Recommendations of the 1965 Summer Conference on Lunar Exploration and Science, Falmouth, Mass., July 19-31, 1965

The Falmouth conference of 1965 made the first concerted effort to define a systematic 10-year program of lunar exploration, giving primary emphasis to manned exploration. Working groups were established in the disciplines of geodesy/cartography, geology, geophysics, bioscience, geochemistry (mineralogy and petrology), particles and fields, lunar atmosphere measurements, and astronomy. At the conclusion of the conference each disciplinary working group prepared a report, from which a summary was prepared by a coordinating committee. Following are excerpts from the summary, which set forth the major requirements for the program. ^**

** NASA 1965 Summer Conference on Lunar Exploration and Science, NASA SP-88 (Washington, 1965).

MISSION SUMMARY

Introduction

In this chapter the major recommendations of the Working Groups are arranged by missions or programs. The suggested priorities, instrument allocations, and mission characteristics for various vehicles are indicated briefly….

Although there was some overlap, most of the recommendations could be divided into these missions: Apollo, Lunar Orbiter, Apollo Extension System-Manned Lunar Orbiter (AES-MLO), Apollo Extension System-Manned Lunar Surface (AES-MLS) and Post-AES.... As the scientific instruments and space vehicle characteristics and availability become more clearly defined, the assignment of experiments will become clearer.

Overall Program

The plans and recommendations of the 1965 Lunar Exploration Summer Conference are based on a 10-year program of exploration, beginning with the first manned lunar landing in the Apollo program. The recommendations of this conference are limited to the 10-year period following the first Apollo lunar landings because a decade seems to be the approximate maximum time for which developments can be meaningfully forecast. In addition, the long lead times involved in the development of equipment for use in space flight require that recommendations be made to cover this period of time. In carrying out these recommendations, it will be necessary for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to conduct its programs in a way that permits a maximum degree of flexibility to meet changing requirements.

The need for flexibility is also important for determining the rate at which missions should be conducted during this ten-year period. It is clearly desirable to schedule flight missions to provide adequate time between missions to react to the findings of one mission by modifying experiments for a later mission. One method of accomplishing this is through the modular construction of individual experiments. It is also desirable to program certain types of experiments so that the time of the operation of the devices used on one mission will overlap with the operating time of devices operated on a subsequent mission. This will provide not only scientific continuity in the experiments, but also simultaneous data from a multiplicity of lunar locations.

In addition, overall program planning considerations dictate the scheduling of missions at relatively close intervals. It is clearly desirable to maintain a certain degree of program momentum, both for psychological reasons and to make certain that the project personnel analyzing the results are provided with definite goals over a relatively long period of time.

On consideration of all of these factors, it was the feeling of the Working Groups that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should schedule lunar surface missions at a minimum rate of one per year or possibly two through 1974. Lunar orbital missions should be conducted at the rate of one per year. Since many of the lunar surface missions will require two flights each, three to five Apollo/Saturn V vehicles are required annually.

Present indications are that lunar exploration should continue at the same rate in the latter half of the 1970s. However, there seems to be no need now to plan the flight mission assignment schedule for that period of time.

The Early Apollo Missions

It is assumed that at least the first missions, with durations limited to a day or two and with exploration limited to an area close to the point of landing, will be dominated by operational considerations. Since the highest mission priority is assigned to the safety of the astronauts, the bulk of their time and attention will be devoted to perfecting the procedures of flight. In the relatively short duration of these early missions, the time assigned to scientific lunar exploration as such will be limited.

All experiments should be designed to conserve the astronauts' time, the most valuable scientific commodity on the early missions.

As flight procedures and techniques are perfected, and as improved flight equipment becomes available, plans should be made to gradually increase the duration of stays on the Moon, the distance traveled from the point of landing, and the proportion of the astronauts' time devoted to lunar exploration. A judicious use of “manned” and “unmanned” spacecraft will be required to obtain maximum coverage. Recommendations were made by some groups concerning the specific instrumentation to be carried on each of the first three landings.

Training of the astronauts in sampling techniques and field geology is of the utmost importance to insure the intelligent collection of samples. To assure collection of sterile samples, training is required for the astronauts in the nature of contamination, transfer of contaminants, aseptic transfer procedures, and chemical cleanliness.

Priorities for Experiments

The highest priority activity for the early Apollo landings is to return the greatest number and variety of samples as is feasible. It is desirable that all samples be kept sterile and free of chemical contaminants from such sources as the LEM fuels, the LEM atmosphere or the outgassing or leakage of the astronaut’s suit. A variety of easily obtainable samples should be collected, ranging from dust to rock sizes. These samples should be taken as far from the LEM as possible. Both surface and subsurface samples are required. In the event of a semiaborted or shortened stay on the lunar surface, the astronaut’s first scientific duty is the collection of as many samples as possible, without regard to sterility.

The second priority for the Early Apollo is the emplacement of the Lunar Surface Experiment Package (LSEP) by the astronauts. This should be emplaced to attain optimum operating conditions. Next in priority are the lunar geological traverses by the astronauts. If feasible, these should be accurately controlled with automatic procedures and monitoring. The description of topographic and geologic relations along the traverse lines should be supplemented by stereoscopic photographs.

Equipment Requirements

The working groups were asked to consider equipment priority beginning with the most important. Weights assigned are the absolute minimum needed to accomplish the task. In some cases (i.e., sample tools), added weight and complexity would be desirable if weight and space were available. This priority list is as follows:

1. Sample containers (10 lb.) should keep samples sterile and chemically clean. Stainless steel is acceptable. More studies should be completed relative to the use of Teflon in the lunar environment.
2. Sampling tools (10 lb.) should be easily operable, light, and simple; e.g., space hardened rock hammer, rubber mallet, sun compass.
3. Aseptic sample collection tool (10 lb.).
4. Photography (7 lb.): A stereoscopic camera with several filters and polarizing lenses.
5. LSEP experiments: Suggested experiments in order of priority are: a passive seismograph (25 lb.); a magnetometer/particle detector (13 lb.) and a heat flow measurement device (15 lb.); an active seismograph experiment (7-10 lb.); a micrometeoroid detector (15 lb.). The gravimeter should be considered for AES because of its weight and development complexities.

Preliminary Studies

Studies and tests should be started immediately to determine the amounts and effects of the outgassing of the astronauts' suits and the escape of the atmosphere from the LEM. Sterilization of the escaping atmosphere from the LEM should be considered. Analyses of the possible contaminants in the LEM fuel and the effects on sample collection should be undertaken.

Sample Investigations

Upon return of the lunar samples to Earth, they will be prepared at a Lunar Sample Receiving Laboratory (LSRL) for distribution. Here they will be logged in, cataloged, checked for outgassing, measured for low level radiation, and examined for pathogenic agents. Only those tests that must be done immediately will be conducted at the LSRL. The portion of samples to be distributed will be packaged and initial distribution to the selected scientific investigators will be made.

Early Lunar Orbiters

In the period before the end of the decade two classes of missions are scheduled.

Unmanned Missions

These missions will begin in the period of 1966-1967. The primary function for the approved missions is site selection, and hence, low altitude orbiters are desirable. However, should particles and field experiments be included on later flights, altitudes of 150 to 2000 km are required. Following are some specific recommendations for inclusion on these flights:

1. Cartography. Stereophotogrammetric analysis of the photography obtained by the first block of Lunar Orbiters should be carried out to obtain information regarding the character of lunar topography and to gain experience in analyzing lunar photography. It is recommended that later first block Lunar Orbiters, or any second block, be placed in orbits of different inclinations, with priority for a polar orbit.
2. Particles and Fields. A three-axis magnetometer and particle package to study day-night changes in particle and field environment should be included. For these experiments the spacecraft should be radioactively and magnetically clean.
3. Lunar Atmospheres. Pressure, flux, and mass measurements for determination of neutral and ionic constituents should be conducted. This study is advantageous for early flights because of the uncontaminated state of the atmosphere.

Manned Missions

Consideration should be given to the inclusion of simple diagnostic experiments to be conducted from the orbiting Command/Service Module (CSM) in conjunction with Apollo experiments on the lunar surface.

AES Manned Lunar Orbiter (AES-MLO)

Role of AES-MLO

Since less than 1 percent of the lunar surface will be visited in the near future, a major source of scientific knowledge will come from orbiting spacecraft. Extensive information can be easily obtained for the following reasons:

1. Variation of orbital inclinations will permit mapping of the entire lunar surface.
2. Absence of atmosphere allows all regions of the electromagnetic spectrum to be accessible.

Thus, Manned Lunar Orbiters can provide useful additions to the subsurface information obtained from geophysical studies and to the local studies from fixed and traversing surface experiments. Because of the orbiter’s nature, however, they cannot provide information with the same precision and detail as the surface instruments. Orbital investigations offer the potential of identifying local areas of the lunar surface with unusual properties that might be of interest for future manned exploration. It is recommended that one orbiter carrying the remote sensing package be flown before the first AES landings. Polar orbiters are desirable at the earliest time for total coverage of the lunar surface by remote sensors. In the first phase of lunar exploration (complete orbital survey), five or six missions are believed to be appropriate. Subsequently, AES-MLOs will be necessary to support and supplement the AES surface operations, as well as to monitor lunar activity. Launch rates should be approximately one a year. A systematic program of geologic mapping using orbital data is recommended with the preparation of geologic maps at the following scales:

1. 1:2,500,000. Synoptic map for general planning and collating of a wide variety of data about the gross features of the Moon.
2. 1:1,000,000. Complete synoptic geologic mapping.
3. 1:250,000. Total coverage of the lunar surface. This is a long-range goal.
4. 1:100,000; 1:25,000. Special purpose, directed toward solution of selected topical problems.

Photography Equipment

For complete photographic coverage of the lunar surface the lunar Orbital Camera System should include the following camera subsystems:

1. Metric (Mapping) Camera Subsystem. Designed for use in determining the lunar figure and mapping of the lunar surface.
2. High Resolution Twin Convergent Panoramic Camera Subsystem. Designed for photography of the highest resolution in keeping with coverage of large areas.
3. Ultrahigh Resolution Camera Subsystem. Designed to produce photography of extremely high resolution and multispectral response of limited areas.
4. Multiband Synoptic Camera Subsystem. A means for obtaining large areas of multispectral photographic coverage of the reflective properties of the lunar surface in the visible and near-visible portion of the spectrum.

Remote Sensors

Imaging sensors will provide information about surface structure and composition from depths of microns to a few meters. Imaging instruments, including UV [ultraviolet] imagers, IR [infrared] imagers, and high-resolution radars have proven value for surface and near-surface structure and composition studies and for the study of thermal anomalies. Coverage of the entire Moon with these instruments is recommended at an early date. Nonimaging remote sensors, such as the passive microwave, radar scatterometer, IR, X-ray. gamma-ray, and alpha-particle emission are recommended for inclusion in lunar orbital payloads pending the results of current remote sensor feasibility studies.

Atmospheres, Particles, and Fields Equipment

Atmospheric and ionospheric variability surveys should be conducted. The recommended characteristics of the ion and neutral mass spectrometers are described in the Group Report. Ion traps, solar wind detectors, and pressure gauges can be adapted from the unmanned programs.

Other experiments include the determination of the cosmic-ray albedo, the study of solar and lower-energy galactic cosmic rays (particle telescope), and the search for water using a neutron instrument to defect the hydrogen content of the surface.

Instruments for Subsurface Analysis

There are three orbital instruments that have the potential of obtaining valuable data from depths of kilometers and beyond. The first of these is a magnetometer, which will yield important information on the geology of the lunar crust. Second is a gravity gradiometer yielding details of the variations in the lunar gravitational field. The third is the electromagnetic pulse probe, which has the potential for probing to depth and differentiating the various layers present.

AES Manned Lunar Surface (AES-MLS)

The AES-MLS is essentially a continuation of the early Apollo missions characterized by longer stay time and larger scientific payloads.

It is suggested that this program can be usefully exploited in five or six missions, extending through 1974. The scientific requirements of this series include stay times up to 14 days and traverses up to 15 km from point of landing.

The longer stay time will probably permit the collection of more material than can be returned to Earth. Hence aids to the selection of samples in the field or prior to return should be provided by analytical equipment that will also measure sample characteristics that may be altered by return or packaging. Sample return is still the most significant achievement in these missions. Local mapping should also have a high priority so that sample location is accurately tied to the local geology.

The capability to off load several LSEP’s during each AES mission is also an important aspect. In this way, a small array of stations (LSEP’s) could be set into operation, giving important information for revealing the internal properties of the Moon.

The Moon should provide a unique base for astronomers because of its useful environmental characteristics, the most important being the lack of an appreciable atmosphere. However, exhaustive studies of the complete lunar environment are necessary before engineering design can be started.

The primary objective of analytical devices used on the lunar surface should be to extend the power of the observer to differentiate materials that have similar characteristics. The optimum sample return capability would be between 200 and 250 kg (450-600 lb.) per mission. The following basic types of equipment are required for this phase of lunar exploration:

1. Automatic position recording systems. Essential for tracking and recording movements of the astronaut, and the roving vehicle, and knowing the orientation of the camera. The system would automatically telemeter this information back to Earth or to the LEM.
2. Local Scientific Survey Module (LSSM). This surface roving vehicle should have the capability of carrying either one or two suited astronauts and scientific payload of at least 600 lb. An operational range of 8 km radius is a minimum, and 15 km would be more useful. Remote control of the LSSM would also be advantageous both before and after the arrival of the astronauts.
3. Lunar Flying Vehicle (LFV). A LFV would be useful for extending the operational range of the AES and for studying features inaccessible to the LSSM due to topography. It should be able to carry a 300-lb. scientific payload over a distance of 15 km. Continued study should determine how effectively it can be employed in surface operation.
4. Lunar Drills. The development of a 1-inch drill capable of penetrating to a depth of 3 meters in either rubble or solid rock is recommended. It should be operable from a roving vehicle. It is necessary for lunar heat flow studies and for obtaining biological samples.

Because of the liberal weight allowance for equipment delivered to the Moon’s surface most Working Groups indicated a wide variety of experiments desired for inclusion in the program. Equipment and experiments include instrumentation for performing gravity surveys, active seismic surveys, magnetic measurements, radioactivity measurements, environmental measurements, and in general instrumentation and supporting equipment for conducting geological-geophysical surveys on the lunar surface.

To obtain maximum output of scientific information from these experiments, astronauts should be given scientific training in specific rather than general areas. The greatest need is for trained geologists; however, specialized training will be required in physics, meteorology, chemistry, and in other fields.

Post-AES

The AES should be followed by a program including long-distance travel, up to 800 km and fixed-site investigation from 2 months to 1 year. These missions should commence about 1975 and proceed at a rate of one per year through 1980. Additional orbital flights also appear desirable during this period so as to conduct simultaneous orbital and surface missions. A long-range laboratory vehicle for geological and geophysical exploration is required to permit the collection of data to form a broad regional integrated picture of the surface geology and crustal structure. These data will also be essential as a basis for interpretation of the imagery and measurements obtained from the remote sensing orbital vehicle and also to substantiate other investigations. A series of traverses along the geological belt is suggested, requiring a vehicle with the following characteristics:

1. A minimum range of 800 km.
2. Shelter for a three-person crew.
3. Mission duration capability of up to 2 months.
4. No constraints in returning to starting point.

A Lunar Base is a surface complex that will allow longer stay time, possibly up to a year, than is presently envisioned by the AES concept. Primary needs for a base are visualized to be:

1. The measurement of presently occurring time-varying phenomena; many are geophysical in nature.
2. The study of lunar surface processes.
3. Deep-drilling studies - most important for information on early history, crustal composition, and surface properties of the past. The depth to be reached should probably exceed 300 meters.
4. Detailed study of a critical field area.
5. Construction and manning of large radio and optical telescopes, yet to be defined.

[A 36-page section following this summary in the original report, not reproduced here, is a detailed listing of the requirements formulated by each disciplinary working group.]

Recommendations of the 1967 Summer Study of Lunar Science and Exploration, Santa Cruz, California, July 31-August 13, 1967

The Santa Cruz Summer Study was organized along the same lines as the Falmouth Conference, with five major objectives:

1. To obtain the consensus of the scientific community as to what the future lunar exploration program should be;
2. To prepare detailed science plans for future manned and unmanned lunar missions;
3. To establish the order of priority of experiments to be conducted on all missions;
4. To make recommendations on major hardware items required for the science programs;
5. To make recommendations on the instrument development programs required for the science program and those required to meet Supporting Research and Technology Program needs.

The following is an excerpt from the first section of the conference report,^*** “Summary and Recommendations,” pp. 9-29.

*** 1967 Summer Study of Lunar Science and Exploration, NASA SP-157 (Washington, 1967).

Summary and Recommendations

The primary purpose of the Santa Cruz Conference was to arrive at a scientific consensus as to what the future lunar manned and unmanned exploration program should be, particularly in the time frame of the Apollo Applications Program (AAP). It was planned that the major results of the conference would include (1) a recommended list of lunar missions with detailed mission plans and priority experiment lists for each mission, (2) a priority list of major hardware items, and (3) recommendations for instrument development and for Supporting Research and Technology Programs. The details of the findings and recommendations of the working groups are reported in later sections [not included here]. The major recommendations of the conference and the proposed lunar exploration program include (1) systems development, (2) proposed mission sequence, (3) program planning and support, and (4) science mission plans.

Systems Development

Lunar Surface Mobility

The most important recommendation of the conference relates to lunar surface mobility. To increase the scientific return from lunar surface missions after the first few Apollo landings, the most important need is for increased operating range on the Moon. On the early Apollo missions it is expected that an astronaut will have an operating radius on foot of approximately 500 meters. It is imperative that this radius be increased to more than 10 km as soon as possible. To increase surface mobility the following recommendations are made:

1. It is recommended that a Lunar Flying Unit be developed immediately to be used in AAP and, if possible, on late Apollo flights to increase the astronaut’s mobility range.

   This is the first step toward attaining reasonable mobility. It is expected that the Lunar Flying Unit (LFU) will provide a mobility radius of 5 to 10 kilometers, which is a considerable improvement over the present capability, but not nearly enough. Exploration of lunar surface features such as large craters and their environs will require a range of approximately 25 km or more.

2. It is recommended that the Saturn V dual-launch capability be developed as soon as possible.

3. It is recommended that the dual-mode local scientific survey module (LSSM) be developed on the same schedule as the dual-launch Saturn V. This wheeled vehicle should be capable of operating in an automatic or manned mode. The primary purpose of the dual-launch system is to carry the recommended LSSM and additional fuel for the Lunar Flying Units. The automated/manned LSSM has a greater capability than the one now planned [i.e., the lunar roving vehicle]. The LSSM used in conjunction with Lunar Flying Units should provide a mobility radius of approximately 25 km.

   The best type of lunar surface mobility system was the subject of considerable debate during the conference. Two different philosophies of exploration on large-scale areas arose.

   1. The Geochemistry Working Group strongly favored the large lunar flying vehicle. A manned vehicle, which provides spot coverage over a wide area, would best afford the opportunity of observation and sample collection.
   2. A substantial, but divided, opinion of the Geology Working Group was that the combination of Small Lunar Flying Units with the LSSM was best for spot coverage and for continuous ground coverage. The Geology Working Group emphasized that the continuous ground observation was essential to solve complex geological problems in areas of limited size. The geologists felt that experience had shown that such studies are critical to solving much larger problems and are necessary to place geochemical and geophysical data in their proper geological context.

At the conclusion of the meeting, a substantial majority of the working groups were in favor of the shorter range, continuous surface traverse using a dual-mode LSSM rather than spot coverage over a large area with a Large Flying Unit. Another reason for the choice of the LSSM is that it is probable that the manned half of a dual launch will carry two Lunar Flying Units. Starting with this, the total mobility system using the LSSM seemed a better choice. A very important reason for the choice of the LSSM involved the use of an automated mode of operation. Agreement was unanimous on the need for long unmanned traverses on the lunar surface. After the astronauts have returned to the Earth, the LSSM would be sent to a new destination. On its journey, the LSSM would accomplish the following:

1. Stereo TV on the LSSM will permit the LSSM to be controlled from the earth. The LSSM would collect samples along the route. Some of these samples would be aseptically handled and packaged for return to the earth by the next manned lander.
2. The LSSM would conduct a geophysical traverse of a large area using devices such as magnetometers, gravimeters, and radar probes.

3. The LSSM would deploy several small ALSEP-type Remote Geophysical Monitors (RGM) along the traverse. In this way , a network of such units could be built. The RGM would carry instruments such as seismographs, atmospheric mass spectrometers, gravimeters, and magnetometers.

   The dual-mode LSSM is more complicated and has greater capability than the vehicle presently planned. The LSSM should have the following characteristics and capabilities:

   1. articulation;
   2. the ability to pick up rocks;
   3. stereo TV with the Apollo bandwidth and a fast shutter;
   4. rock analysis (nondestructive) with a storage capacity of 50 pounds;
   5. a headlight (night and shadow operation)
   6. samples, stowage of approximately 100, maximum weight of 1 kg per sample with some aseptically sealed;
   7. the capability to carry and deploy 6 RGMs, each weighing 50 pounds and equipped with instruments such as a gravimeter, a radar probe, and a magnetometer;
   8. dead-reckoning navigation with altitude and horizontal ties to known controls;
   9. capability for carrying two persons with optional steering modes and capability for carrying 1 or 2 LFUS;
   10. relay communications; and
   11. the ability to carry a backup portable life support system (PLSS) or an independent life support system.

Block II Surveyor

Other systems working with the automated LSSM are probably needed to develop the geophysical network of Remote Geophysical Monitors on the Moon. This network requires about 10 automated stations distributed over the front face of the Moon with spacings on the order of 1,000 km or more. This system is required to obtain large-scale information about the interior of the Moon.

It is recommended that a Block II Surveyor, or another system, be available in the period from 1970 to 1975, which is capable of deploying experiments such as the following:

1. a passive seismic/tidal gravimeter/tiltmeter (three components);
2. a corner reflector;
3. a gravimeter (geodetic);
4. a mass spectrometer;
5. a total-pressure gauge;
6. a doppler transponder;
7. a facsimile camera;
8. a magnetometer;
9. a plasma probe;
10. low-energy particles;
11. electric field; and
12. a gamma-ray experiment or alpha-counter experiment.

The Block II Surveyor will afford wide geographic coverage for instruments. Special care must be taken in deployment of experiments (magnetometer, gamma-ray, etc.) so that they are deployed in an appropriate environment.

Sample Return Capability

One important, if not the most important, scientific result from the AAP missions will be the return of lunar samples. The amount returned must increase as the capabilities of the vehicles allow.

It is recommended that the total returned payload from the Moon in AAP missions increase to 400 lb. so that a minimum of 250 lb. of lunar samples can be returned.

A consensus of the conference was that a capability to return approximately 50 lb. of refrigerated samples was needed as soon as possible.

Modular ALSEP

It was clearly recognized at the conference that Apollo lunar surface experiments packages or their derivatives such as Emplaced Scientific Stations or Remote Geophysical Monitors would be used on essentially all AAP landing missions. A number of new experiments under development require the ESS or RGM capability, and many of the current experiments should be used on the lunar surface in networks. The capability should be established to include new experiments on an ALSEP prior to a mission.

It is recommended that future ALSEP stations be designed to allow a substantial degree of flexibility to react to new opportunities opened up by new developments or discoveries on the Moon. A modular concept to permit accommodation of new instruments with minimum disturbance of the basic ALSEP system would greatly facilitate such flexibility.

It is expected that the number of candidate experiments for a particular ALSEP mission will exceed the number that can be accommodated on that mission. Flight assignments for the mission should be made as close to the flight time as is practical to reflect the state of knowledge at that time. The experiments would, therefore, be built to meet a standard ALSEP electrical interface and a suitably small choice of mechanical interfaces. This requires that the ALSEP central station have an appropriate number of standard electrical plug-in stations and a central data processor that assigns experiment data rates under the control of a stored program. The processor control program could be stored prior to flight or, preferably, on command from Earth. Remote reprogramming is particularly desirable as it permits the real-time assignment of experiment data rates in response to acquired data.

Telemetry Capability

When several scientific packages are operating on or near the Moon for long periods of time, the capability to handle the increased data return will become a problem. The data return capability is presently a problem in some unmanned programs.

It is strongly recommended that appropriate provision be made to insure continuous telemetry coverage of all scientific packages, both single and simultaneous operations, on and around the Moon. Provision must also be made to recover data continuously from the averted face of the Moon.

Orbital Subsatellites

Subsatellites could be injected from the AAP command and service module (CSM) vehicles into precision orbits to study the lunar environment, including magnetic fields and particle environment and the atmosphere and ionosphere.

It is recommended that a subsatellite system be developed for deploying systems of instruments in close orbit around the Moon.

Proposed AAP Mission Sequence

To understand how the mobility systems fit into the program of flights and why they have been chosen, the proposed program of lunar landing missions should be examined. The program is not in final form and will not be for some time, at least until further mission studies have been made. The program of missions consists of three distinct mission types: (1) manned orbital flights; (2) single-launch Saturn V lunar landing flights; and (3) dual-launched Saturn V lunar landing flights. The proposed program is outlined in Table 1 and Figure 1 [not reproduced here].

Manned Orbiter

The first recommended AAP flight is a manned lunar orbital flight with these objectives.

1. AAP landing sites mapping photography (return of film necessary);
2. metric-mapping quality photography with returned film;
3. geochemical remote-sensing using gamma-rays and x-rays on a subsatellite left in lunar orbit or using a directional detector system on the CSM; and
4. flying a family of remote sensors such as passive microwave radiometer, infrared radiometer, radar reflectivity, radio noise survey, magnetometer and plasma probe, multicolor photometry, meteoroid detector, radio radiometer, and fluorescence photometer.

Objective 4 has a somewhat lower priority than the first three.

The only way to obtain adequate data for cartographic purposes is to have the film returned to Earth for analysis. The photography from this flight should provide maps of the Moon in the IR region and (by analyzing the gamma-rays) lunar contour maps of the concentration of potassium and uranium and possibly of other elements. Such data will be valuable in future mission planning.

The first orbiter flight should be followed by a second flight within a time frame so that new remote sensing instruments would be perfected (1) to increase the ability to map the Moon remotely in various electromagnetic frequencies and (2) to obtain greater information on the distribution of the elements.

Single-Launch Mode

The first AAP lunar landers will probably be single launches. Missions 2, 3, and 4 represent the proposed early single-launch landers. Because the crater Copernicus is such a large feature and because information about Copernicus is essential to the understanding of the Moon, two separate missions are proposed: one to the central peaks and one to the crater wall. A proposed science mission plan for the central peaks is presented later in this section.

The durations of this class of missions are flexible. It is desired that the single-launch missions be started as soon as possible; however, a series of useful single launches could be continued for a number of missions. Suggested additional sites for the subsequent single missions are Copernicus H, Gambart, Mosting C, Hyginus Rille, Flamsteed, Dionysius, Hipparchus, the dome near Lunar Orbiter Photographic Site II-P-2, and the Surveyor landing and the Ranger impact sites. The Lunar Flying Unit would be used for mobility on these missions.

Dr. George E. Mueller suggested that the conferees consider what scientific program should be carried out on Apollo flights after the first two or three successful lunar landings. The following ground rules were assumed:

1. Some system constraints will have been removed so that more payload is available on the Apollo CSM.
2. The lunar module (LM) will be able to land at rather rough sites but still in or near the Apollo landing zone of +/- 10 degrees latitude.
3. No substantial hardware changes will be made in the CSM or the LM.

It was decided that all of the suggested single-launch AAP landing sites would be appropriate for late Apollo, except Copernicus, which requires more mobility. The most appealing sites were Copernicus H, Gambart, Mosting C, and the dome near site II-P-2. The lunar module might land close enough to these sites to allow access to the interesting areas. There was a strong feeling that there should be at least one highland landing site.

Additional mobility should be brought into the program as rapidly as possible. The LFU should be used even if it has only a 1- or 2-km range, which will significantly enhance the scientific return. if the LFU is not ready, the schedule for the Apollo lunar program should be adjusted, after the first few successful landers, to allow the LFU to be brought into these late Apollo missions.

Dual-Launch Mode

The future lunar exploration program must involve mobility systems that require two Saturn V launches. The dual-mode LSSM and a large amount of additional fuel for the Lunar Flying Units will be carried to the lunar surface in an unmanned lander. The manned Saturn V will land nearby later. The present LSSM cannot be carried to the Moon in a manned single-launch system.

A major feature of the dual-launch system is that the unmanned LSSM would make a long traverse (approximately l,000 km) and arrive at the site of the next manned landing with a collection of surface samples from an extensive region of the Moon. These would be returned to Earth by the next manned lander. The suggested sequence of missions with automated LSSM traverses is shown in Table 1. This technique allows a much larger fraction of the lunar surface to be sampled than could possibly be visited by humans during all of the proposed manned AAP missions (Fig. 1).

Program Planning and Support

Fallback Position

If the AAP lunar program level should drop below one dual-launch or two single-launch missions per year, then the Group for Lunar Exploration Planning (GLEP) should meet again to reconsider mission plans. The program at this low level might need significant redirection. For example, in the case of severe budgetary restrictions or other problems that would prevent developing the Saturn V dual-launch capability, an automated system, such as Rover launched by a system less complicated than a Saturn V, might need to be developed.

Solicitation for Experiments

The selection of experiments from the scientific community was a major consideration at the Conference.

To develop a strong science program in AAP, it is strongly recommended that any extension of the Apollo science program (that is, new Apollo hardware, follow-on ALSEP, or AAP), be implemented by open solicitation of experiments from the scientific community. Only in this way can the Manned Space Flight Program build the broad base of scientific support and participation necessary for an active and productive research program.

It is recognized that the time scales involved may pose problems in certain disciplines in implementing the above recommendation. However, there are experiments that could be delivered on a relatively short time scale and thus allow the possibility of a wider NASA scientific program.

Support of Basic Research

The NASA support of basic research programs has been a benefit to the space program and also to universities and other research institutions. This support should not be confined to flight programs but should be continued in all areas of basic science that contribute to the overall NASA objectives of space exploration.

Support of Instrument Development

Many scientific experiments appear very promising for lunar exploration but are not feasible now because (1) detector systems have not been developed to the point of having the desired sensitivity, or (2) theoretical problems have not been fully investigated to insure proper design of the experiment or full interpretation of the results.

Three stages in the development of an experiment and the necessary hardware can be visualized. These are (1) detailed consideration of the importance and feasibility of an experiment, (2) development of necessary scientific tools to implement the experiment, and (3) production of flight hardware.

To carry out the first two stages of producing an experiment listed previously, it is recommended that a strong program in scientific instrument definition and development and a substantial lunar supporting research and technology program be undertaken immediately. The amount of money being invested to produce experiments for AAP flights in the present budget is not compatible with the scope of the program. It is further recommended that adequate time be included in program planning and launch schedules to allow for the scientific development of the appropriate experiments.

Establishment of Project Scientist

It is now apparent that there is a need for more continuous scientific input into the development of scientific flight hardware for lunar missions.

It is strongly recommended that a position of Project Scientist be established within the structure of the Manned Space Flight Program. The responsibilities of the project scientist are to represent the scientific requirements and objectives of the experiment to the project manager and staff and conversely to represent to the Principal Investigator project requirements that may affect the experiment. At least one project scientist should be associated with every MSC project that includes scientific experiments; more than one project scientist may be desirable for a large project in which the number of scientific disciplines is large. Furthermore, it is strongly recommended that project scientists be participating experimenters in the projects for which they are responsible. The position of the project scientist within the organizational structure should be at a level that insures adequate science input into the program.

Astronaut Selection and Training

After basic classroom work and tutorials, the astronaut should be provided the time and opportunity to participate directly in the research and planning activities of the particular missions for which he is selected. This may require one or more thorough refresher tutorial covering the specific topics of prime scientific importance for the mission. In crew selection for any mission, flight-operations ability is, without question, the primary criterion.

It is strongly recommended that ability in field geology be the next most important factor in the selection of the crew members who will actually land on the Moon for the Apollo missions. For some of the complicated scientific missions in the later part of the AAP, the Santa Cruz Conference considers that the knowledge and experience of an astronaut who is also a professional field geologist is essential. In the interest of maintaining career proficiency, astronauts should be provided time to engage in some form of research activity within their professional fields.

Science Mission Plans

As previously stated, the science mission plans in this report are not in final form. Engineering studies must be made and appropriate modifications and plans developed.

It is recommended that an immediate and intensive program of detailed mission analyses be undertaken for all of the prime lunar landing sites and traverses that have been listed by this Conference.

Because of the rapid development of suitable launch capability and the growth of an extensive body of photogeologic maps of the lunar surface and because of the lead-times required for development of selected systems, the working groups felt that such analyses are urgent. The analyses must be planned on an iterative basis to test the applicability of the recommended plans and of instrument development for the achievement of the general scientific objectives for lunar exploration.

[The “Summary and Recommendations” continues with detailed (though tentative) plans for three AAP missions-to Copernicus, the “Cobra Head” (Aristarchus region) , and Alphonsus - including landing sites, mission timelines, and surface activities. The balance of the report consists of the individual reports of eight working groups: Geology, Geophysics, Geochemistry, Bioscience, Geodesy and Cartography, Lunar Atmospheres, Particles and Fields, and Astronomy.]

Lunar Science Objectives:

The Rationale for Apollo Landing Site Selection

Following is a summary of material presented to the Apollo Site Selection Board at its meeting on July 10, 1969, intended to show how the Site Selection Subgroup of the Group for Lunar Exploration Planning arrived at their recommended list of primary and alternate sites (presented at the June meeting of the Board). It relates scientific experiments to the “15 Questions” tabulated above.

Age Dating. Determination of the absolute age of lunar surface materials by radioactive-decay methods was of prime importance. The method dates the time at which a given sample became a closed system for a particular element; for example, the potassium-40-argon-40 method determines the time at which a rock containing radioactive potassium-40 cooled sufficiently to retain the gaseous argon-40 decay product. The age thus determined may reflect a period of volcanism, melting by meteoric impact, or original accretion of lunar material.

Ages of primary interest to lunar scientists were:

1. the age of the moon’s formation or of its oldest crust; this age might make it possible to distinguish among various theories of lunar origin. One key site for locating such material was the Fra Mauro Formation. This widespread blanket of debris is considered to consist of debris from the “Imbrian event,” the cataclysmic occurrence that produced Mare Imbrium, the enormous circular mare in the northwestern quadrant of the Earth-facing side of the moon. The Fra Mauro Formation was given high priority on all lists of potential landing sites.
2. The time at which the maria became filled with the relatively smooth material, probably once-molten rock, that characterizes them. This date would be relatively easy to establish, since mission planners preferred smooth, level landing sites, most often found in the maria.
3. The time of significant post-mare events, such as the impacts that created the craters Copernicus and Tycho. Equally interesting was the origin of the sinuous rilles, which appeared to have been formed largely in this later period of lunar history.

Lunar Composition. A primary interest of geochemists was to find “primitive” solar system material to deduce the conditions under which planets and satellites condensed from the solar nebula. Data from analysis of terrestrial and meteoritic samples, along with solar and stellar spectral studies and theoretical physics, comprised the prime source of such information, but both the earth and meteorites have been modified by subsequent heating and weathering, which have obscured the original composition. The moon’s small size (possibly resulting in a smaller flow of heat from the interior) and its lack of an atmosphere suggest that it might still have original material on the surface. It was generally accepted that this material could most likely be found in the lunar highlands, which appeared to represent the oldest lunar material.

Second in importance was establishing the bulk composition of the moon. The abundance of the major elements was expected to be important in establishing the moon’s origin; if it proved to be totally unlike the earth in composition it could hardly have split off from the earth. The abundance of radioactive elements would indicate how much energy had been available for heat-induced chemical changes in the moon since its formation. To determine the bulk composition of the moon it was necessary to sample as many different geologic units as possible. Particularly important were sites showing evidence of differentiation or the presence on the surface of deep-seated material, such as would be present in and around impact excavations or explosive craters and in blankets of material ejected from craters. Radioactivity could be measured by instruments in lunar orbit, hence the importance of flying experiments in the service module.

Finally, analysis of any present or past lunar atmosphere would give clues to lunar origin and evolution. Gas detectors operating over a long period of time might possibly detect transient events, such as had been reported in the crater Aristarchus. The sinuous rilles (e.g., Rima Prinz) were also likely sites for detecting any emission of gases from the lunar interior.

Major Geomorphic Processes. The study of the processes by which lunar landforms have been created and destroyed was important mainly to second- and third-order questions about the moon, but was essential in holding the first-order questions (above) together. Knowledge of dominant processes would provide the basis for selection of samples and determining their place of origin, as well as providing major clues to past energy expenditure on the moon. Regions of particular interest in this regard were the sinuous rilles and areas of volcanic cratering. Since photography covered a large fraction of the lunar surface, data from a few landing sites would enable geomorphologists to draw conclusions about most of the moon.

Lunar Geophysics. The only source of information on the moon’s internal structure was the emplaced ALSEP experiments, which included a seismometer and a heat flow instrument. (Later ALSEPs would include different geophysical instruments.)

Seismic data were expected to yield information on layering in the moon, the rate of release of internal strain, and the number and energy of meteorite impacts. It would be very useful to the seismologists to produce an impact of known energy at a known location, such as by causing a spent S-IVB stage or a lunar module ascent stage to crash on the lunar surface. It was important to have at least four seismic instruments active at one time; they should be about 1,000 km apart with as much angular separation as possible. Thus sites at high latitudes, such as Tycho, were quite important.

Data on heat flow were difficult to interpret but could assist in determining whether the moon had originally been hot or cold.

Lunar gravity and geodesy would determine the extent of the “mascons” (mass concentrations) and whether the moon was in hydrostatic equilibrium. These were well suited to study by orbiting instruments.

The laser retroreflectors were expected to make it possible to determine earth-moon distances within a few centimeters, enabling scientists to measure the librations of the moon with previously unattainable accuracy. Best results would be obtained with widely separated reflectors.

Characteristics of the Recommended Landing Sites. The short list of landing sites for the first 10 lunar exploration missions should include:

1. two types of mare material, “older” or eastern and “younger” or western;
2. regional stratigraphic units, such as blanket (ejecta) deposits around mare basins;
3. various types and sizes of impact craters in the maria and in the highlands;
4. morphological manifestations of volcanism in the maria and in the highlands; and
5. areas that may give clues to the nature and extent of processes other than impact and volcanism, which may have acted on the lunar surface.

Following is a description of the 10 prime sites chosen by the Group for Lunar Exploration Planning. The sites were selected in order of their preferred execution on one “G,” four “H,” and five “J” missions.

1. Landing Site 2 (“older” or eastern mare). This site is entirely within relatively old mare (Imbrian) material. It includes many large subdued craters 200 to 600 meters in diameter but comparatively few in the size range 50-200 meters, a distribution common to many apparently old surfaces. Determination of the age and nature of this Imbrian mare material was a primary object of landing at this site.
2. Landing Site 5 (“younger” or western mare).Landing Site 5 is located within relatively young (Eratosthenian) mare material and displays many craters 50 to 200 meters in diameter and relatively fewer of the larger (200-600 meter) craters. It is surrounded by well developed rays from Kepler, making it likely that it contains material derived from considerable depth. The chief goal of a landing at Site 5 was to determine the age and composition of Eratosthenian mare material.
3. Fra Mauro Formation. This extensive geologic unit covers large portions of the surface around Mare Imbrium and is thought to be material ejected when Imbrium was formed. Samples from the Fra Mauro Formation would help to understand its nature, composition, and formation and its relation to the “Imbrian event.”
4. Rima Bode II, a single linear rille running close to a fresh, elongate crater and a crater chain, was of interest because both the rille and the crater were possible sources of several dark geologic units most probably of volcanic origin. The site was selected as an example of a region where material of deep-seated origin was expected. An alternative site was Hyginus Rille, similar in characteristics but apparently less fresh. Another site, Littrow, would meet part of the objectives of a mission to Rima Bode H.
5. Censorinus is a 3.8-km crater located within and near the edge of a highland block south-southeast of Mare Tranqillitatis. It offered the opportunity, early in the exploration program, to sample both highland material and features associated with a fresh impact crater. The proposed site was within the ejecta blanket about 1 km north of the crater rim and allowed investigation of the crater on foot, without mobility aids. If Censorinus presented operational difficulties, Littrow could be considered as an alternative site for this mission.
6. Copernicus (peak). This bright crater, 95 km in diameter, is the source of visible rays of ejected material extending for several hundred kilometers. Its walls expose a 4-km vertical section of the lunar crust. The floor, some 60 km across, contains multiple peaks with a maximum height of 800 meters. A mission to the central peaks would be mainly a sampling mission with the objective of bringing back material that once lay at considerable depth.
7. Marius Hills. Marius Hills, a group of domes and cones near the center of Oceanus Procellarum west-northwest of the crater Marius, are part of a ridge system stretching some 1,900 km through Oceanus Procellarum. The variety of features in this area and their similarity to terrestrial volcanic structures strongly suggests intensive and prolonged volcanic activity.
8. Tycho (rim). Tycho, like Censorinus a fresh impact crater, is in the southern highlands. It is much larger than Censorinus and offers an opportunity to study many features common to large, fresh impact events, including associated volcanism. The proposed landing site was near the Surveyor VII spacecraft, offering the option of returning some Surveyor parts. In that area are several generations of flows, a pond or pool, ejected blocks (probably from Tycho), and other ejecta features and structures.
9. Rima Prinz I, Rima Prinz I, in the Harbinger Mountains northeast of the Marius Hills, is a double sinuous rille - a small meandering rille enclosed within a larger sinuous rille. The origin of the rilles is of great interest because they resemble channels carved by a flowing fluid. A landing near the mouth of Rima Prinz I, selected because of the freshness of its details, would allow examination of the lower part of the eroded valley, sampling the materials and studying the exposed structures. An alternative, Schroter’s V alley , displays similar characteristics but appears older than Rima Prinz I.
10. Descartes. The area of the southern highlands north of the crater Descartes and west of Mare Nectaris is characterized by hilly, groovy, and furrowed deposits reminiscent of terrestrial volcanoes. A mission to a region of intensive and prolonged volcanism within the lunar terrae was considered most important, from both the geological and geochemical viewpoints. An alternative to this site was Abulfeda, just to the southwest.

The Group for Lunar Exploration Planning recommended this list of sites after considering the expected evolution in capability as well as the constraints imposed by operations. Those selected for “J” missions, for example, were picked on account of the additional time on the surface that would be available and the increased mobility that would be provided by a powered vehicle. Tycho, accessible only in the early part of the year because of operational limitations, was switched from the third to the second “J” mission for that reason, although it was better than the Marius Hills site for exploration on foot.

The Apollo Site Selection Board accepted this list for planning purposes at its meeting on July 10, 1969. As was to be expected, the list underwent considerable revision during the next three years, both as to the choice of sites and the order in which they would be explored, as mission planning became more detailed and operational capability improved.