Racing for the Moon

The U.S.S.R. docked two unmanned satellites by remote control last October; ever since, U.S. space experts have watched and waited for the next Soviet moves toward a manned moon landing. Within the past two weeks, the Russians took two steps in that direction: a second automatic linkup of two unmanned spacecraft, Cosmos 212 and 213, in earth orbit last week; and, five days earlier, an unmanned orbiting of the moon by the spacecraft Luna 14.

The latest docking pas de deux in the Cosmos series, U.S. space watchers say, increases chances that Russia will send its cosmonauts to a moon landing from an earth orbit. The spacecraft that were hooked together were of the Soyuz type, each with a capacity of from three to six men. Manned, a two-Soyuz hookup could be a counterpart to the U.S. Air Force's proposed manned orbiting laboratory. Four or five of them, linked up like spokes of a wheel, could serve as an assembly plant for a manned lunar vehicle.

Go for Broke? U.S. space officials were not particularly awed by the technology involved in the Russians' docking maneuver. The U.S. has carried out ten manned rendezvous in space since Gemini 6 and 7 first got together in December 1965, and the U.S. has all the guidance and control equipment necessary for automatic docking Soviet style. More significant, say NASA scientists, would be the safe return to earth of Luna 14 from its orbit around the moon. Such an accomplishment would open the way to a manned circumlunar flight, which would place the U.S.S.R. ahead of the U.S. in at least one heat of the moon race.

NASA has yet to decide whether or not it will fly a manned circumlunar orbit before attempting to land a man on the moon. Some NASA officials believe that such a preparatory flight would improve the chances for a trouble-free descent to the lunar surface. Others oppose it. Once an Apollo is in orbit around the moon with all its equipment functioning, runs the argument, why not go for broke?

Despite the controversy and the most recent Soviet space achievements, U.S. experts are still convinced that they will be first to put a man on the moon--probably by late next year. The Soviet moon schedule, they point out, was set back a year by the disastrous malfunction of Soyuz 1 (TIME, May 5), which took the life of Cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov. As a result, the Russians have been forced to increase the tempo of space activity. They are now spending twice as much as the U.S., and even hold a spare booster rocket in readiness during each major space shot in case the primary booster fails.

Russian Planets? The U.S. moon program has been delayed for more than a year by the Apollo launching-pad fire. But despite the holocaust, and the flawed performance of the Saturn 5 moon rocket three weeks ago, it is still ahead of the Soviet Union's. Engineers now blame the Saturn 5 failures on what appear to be a pair of rare flukes--a leak in a secondary fuel line and crossed cut-off signal wires that shut down the wrong rocket engine. The Russians have no moon rocket to compare with the Saturn 5, which is capable of 7,500,000 Ibs. of thrust. NASA Administrator James Webb believes they will soon test a moon booster with a 10,000,000-lb. thrust capacity. With the first manned Apollo orbit scheduled for August and a Saturn 5-powered orbital mission tentatively set for November, NASA estimates that the U.S. still has a half-year lead.

What looms beyond the moon? Russian space efforts, says Mstislav V. Keldysh, president of the Soviet Academy of Sciences, are already focused on "the setting up of interplanetary stations and the reaching of other planets." By contrast, the moon now seems to be the end of the line to many U.S. space scientists. Hamstrung by cutbacks in appropriations, laboratories and space installations across the country have been laying off technicians, engineers and scientists by the thousands. More important, they have been forced to suspend most planning for interplanetary missions. "There is no question that things will be bleak in the '70s," says NASA consultant and former Deputy Administrator Robert C. Seamans Jr. "The question is how bleak."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.