Astronautics and Aeronautics, 1967 - NASA's History Office

ASTRONAUTICS AND AERONAUTICS, 1967 During April
special dates connected with the fiftieth anniversary of their Revolution.
The United States still insists on trying to reach the moon by 1970.
“Both nations are duplicating costly and dangerous work. Thus good
and brave men die unnecessarily, vast sums are wasted, and without
doubt the progress that humanity could make through cooperation in
the thrilling quest for knowledge of the universe is being hampered by
pride, prestige and the nebulous possibility of strategic gain.” (NYT,
4/25/67,40)
Philadelphia Evening Bulletin: “. . . hard on the heels of a test dis-
aster that took the lives of three US. Apollo astronauts, tragedy has
also struck the Russian space program with the crash of a new giant
spacecraft and the death of its pilot, Cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov. . . .
“Had the Russians succeeded in mounting a new space spectacular
at this time, it is possible that some of the sobering impact of the Apollo
on this country would have been dissipated. Although there have been
repeated disclaimers of a space ‘race,’ the sight of the Soviet Union
again forging ahead would surely have fanned anew American competi-
tive instincts. Surely the death of brave men on both sides will re-
emphasize for both the element of human fallibility and the need for
offsetting it with infinite pains and caution in space exploration.” (P EB,
4/25/67)
Technology Week: “The Soviet tragedy, by emphasizing the hazards
of space flight, has perhaps eased some of the pressure of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration and North American Aviation.
There is more awareness now that the exploration of space will not be
a series of glittering successes, one after another. There are dangers;
there will be further tragedies, other brave men to mourn. While bringing
home the care which must always be taken, the Soviet accident also
makes it clear that in programs of this magnitude humans are not al-
ways infallible. . . .” (Coughlin, Tech Wk, 5/1/67, 50)
Aviation Week and Space Technology: “It is fortunate that the Apollo
and Soyuz tragedies came this far downstream in the history of manned
space flight. If they had occurred in the initial phases of Vostok or
Mercury, the hue and cry of technical timidity in both countries might
have killed the manned space flight programs before they had a chance
to demonstrate their technical feasibility. Viewed against the perspective
of Vostok, Mercury, Voskhod and Gemini and more than 2,000 hr of
successful space flight logged by crews of both nations, the recent trag-
edies spotlight development problems but do not raise any fundamental
doubts about man’s ability to reach the moon. . . .” (Hotz, Av Wk,
5/1/67,11)
* Press commented on Congressional hearings on Apollo accident.
Philadelphia Inquirer: “With both the House and Senate conducting
their own investigations of the Apollo tragedy, in the aftermath of the
exhaustive inquiry by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s
own review board, there is a danger that what will result is a
negative witch hunt instead of constructive criticism of benefit to the
space program. Congress should strive to protect the Nation’s investment
in this critically important and expensive venture and that is not
to be accomplished by laboring the deficiencies of Apollo I. Above all,
the concern should be for the safety of future space voyagers. It should
be to certify that no unnecessary risks will be taken that might invite
another lethal disaster.” (P Inq, 4/12/67)
131