The Observer view: fifty years on, the real meaning of the lunar landing is becoming clear | Observer editorial
When Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin took their first careful steps on the moon's surface 50 years ago this weekend, they transformed humanity's place in the cosmos. We stopped being distant bystanders who were contemplating the glories of the universe from afar and became participants in its exploitation. The fact that this goal was achieved using equipment that now looks breathtakingly primitive merely makes America's lunar landings look all the more impressive. Apollo 11's guidance computer had considerably less power than a smartphone has today, while the Eagle lunar module's ascent engine, which would blast the astronauts back off the surface at 17.54 GMT on 21 July, 1969, remained a worry because it had never been tested on the moon. Armstrong rated the chances that he and Aldrin would make a successful landing at no more than 50-50. Their triumph was certainly not preordained.
The decision, made in the early 1970s, to end the programme that took Armstrong, Aldrin and 10 other US astronauts to the lunar surface disappointed many at the time. However, the Apollo flights were motivated, not by a spirit of scientific inquiry but by the United States' desire to beat the Russians and win "the Space Race". Once America had demonstrated its technological superiority, the Apollo programme - which at one time consumed 4% of the US federal budget - had little purpose.
Continue reading...