and biros.

        As long as you have a swiss army knife, some duct tape, a can of WD-40 and a handful of cable ties you can make it home somehow.

        http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140725-the-five-greatest-space-hacks

        http://space.gizmodo.com/astronauts-have-done-so-so-much-with-duct-tape-and-ele-1711503831

        http://www.octanecreative.com/ducttape/NASA/

        As to politics and the funding of space programs - it was true then and it is true now: wars are bloody expensive and leave little in the budget for constructive things.

        As to the hopes we had for the year 2000: I didn't get a jet pack or a trip to the moon - I got one of those silly little kickboards.

        "The future is now, but it's all going wrong..." - The The

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking

          https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/14172/how-did-the-apollo-11s-eagle-ascent-stage-find-the-csm-after-leaving-the-moon

          I asked this a few weeks back... I found the answers interesting.

      3. Peter Simpson 1
        Thumb Up

        Re: Lunar Orbit Rendezvous docking

        Now, as long as Buzz doesn't accidentally snap off the circuit breaker for the Ascent Motor...

        Funnily enough, I just read that bit...the CB handles were out when open, in when closed. So when the CB with the snapped off handle needed to be closed, they pushed it in with a pen. Getting it out again would have been tough, but you only use your ascent stage once (hopefully)

  3. Winkypop Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    Makes me feel old

    These men are true legends, especially the late Mr Armstrong. His skill and judgement on that day 50 years ago was testament to his rare ability.

    As a kid, I was never into super-heros, I had real-life astronauts to idolise!

    1. redpawn

      Re: Makes me feel old

      Me too.

      I was sure I would get to explore the solar system when I grew up. Learned to hate socialists and communists instead. Call it a wash.

      1. Anonymous Custard
        Thumb Up

        Re: Makes me feel old

        Have to say though, either Armstrong lived a charmed life, or karma was out to get him. This, the flying bedstead that nearly flew him into the ground and of course Apollo 11's Eagle module itself trying to land them on top of a boulder.

        Certainly had the right stuff back then. Shame they didn't have the politicians to match.

        Just like now too I guess, on both counts.

        1. JeffyPoooh
          Pint

          Re: Makes me feel old

          A Custard's (last stand?): "...flying bedstead that nearly flew him into the ground..."

          He then went back to his office and did some paperwork. Didn't bother mentioning it to his officemate.

          "...Apollo 11's Eagle module....trying to land them on top of a boulder."

          Root cause might have been residual pressure when undocking for the descent. Extra feet per second all the way down saw them arriving 'long',

      2. JeffyPoooh
        Pint

        Re: Makes me feel old

        RP: "I was sure I would get to explore the solar system when I grew up."

        You can. At least the best part, the Earth. Not even Michael Palin has finished that first step.

    2. IsJustabloke
      Headmaster

      Re: Makes me feel old

      "These men are true legends"

      Not legends but actual living people.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Legends...

        Over the past decade I've been buying plenty of books about the US space program, including these books signed by the astronauts. :-)

        'Magnificent Desolation', Buzz Aldrin (Apollo 11 LMP)

        'Painting Apollo', Alan Bean (Apollo 12 LMP)

        'Lost Moon', Jim Lovell (Apollo 8, Apollo 13 CDR)

        'Moon Shot', Alan Shepard (Apollo 14 CDR)

        'Earthrise', Edgar MItchell (Apollo 14 LMP)

        'Falling to Earth', Alfred Worden (Apollo 15 CMP)

        'Moon Walker', Charles Duke (Apollo 16 LMP)

        'The Last Man on the Moon', Eugene Cernan (Apollo 10, Apollo 17 CDR)

  4. Joe Gurman

    OK, I'm a pedant

    ....and proud. "50-year anniversary" is redundant, repetitious, and tautological (see what I did there?).

    Anniversary comes from the Latin for "turning of a year," so all the head needed to say was, "50th anniversary."

    Mutter, mutter, kids today. Why, in my day.... mutter, mutter.

    1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

      Re: OK, I'm a pedant

      Yes, I see what you did there - you missed the opportunity to use superfluous, unnecessary, bombastic, de trop, diffuse, extra, extravagant, inessential, inordinate, iterating, long-winded, loquacious, oratorical, padded, palaverous, periphrastic, pleonastic, prolix, reiterating, spare, supererogatory, supernumerary, surplus, unwanted, verbose or wordy.

      See me after class.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    On a positive note...

    There are billion dollar companies paying no taxes and creating a top 1% of billionaires hoarding their wealth.

    Add to this a corrupt state only interested in spending billions on snooping on its citizens & using a police force as a military wing to scare and shoot the population, led by corrupt politicians crazy for personal wealth and power.

    Yep. Much better these days.

    1. Dave 126 Silver badge

      Re: On a positive note...

      Ah well.

      Still, there are billionaires who are set on going to Mars, and who seem to have a working business model to develop the required kit.

      And the percentage of the world's population caught up in violent conflict is at a historical low.

      And yeah, we have a massive world population, some of whom have miserable lives, but still leaves a few more billion souls leading happy enough lives today than there were a few decades ago.

      I'm not an unalloyed optimist, but sometimes you need to look at things afresh to maintain an approximation of objectivity.

      There are going to be some challenges ahead of all of us.

      1. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

        Re: On a positive note... / Dave 126

        "And the percentage of the world's population caught up in violent conflict is at a historical low."

        Care to share your data on that? My intuition says 'nope', but maybe I'm just too pessimistic (I hope).

        1. Dave 126 Silver badge

          Re: On a positive note... / Dave 126

          >Care to share your data on that?

          My pleasure:

          http://ourworldindata.org/VisualHistoryOf/Violence.html#/2

          (Though it was probably something I originally heard ion the radio)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: On a positive note... / Dave 126

            Even better source with some brilliant visualisations...(though main tools currently bust by latest version of flash...:/ ) http://www.gapminder.org/tools/bubbles .

            And on world population, both the positives and the challenges Hans Rosling is exceptional...http://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about-population/

        2. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: On a positive note... / Dave 126

          Care to share your data on that? My intuition says 'nope', but maybe I'm just too pessimistic (I hope).

          Your intuition coloured by the bias of modern media and news reporting.

      2. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge

        Re: On a positive note...

        And the percentage of the world's population caught up in violent conflict is at a historical low.

        Probably. A million caught up in conflict with a global population of a billion would be a higher percentage than 9 million and a population of 10 billion.

        It does however feel like playing number games when the entire Middle East and swathes of Africa appear to be on fire.

        1. Dave 126 Silver badge

          Re: On a positive note...

          >It does however feel like playing number games when the entire Middle East and swathes of Africa appear to be on fire.

          Maybe. But then sometimes people become apathetic because a situation is reported as hopeless.

          In any case, we should never let ideas of 'what should be done' inform our perception of the facts. Get the facts clear first, and you will be better empowered to do the right thing. If you bodge your outlook to fit an ideology, no matter how well intentioned or benign, you will do nobody any favours.

          (And for sure, the situations in parts of the Middle East and Africa are terrible and complex in their causes and possible solutions, and are not to be underestimated.)

      3. DropBear

        Re: On a positive note...

        "Still, there are billionaires who are set on going to Mars"

        What, multiple ones? Who's the other one...?

        1. IT Poser

          Re: On a positive note...

          Any billionaire that can make money doing it will be looking at it. We now have a four major companies with contracts just to delivery stuff to the ISS.

  6. Hud Dunlap
    Coat

    A game about the space race

    For those who might be interested.

    http://www.matrixgames.com/products/462/details/Buzz.Aldrin's.Space.Program.Manager

    1. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: A game about the space race

      > http://www.matrixgames.com

      Matrix Games - producers of the finest squad-level wargame ever (Steel Panthers, World at War).

      A DOS-era games later converted to run under Windows. Now running on my Mac using Crossover. Probably the most-played game I have.

  7. lee harvey osmond

    "People tend to forget NASA's Gemini missions"

    Don't forget John Young's sandwich on Gemini III.

    Didn't even have mustard on it, apparently.

  8. PassiveSmoking

    I remember watching the reconstruction/dramatisation of Gemini 8 on HBO's From The Earth To The moon (and if you're a space nut it's well worth checking out!), and thinking "No, that can't be how bad it really got, they must be exaggerating the roll excursion for dramatic effect".

    Then I saw the footage from the actual mission. Nope, they weren't exaggerating all that much.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What is the green stuff in the water in the last picture?

    1. lone_wolf

      just a marker dye if i remember correctly.

      1. cray74

        just a marker dye if i remember correctly.

        Yep, it was dye that helped recovery crews spot the capsule from the air. Back then they didn't have GPSs to pinpoint the capsule down to the last inch**, nor apps to figure out if the capsules were under the couch or back at the gas station.

        **That said, Gemini 8 and later US capsules generally fell within 5 miles of their target point, and Apollo 13-17+ASTP were under 2 miles of their targets. Excessive searching wasn't required.

  10. MMA

    A good dramatization of what happened on Gemini 8

    https://youtu.be/ThL-uz51_Z0

  11. FBee

    The Ray-Ban Stuff

    So cool that, even with an aborted flight/unexpected splashdown on the other side of the planet/floating in place until (hopefully) rescued by the U.S. Navy, they wore their Ray-Ban Aviator's with aplomb!!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like