|
Author
|
Topic: Would Apollo 14 have landed at Hadley?
|
mensax
Member Posts: 861
From: Virginia
Registered: Apr 2002
|
posted 12-17-2006 12:01 PM
   
I believe I read it in the past where this was discussed, but too many cobwebs have accumulated in the old skull since then... If Apollo 13 had landed on the Moon, would Apollo 14 have landed at Hadley? And would the lunar rover have been ready in time?Noah |
Tom
Member Posts: 1610
From: New York
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 12-17-2006 12:01 PM
Noah... if Apollo 13 landed at Fra Mauro, "14" would have headed to Taurus Littrow.If I remember correctly, the first "J" mission at that time was scheduled to be Apollo 16. |
Dwight
Member Posts: 577
From: Germany
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted 12-19-2006 11:58 AM
I'd highly recommend David J Shayler's book Apollo: The Lost and Forgotten Missions for a thorough discussion and analysis on what the missions more than likely would have done had everything gone as originally planned.I personally think that the missed landing of 13, and the curtailed missions made for a better choice of later landing sites. |
Fra Mauro
Member Posts: 1624
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 12-21-2006 03:25 PM
I agree with that. Even with a rover, I can't imagine Shepard & Mitchell doing the job that Cernan & Schmitt did. I do think they could've chosen a better site fo Apollo 16 than the Descartes Valley |
Challenger
New Member Posts:
From:
Registered:
|
posted 12-22-2006 09:57 AM
In 1971, Apollo 14 did in fact land at Hadley... according to Stephen Baxter's book Voyage, a "what-if" novel.In Baxter's scenario, after the Apollo 13 near-disaster, all of the remaining moon flights, save Apollo 14, had been trimmed from the budget, and Dave Scott's crew had been moved up from 15... bumping Shepard, Roosa snd Mitchell. The modified mission took place in July 1971, and the rover and SIM were made available to Scott's crew. |
tegwilym
Member Posts: 2331
From: Sturgeon Bay, WI
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 12-22-2006 11:11 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Challenger:
In 1971, Apollo 14 did in fact land at Hadley... according to Stephen Baxter's book Voyage, a "what-if" novel.
Great book by the way if anyone likes science fiction with a realistic twist to it. I've read several of Baxter's books. I really like that kind of sci-fi where it could almost come true if history went a different way. Another one of his books that was fun was called "Titan". A bit way out, but they used Apollo and shuttle hardware for a flight to Saturn. Good book too!Tom |
Delta7
Member Posts: 1527
From: Bluffton IN USA
Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted 02-12-2008 12:59 PM
Is there any info about the original targeted landing site for Apollo 14, before being re-targeted for Fra Mauro after Apollo 13? I seem to remember reading something about Censorinus Crater many moons ago. |
mjanovec
Member Posts: 3811
From: Midwest, USA
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted 02-12-2008 02:24 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Fra Mauro:
Even with a rover, I can't imagine Shepard & Mitchell doing the job that Cernan & Schmitt did.
I can't imagine Shepard doing *any* lunar EVA better than the other crews did. He just had no interest at all in being a lunar geologist. It's unfortunate that Lovell and Haise weren't given a second chance to try for Fra Mauro. Both had a real desire to conduct a geologic exploration of the site, which was even reflected in their mission motto. |
Jay Chladek
Member Posts: 2272
From: Bellevue, NE, USA
Registered: Aug 2007
|
posted 02-13-2008 02:25 AM
quote:
Originally posted by tegwilym:
Another one of his books that was fun was called "Titan".
I hate to say it, although I did enjoy reading Titan at the time, it still depressed the heck out of me. When it foretold the loss of a certain space shuttle and that shuttle really did not make it home, I felt like the space program was going to end up like it did in Titan (NOT a history I wanted to see repeated at all). Plus, the ending was a bit "2001" for my taste. Of course, that could explain why Baxter and Clarke have teamed up with a sequel trilogy of novels about the origin of those mysterious monoliths. |
WAWalsh
Member Posts: 809
From: Cortlandt Manor, NY
Registered: May 2000
|
posted 02-13-2008 03:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Fra Mauro:
I do think they could've chosen a better site fo Apollo 16 than the Descartes Valley
A little of that is hindsight. The expectation for Descartes was different lunar sampling due to theorized volcanic activity in the area. Had the hypothesis been correct, the samples could/would have been spectacular. Apollo 16 showed the value in science in that it tested an idea, the results did not support the hypothesis, causing an alteration in our understanding on the formation of the Moon. |
kr4mula
Member Posts: 642
From: Cinci, OH
Registered: Mar 2006
|
posted 02-14-2008 11:07 AM
Excellent point. It's just unfortunate that John Young's "mysterious and unknown Descartes" ended up disproving expectations by going the (relatively) boring direction, rather than revealing something truly fascinating (Looney artifacts, anyone?).Cheers,
Kevin |
advertisement