Were there any unmanned expeditions to the moon that returned to Earth prior to Apollo?Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal?What gave NASA the confidence for a translunar injection in Apollo 8?Could an Apollo LM land uncrewed?Why was the Saturn V considered to be human-rated after Apollo 6?How was dust-mitigation addressed during the Apollo program?If the Apollo mandate were delivered today, would the mission vehicle(s) and profile be similar?Have there been any photos taken of a total Earth-Sun eclipse from the Moon, or its vicinity?Would the Saturn V have been able to send more mass to TLI if it had a lower earth parking orbit?What is the case for human presence on the Moon?Were the Apollo lunar ALSEP transmitter signals ever analyzed or used after the experiments were shut down?How could an object barely exceeding escape velocity from the Moon eventually reach the Earth?Have there been long-term observations of the effects of lunar exposure to equipment?Will it be possible to see BFR approaching the moon from earth, with naked eye?What are NASA's dozen payloads for the Moon that will be ready for launch by the end this year? (2019)
Heating Margarine in Pan = loss of calories?
If clocks themselves are based on light signals, wouldn't we expect the measured speed of light to always be the same constant?
Why is the result of ('b'+'a'+ + 'a' + 'a').toLowerCase() 'banana'?
What is this 1990s horror game of otherworldly PCs dealing with monsters on modern Earth?
When does Tiana, Ship's Caretaker check card type?
If a digital camera can be "hacked" in the ransomware sense, how best to protect it?
Super Duper Vdd stiffening required on 555 timer, what is the best way?
What is my malfunctioning AI harvesting from humans?
Why is there a large performance impact when looping over an array over 240 elements?
What should I call bands of armed men in the Middle Ages?
These were just lying around
Solution to German Tank Problem
Loading military units into ships optimally, using backtracking
How can this older-style irrigation tee be replaced?
Can a PC use the Levitate spell to avoid movement speed reduction from exhaustion?
Is there a command to install basic applications on Ubuntu 16.04?
Not going forward with internship interview process
Is 悪いところを見つかった proper Japanese?
If "more guns less crime", how do gun advocates explain that the EU has less crime than the US?
Markov-chain sentence generator in Python
How can I decide if my homebrew item should require attunement?
TEMPO: play a sound in animated GIF/PDF/SVG
Is there any way to stop a user from creating executables and running them?
Is this n-speak?
Were there any unmanned expeditions to the moon that returned to Earth prior to Apollo?
Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal?What gave NASA the confidence for a translunar injection in Apollo 8?Could an Apollo LM land uncrewed?Why was the Saturn V considered to be human-rated after Apollo 6?How was dust-mitigation addressed during the Apollo program?If the Apollo mandate were delivered today, would the mission vehicle(s) and profile be similar?Have there been any photos taken of a total Earth-Sun eclipse from the Moon, or its vicinity?Would the Saturn V have been able to send more mass to TLI if it had a lower earth parking orbit?What is the case for human presence on the Moon?Were the Apollo lunar ALSEP transmitter signals ever analyzed or used after the experiments were shut down?How could an object barely exceeding escape velocity from the Moon eventually reach the Earth?Have there been long-term observations of the effects of lunar exposure to equipment?Will it be possible to see BFR approaching the moon from earth, with naked eye?What are NASA's dozen payloads for the Moon that will be ready for launch by the end this year? (2019)
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
Apollo 8 orbited the moon, and obviously Apollo 11 landed. I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth? It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
the-moon uncrewed-spaceflight
$endgroup$
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Apollo 8 orbited the moon, and obviously Apollo 11 landed. I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth? It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
the-moon uncrewed-spaceflight
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
This is an interesting question and makes me wonder 1) would all of that have been possible without the Apollo guidance computer and IMU(s), and 2) would those have functioned reliably without the humans on board tending to them?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 1:26
3
$begingroup$
@uhoh AGC worked well enough controlled from the ground on Apollo 4 and 6.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 2:11
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove thanks, that's something to think/ask about ;-)
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 3:54
7
$begingroup$
Near duplicate of Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal? -- but I like my answer here better. 😉
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 14:22
$begingroup$
when lindberg flew to europe he took enormous risks given the time and period. without men daring nothing is really possible
$endgroup$
– JP VDB
Aug 2 at 15:34
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Apollo 8 orbited the moon, and obviously Apollo 11 landed. I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth? It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
the-moon uncrewed-spaceflight
$endgroup$
Apollo 8 orbited the moon, and obviously Apollo 11 landed. I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth? It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
the-moon uncrewed-spaceflight
the-moon uncrewed-spaceflight
asked Aug 1 at 1:05
Joe BobJoe Bob
1211 silver badge3 bronze badges
1211 silver badge3 bronze badges
$begingroup$
This is an interesting question and makes me wonder 1) would all of that have been possible without the Apollo guidance computer and IMU(s), and 2) would those have functioned reliably without the humans on board tending to them?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 1:26
3
$begingroup$
@uhoh AGC worked well enough controlled from the ground on Apollo 4 and 6.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 2:11
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove thanks, that's something to think/ask about ;-)
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 3:54
7
$begingroup$
Near duplicate of Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal? -- but I like my answer here better. 😉
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 14:22
$begingroup$
when lindberg flew to europe he took enormous risks given the time and period. without men daring nothing is really possible
$endgroup$
– JP VDB
Aug 2 at 15:34
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
This is an interesting question and makes me wonder 1) would all of that have been possible without the Apollo guidance computer and IMU(s), and 2) would those have functioned reliably without the humans on board tending to them?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 1:26
3
$begingroup$
@uhoh AGC worked well enough controlled from the ground on Apollo 4 and 6.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 2:11
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove thanks, that's something to think/ask about ;-)
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 3:54
7
$begingroup$
Near duplicate of Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal? -- but I like my answer here better. 😉
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 14:22
$begingroup$
when lindberg flew to europe he took enormous risks given the time and period. without men daring nothing is really possible
$endgroup$
– JP VDB
Aug 2 at 15:34
$begingroup$
This is an interesting question and makes me wonder 1) would all of that have been possible without the Apollo guidance computer and IMU(s), and 2) would those have functioned reliably without the humans on board tending to them?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 1:26
$begingroup$
This is an interesting question and makes me wonder 1) would all of that have been possible without the Apollo guidance computer and IMU(s), and 2) would those have functioned reliably without the humans on board tending to them?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 1:26
3
3
$begingroup$
@uhoh AGC worked well enough controlled from the ground on Apollo 4 and 6.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 2:11
$begingroup$
@uhoh AGC worked well enough controlled from the ground on Apollo 4 and 6.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 2:11
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove thanks, that's something to think/ask about ;-)
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 3:54
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove thanks, that's something to think/ask about ;-)
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 3:54
7
7
$begingroup$
Near duplicate of Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal? -- but I like my answer here better. 😉
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 14:22
$begingroup$
Near duplicate of Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal? -- but I like my answer here better. 😉
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 14:22
$begingroup$
when lindberg flew to europe he took enormous risks given the time and period. without men daring nothing is really possible
$endgroup$
– JP VDB
Aug 2 at 15:34
$begingroup$
when lindberg flew to europe he took enormous risks given the time and period. without men daring nothing is really possible
$endgroup$
– JP VDB
Aug 2 at 15:34
|
show 1 more comment
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth?
There were no uncrewed round-trip missions to the moon prior to Apollo 11.
Several one-way missions landed safely on the moon without crew before 1969, but did not return, including the American Surveyor series. The first of these, Surveyor 1, landed on the moon on June 2, 1966.
In 1970, the first robotic round-trip mission, the USSR's Luna 16, returned samples from the moon.
There weren't any huge technical obstacles to robotic lunar round-trip missions. The Luna round-trips used a clever return trajectory that required only a single burn from the moon's surface with no course corrections afterwards, but that technique constrained when and where they could land on the moon; a multiple-burn return would have required a little more sophistication in the probe's guidance and navigation system (and thus more mass and cost), but it wouldn't have been impossible to do pre-Apollo-11.
Returning from the moon takes a vehicle several times larger than one that just needs to get there; if you don't do a lunar orbit rendezvous like Apollo did, then you need to carry all the fuel for your return journey all the way to the moon's surface. Luna 16 was more than 5 times as massive as Surveyor 1, for example, requiring a 700-ton Proton booster to go to the moon instead of a 140-ton Atlas-Centaur.
Lunar orbit rendezvous offers a path to a lunar landing mission with a smaller vehicle at the cost of additional mission complexity, and automatic docking had been demonstrated by the USSR in 1967.
The USSR's lunar landing plan would possibly have landed one LK uncrewed as a backup, followed by a second LK with a single crew member, but they never got the necessary N1 booster to work. The LK itself had a backup ascent engine, so this plan provides 8 times as many ascent engines per crew member as Apollo. They clearly didn't want to strand a cosmonaut on the moon.
It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
It would have been technically feasible to land an Apollo LM (with some modifications) uncrewed. However, one of the major lessons of the X-15 program was that the combination of automation and human capabilities in a complex system was far more reliable than either human or automation alone. If, for example, Apollo 10 had flown its LM to the surface without a crew, it would have had substantial risk of crashing (having no way to know if it was coming down in a field of boulders) and the program would have missed out on the first-hand observations of the crew.
As with other apparently-risky steps taken in the Apollo program (particularly Apollo 8, discussed here and here), skipping an unmanned landing attempt was a calculated risk to save time and money.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This is a superb answer!
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Aug 1 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
I think your answer should mention the tortoises on Zond 5. It's an intermediate step between unmanned craft and the manned missions, showing that life support systems could remain operational, and keeping the passengers alive long enough to survive the journey.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 11:53
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine And in fact the USSR did a remote control docking in ‘67.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 13:23
2
$begingroup$
@user That was considered by the US, but the USSR’s final plan was a one-lander LOR plan not too unlike Apollo. A return lander still has to descend and ascend safely (albeit without crew mass on the descent) then you need a whole second ship for descent only, so it’s less efficient.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 2 at 13:57
2
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove I think their plan was to do the entire landing automatically. Soviet spacecraft tended to be more automated than US ones. So the first lander would be a test of the landing system, and also offer a spare craft if the ascent engine on the later manned one failed.
$endgroup$
– user
Aug 2 at 14:01
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
No. NASA was focused on manned missions. The unmanned Surveyor series proved that a Moon landing was possible, and launching from the lunar surface wasn't considered risky enough that an unmanned trial run was considered worth doing.
The Soviet Union took two shots at it: an unnamed mission that failed on launch in June 1969 and Luna 15 (crashed into the Moon 13 hours after the start of Armstrong's moonwalk), but the first successful unmanned sample-return mission was Luna 16, in September of 1970.
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Zond 5 performed a successful circumlunar flight in '68, and its passengers, a pair of tortoises, returned safely to earth.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 16:14
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f37843%2fwere-there-any-unmanned-expeditions-to-the-moon-that-returned-to-earth-prior-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth?
There were no uncrewed round-trip missions to the moon prior to Apollo 11.
Several one-way missions landed safely on the moon without crew before 1969, but did not return, including the American Surveyor series. The first of these, Surveyor 1, landed on the moon on June 2, 1966.
In 1970, the first robotic round-trip mission, the USSR's Luna 16, returned samples from the moon.
There weren't any huge technical obstacles to robotic lunar round-trip missions. The Luna round-trips used a clever return trajectory that required only a single burn from the moon's surface with no course corrections afterwards, but that technique constrained when and where they could land on the moon; a multiple-burn return would have required a little more sophistication in the probe's guidance and navigation system (and thus more mass and cost), but it wouldn't have been impossible to do pre-Apollo-11.
Returning from the moon takes a vehicle several times larger than one that just needs to get there; if you don't do a lunar orbit rendezvous like Apollo did, then you need to carry all the fuel for your return journey all the way to the moon's surface. Luna 16 was more than 5 times as massive as Surveyor 1, for example, requiring a 700-ton Proton booster to go to the moon instead of a 140-ton Atlas-Centaur.
Lunar orbit rendezvous offers a path to a lunar landing mission with a smaller vehicle at the cost of additional mission complexity, and automatic docking had been demonstrated by the USSR in 1967.
The USSR's lunar landing plan would possibly have landed one LK uncrewed as a backup, followed by a second LK with a single crew member, but they never got the necessary N1 booster to work. The LK itself had a backup ascent engine, so this plan provides 8 times as many ascent engines per crew member as Apollo. They clearly didn't want to strand a cosmonaut on the moon.
It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
It would have been technically feasible to land an Apollo LM (with some modifications) uncrewed. However, one of the major lessons of the X-15 program was that the combination of automation and human capabilities in a complex system was far more reliable than either human or automation alone. If, for example, Apollo 10 had flown its LM to the surface without a crew, it would have had substantial risk of crashing (having no way to know if it was coming down in a field of boulders) and the program would have missed out on the first-hand observations of the crew.
As with other apparently-risky steps taken in the Apollo program (particularly Apollo 8, discussed here and here), skipping an unmanned landing attempt was a calculated risk to save time and money.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This is a superb answer!
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Aug 1 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
I think your answer should mention the tortoises on Zond 5. It's an intermediate step between unmanned craft and the manned missions, showing that life support systems could remain operational, and keeping the passengers alive long enough to survive the journey.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 11:53
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine And in fact the USSR did a remote control docking in ‘67.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 13:23
2
$begingroup$
@user That was considered by the US, but the USSR’s final plan was a one-lander LOR plan not too unlike Apollo. A return lander still has to descend and ascend safely (albeit without crew mass on the descent) then you need a whole second ship for descent only, so it’s less efficient.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 2 at 13:57
2
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove I think their plan was to do the entire landing automatically. Soviet spacecraft tended to be more automated than US ones. So the first lander would be a test of the landing system, and also offer a spare craft if the ascent engine on the later manned one failed.
$endgroup$
– user
Aug 2 at 14:01
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth?
There were no uncrewed round-trip missions to the moon prior to Apollo 11.
Several one-way missions landed safely on the moon without crew before 1969, but did not return, including the American Surveyor series. The first of these, Surveyor 1, landed on the moon on June 2, 1966.
In 1970, the first robotic round-trip mission, the USSR's Luna 16, returned samples from the moon.
There weren't any huge technical obstacles to robotic lunar round-trip missions. The Luna round-trips used a clever return trajectory that required only a single burn from the moon's surface with no course corrections afterwards, but that technique constrained when and where they could land on the moon; a multiple-burn return would have required a little more sophistication in the probe's guidance and navigation system (and thus more mass and cost), but it wouldn't have been impossible to do pre-Apollo-11.
Returning from the moon takes a vehicle several times larger than one that just needs to get there; if you don't do a lunar orbit rendezvous like Apollo did, then you need to carry all the fuel for your return journey all the way to the moon's surface. Luna 16 was more than 5 times as massive as Surveyor 1, for example, requiring a 700-ton Proton booster to go to the moon instead of a 140-ton Atlas-Centaur.
Lunar orbit rendezvous offers a path to a lunar landing mission with a smaller vehicle at the cost of additional mission complexity, and automatic docking had been demonstrated by the USSR in 1967.
The USSR's lunar landing plan would possibly have landed one LK uncrewed as a backup, followed by a second LK with a single crew member, but they never got the necessary N1 booster to work. The LK itself had a backup ascent engine, so this plan provides 8 times as many ascent engines per crew member as Apollo. They clearly didn't want to strand a cosmonaut on the moon.
It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
It would have been technically feasible to land an Apollo LM (with some modifications) uncrewed. However, one of the major lessons of the X-15 program was that the combination of automation and human capabilities in a complex system was far more reliable than either human or automation alone. If, for example, Apollo 10 had flown its LM to the surface without a crew, it would have had substantial risk of crashing (having no way to know if it was coming down in a field of boulders) and the program would have missed out on the first-hand observations of the crew.
As with other apparently-risky steps taken in the Apollo program (particularly Apollo 8, discussed here and here), skipping an unmanned landing attempt was a calculated risk to save time and money.
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This is a superb answer!
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Aug 1 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
I think your answer should mention the tortoises on Zond 5. It's an intermediate step between unmanned craft and the manned missions, showing that life support systems could remain operational, and keeping the passengers alive long enough to survive the journey.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 11:53
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine And in fact the USSR did a remote control docking in ‘67.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 13:23
2
$begingroup$
@user That was considered by the US, but the USSR’s final plan was a one-lander LOR plan not too unlike Apollo. A return lander still has to descend and ascend safely (albeit without crew mass on the descent) then you need a whole second ship for descent only, so it’s less efficient.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 2 at 13:57
2
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove I think their plan was to do the entire landing automatically. Soviet spacecraft tended to be more automated than US ones. So the first lander would be a test of the landing system, and also offer a spare craft if the ascent engine on the later manned one failed.
$endgroup$
– user
Aug 2 at 14:01
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth?
There were no uncrewed round-trip missions to the moon prior to Apollo 11.
Several one-way missions landed safely on the moon without crew before 1969, but did not return, including the American Surveyor series. The first of these, Surveyor 1, landed on the moon on June 2, 1966.
In 1970, the first robotic round-trip mission, the USSR's Luna 16, returned samples from the moon.
There weren't any huge technical obstacles to robotic lunar round-trip missions. The Luna round-trips used a clever return trajectory that required only a single burn from the moon's surface with no course corrections afterwards, but that technique constrained when and where they could land on the moon; a multiple-burn return would have required a little more sophistication in the probe's guidance and navigation system (and thus more mass and cost), but it wouldn't have been impossible to do pre-Apollo-11.
Returning from the moon takes a vehicle several times larger than one that just needs to get there; if you don't do a lunar orbit rendezvous like Apollo did, then you need to carry all the fuel for your return journey all the way to the moon's surface. Luna 16 was more than 5 times as massive as Surveyor 1, for example, requiring a 700-ton Proton booster to go to the moon instead of a 140-ton Atlas-Centaur.
Lunar orbit rendezvous offers a path to a lunar landing mission with a smaller vehicle at the cost of additional mission complexity, and automatic docking had been demonstrated by the USSR in 1967.
The USSR's lunar landing plan would possibly have landed one LK uncrewed as a backup, followed by a second LK with a single crew member, but they never got the necessary N1 booster to work. The LK itself had a backup ascent engine, so this plan provides 8 times as many ascent engines per crew member as Apollo. They clearly didn't want to strand a cosmonaut on the moon.
It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
It would have been technically feasible to land an Apollo LM (with some modifications) uncrewed. However, one of the major lessons of the X-15 program was that the combination of automation and human capabilities in a complex system was far more reliable than either human or automation alone. If, for example, Apollo 10 had flown its LM to the surface without a crew, it would have had substantial risk of crashing (having no way to know if it was coming down in a field of boulders) and the program would have missed out on the first-hand observations of the crew.
As with other apparently-risky steps taken in the Apollo program (particularly Apollo 8, discussed here and here), skipping an unmanned landing attempt was a calculated risk to save time and money.
$endgroup$
I'm wondering if there were any test missions to get unmanned ships to the moon and safely back to Earth?
There were no uncrewed round-trip missions to the moon prior to Apollo 11.
Several one-way missions landed safely on the moon without crew before 1969, but did not return, including the American Surveyor series. The first of these, Surveyor 1, landed on the moon on June 2, 1966.
In 1970, the first robotic round-trip mission, the USSR's Luna 16, returned samples from the moon.
There weren't any huge technical obstacles to robotic lunar round-trip missions. The Luna round-trips used a clever return trajectory that required only a single burn from the moon's surface with no course corrections afterwards, but that technique constrained when and where they could land on the moon; a multiple-burn return would have required a little more sophistication in the probe's guidance and navigation system (and thus more mass and cost), but it wouldn't have been impossible to do pre-Apollo-11.
Returning from the moon takes a vehicle several times larger than one that just needs to get there; if you don't do a lunar orbit rendezvous like Apollo did, then you need to carry all the fuel for your return journey all the way to the moon's surface. Luna 16 was more than 5 times as massive as Surveyor 1, for example, requiring a 700-ton Proton booster to go to the moon instead of a 140-ton Atlas-Centaur.
Lunar orbit rendezvous offers a path to a lunar landing mission with a smaller vehicle at the cost of additional mission complexity, and automatic docking had been demonstrated by the USSR in 1967.
The USSR's lunar landing plan would possibly have landed one LK uncrewed as a backup, followed by a second LK with a single crew member, but they never got the necessary N1 booster to work. The LK itself had a backup ascent engine, so this plan provides 8 times as many ascent engines per crew member as Apollo. They clearly didn't want to strand a cosmonaut on the moon.
It seems like a big jump to suddenly send manned ships there.
It would have been technically feasible to land an Apollo LM (with some modifications) uncrewed. However, one of the major lessons of the X-15 program was that the combination of automation and human capabilities in a complex system was far more reliable than either human or automation alone. If, for example, Apollo 10 had flown its LM to the surface without a crew, it would have had substantial risk of crashing (having no way to know if it was coming down in a field of boulders) and the program would have missed out on the first-hand observations of the crew.
As with other apparently-risky steps taken in the Apollo program (particularly Apollo 8, discussed here and here), skipping an unmanned landing attempt was a calculated risk to save time and money.
edited Aug 2 at 14:10
answered Aug 1 at 1:52
Russell BorogoveRussell Borogove
101k4 gold badges359 silver badges441 bronze badges
101k4 gold badges359 silver badges441 bronze badges
3
$begingroup$
This is a superb answer!
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Aug 1 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
I think your answer should mention the tortoises on Zond 5. It's an intermediate step between unmanned craft and the manned missions, showing that life support systems could remain operational, and keeping the passengers alive long enough to survive the journey.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 11:53
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine And in fact the USSR did a remote control docking in ‘67.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 13:23
2
$begingroup$
@user That was considered by the US, but the USSR’s final plan was a one-lander LOR plan not too unlike Apollo. A return lander still has to descend and ascend safely (albeit without crew mass on the descent) then you need a whole second ship for descent only, so it’s less efficient.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 2 at 13:57
2
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove I think their plan was to do the entire landing automatically. Soviet spacecraft tended to be more automated than US ones. So the first lander would be a test of the landing system, and also offer a spare craft if the ascent engine on the later manned one failed.
$endgroup$
– user
Aug 2 at 14:01
|
show 9 more comments
3
$begingroup$
This is a superb answer!
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Aug 1 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
I think your answer should mention the tortoises on Zond 5. It's an intermediate step between unmanned craft and the manned missions, showing that life support systems could remain operational, and keeping the passengers alive long enough to survive the journey.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 11:53
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine And in fact the USSR did a remote control docking in ‘67.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 13:23
2
$begingroup$
@user That was considered by the US, but the USSR’s final plan was a one-lander LOR plan not too unlike Apollo. A return lander still has to descend and ascend safely (albeit without crew mass on the descent) then you need a whole second ship for descent only, so it’s less efficient.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 2 at 13:57
2
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove I think their plan was to do the entire landing automatically. Soviet spacecraft tended to be more automated than US ones. So the first lander would be a test of the landing system, and also offer a spare craft if the ascent engine on the later manned one failed.
$endgroup$
– user
Aug 2 at 14:01
3
3
$begingroup$
This is a superb answer!
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Aug 1 at 2:47
$begingroup$
This is a superb answer!
$endgroup$
– Organic Marble
Aug 1 at 2:47
1
1
$begingroup$
I think your answer should mention the tortoises on Zond 5. It's an intermediate step between unmanned craft and the manned missions, showing that life support systems could remain operational, and keeping the passengers alive long enough to survive the journey.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 11:53
$begingroup$
I think your answer should mention the tortoises on Zond 5. It's an intermediate step between unmanned craft and the manned missions, showing that life support systems could remain operational, and keeping the passengers alive long enough to survive the journey.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 11:53
1
1
$begingroup$
@Innovine And in fact the USSR did a remote control docking in ‘67.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 13:23
$begingroup$
@Innovine And in fact the USSR did a remote control docking in ‘67.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 13:23
2
2
$begingroup$
@user That was considered by the US, but the USSR’s final plan was a one-lander LOR plan not too unlike Apollo. A return lander still has to descend and ascend safely (albeit without crew mass on the descent) then you need a whole second ship for descent only, so it’s less efficient.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 2 at 13:57
$begingroup$
@user That was considered by the US, but the USSR’s final plan was a one-lander LOR plan not too unlike Apollo. A return lander still has to descend and ascend safely (albeit without crew mass on the descent) then you need a whole second ship for descent only, so it’s less efficient.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 2 at 13:57
2
2
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove I think their plan was to do the entire landing automatically. Soviet spacecraft tended to be more automated than US ones. So the first lander would be a test of the landing system, and also offer a spare craft if the ascent engine on the later manned one failed.
$endgroup$
– user
Aug 2 at 14:01
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove I think their plan was to do the entire landing automatically. Soviet spacecraft tended to be more automated than US ones. So the first lander would be a test of the landing system, and also offer a spare craft if the ascent engine on the later manned one failed.
$endgroup$
– user
Aug 2 at 14:01
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
No. NASA was focused on manned missions. The unmanned Surveyor series proved that a Moon landing was possible, and launching from the lunar surface wasn't considered risky enough that an unmanned trial run was considered worth doing.
The Soviet Union took two shots at it: an unnamed mission that failed on launch in June 1969 and Luna 15 (crashed into the Moon 13 hours after the start of Armstrong's moonwalk), but the first successful unmanned sample-return mission was Luna 16, in September of 1970.
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Zond 5 performed a successful circumlunar flight in '68, and its passengers, a pair of tortoises, returned safely to earth.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 16:14
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No. NASA was focused on manned missions. The unmanned Surveyor series proved that a Moon landing was possible, and launching from the lunar surface wasn't considered risky enough that an unmanned trial run was considered worth doing.
The Soviet Union took two shots at it: an unnamed mission that failed on launch in June 1969 and Luna 15 (crashed into the Moon 13 hours after the start of Armstrong's moonwalk), but the first successful unmanned sample-return mission was Luna 16, in September of 1970.
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Zond 5 performed a successful circumlunar flight in '68, and its passengers, a pair of tortoises, returned safely to earth.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 16:14
add a comment |
$begingroup$
No. NASA was focused on manned missions. The unmanned Surveyor series proved that a Moon landing was possible, and launching from the lunar surface wasn't considered risky enough that an unmanned trial run was considered worth doing.
The Soviet Union took two shots at it: an unnamed mission that failed on launch in June 1969 and Luna 15 (crashed into the Moon 13 hours after the start of Armstrong's moonwalk), but the first successful unmanned sample-return mission was Luna 16, in September of 1970.
$endgroup$
No. NASA was focused on manned missions. The unmanned Surveyor series proved that a Moon landing was possible, and launching from the lunar surface wasn't considered risky enough that an unmanned trial run was considered worth doing.
The Soviet Union took two shots at it: an unnamed mission that failed on launch in June 1969 and Luna 15 (crashed into the Moon 13 hours after the start of Armstrong's moonwalk), but the first successful unmanned sample-return mission was Luna 16, in September of 1970.
answered Aug 1 at 2:01
MarkMark
5,18924 silver badges37 bronze badges
5,18924 silver badges37 bronze badges
4
$begingroup$
Zond 5 performed a successful circumlunar flight in '68, and its passengers, a pair of tortoises, returned safely to earth.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 16:14
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
Zond 5 performed a successful circumlunar flight in '68, and its passengers, a pair of tortoises, returned safely to earth.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 16:14
4
4
$begingroup$
Zond 5 performed a successful circumlunar flight in '68, and its passengers, a pair of tortoises, returned safely to earth.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 16:14
$begingroup$
Zond 5 performed a successful circumlunar flight in '68, and its passengers, a pair of tortoises, returned safely to earth.
$endgroup$
– Innovine
Aug 1 at 16:14
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f37843%2fwere-there-any-unmanned-expeditions-to-the-moon-that-returned-to-earth-prior-to%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
This is an interesting question and makes me wonder 1) would all of that have been possible without the Apollo guidance computer and IMU(s), and 2) would those have functioned reliably without the humans on board tending to them?
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 1:26
3
$begingroup$
@uhoh AGC worked well enough controlled from the ground on Apollo 4 and 6.
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 2:11
$begingroup$
@RussellBorogove thanks, that's something to think/ask about ;-)
$endgroup$
– uhoh
Aug 1 at 3:54
7
$begingroup$
Near duplicate of Why didn't the Apollo program do an uncrewed landing/ascent rehearsal? -- but I like my answer here better. 😉
$endgroup$
– Russell Borogove
Aug 1 at 14:22
$begingroup$
when lindberg flew to europe he took enormous risks given the time and period. without men daring nothing is really possible
$endgroup$
– JP VDB
Aug 2 at 15:34