Skip to main content

Canada The once and future moon: 50 years after Apollo 11, our lunar adventure has just begun

So far, human explorers have touched only a few points on the moon's surface, the Apollo mission sites indicated in black. But seeing more diverse terrain could teach us new things about the moon's past and humanity's potential future there. Marked in red are some of the areas where future missions could land. Check the map lower down in this story to learn more. ANIMATION BY CARRIE COCKBURN

Next month, Christy Caudill, a doctoral student at the University of Western Ontario, will be playing the part of a robot as she picks her way across a rock-strewn terrain of hardened and broken lava. She and her team will carry a set of scientific instruments built to examine the geology of another world. At the same time, in a mission control room in London, Ont., other colleagues will study the images and data streaming in from those instruments, as though they are receiving them from the Schrodinger basin, a 320-kilometre-wide impact crater on the far side of the moon that has attracted the attention of planetary scientists because of its intriguing volcanic features.

For two weeks, both sides of the exercise will be immersed in a simulation call CanMoon, designed to test procedures for operating a Canadian-built lunar rover. Only after a 10-hour shift each day will Ms. Caudill and her colleagues allow themselves to remember that they are on Lanzarote, one of the Canary Islands, which features some of the same rock types as the rover’s potential landing site.

“It’s all about gaining insight into how people think when they’re seeing through the rover’s eyes and to really discern what’s going on as they try to meet their mission goals,” said Ms. Caudill, a veteran of several previous simulations. “As far as I’m concerned, we won’t be on Lanzarote, we’ll be on the moon.”

Story continues below advertisement

That sense of actuality reflects the moon’s recent return to prominence as a destination for space explorers, almost 50 years after Neil Armstrong and Edwin (Buzz) Aldrin stepped and hopped across its surface.

Flashback: In 1969, Neil Armstrong took the first steps on the moon and then he and Buzz Aldrin received a special phone call. Watch to learn more.

For Ms. Caudill, who has participated in real-life robotic missions to Mars, there is a certain wistfulness in this. As a scientist, Mars is undeniably her destination of choice, she said. But human missions to Mars remain a distant goal fraught with unsolved challenges, including what to do about the heavy doses of radiation astronauts will be exposed to during a long interplanetary flight.

The moon has the advantage of being Earth’s celestial companion. While it is still a thousand times farther than the International Space Station (ISS), it presents more manageable risks for humans and a genuine business case for entrepreneurs looking for a stake in the next phase of space exploration.

Already this year, there is a sense of acceleration toward the moon. In January, China became the first country to place an unmanned lander on the moon’s far side, another step toward its own manned mission. This month, India is launching its first lunar lander. And in April SpaceIL, an Israeli non-profit, narrowly missed becoming the first privately funded organization to successfully place a spacecraft on the moon’s surface. All of this suggests that after years of uncertainty about where deep space exploration is heading, the extraterrestrial compass needle is swinging back toward Earth’s nearest neighbour. And unlike what happened after the Apollo program ended, the politics, economics and technology of space are lining up for something more permanent.

“The way in which it continues to be discussed is that we’re not going to go back to visit, we’re going to stay this time,” said Mike Greenley, president of MDA, which built and supports the Canadarm 2 aboard the ISS.

MDA is now part of Colorado-based Maxar Technologies, the company recently tapped by NASA to supply the first component of a smaller orbiting space station called the Lunar Gateway. In February, Canada became the first country to commit to the Gateway as an international partner. MDA is a leading contender to build Canada’s contribution: a more autonomous, AI-guided version of the arm that currently appears on the back of the $5 bill.

But while the Gateway – like the ISS before it – is expected to grow gradually through international agreements between national space agencies, the real catalysts in the new push toward the moon are the growing ranks of private companies looking to do it for themselves. “As the Earth’s economic sphere grows, people are realizing the moon is an asset,” said Christian Sallaberger, president and CEO of Canadensys Aerospace Corp., a space technology company based in Bolton, Ont., that has seen moon-related projects taking up a growing share of its business.

Story continues below advertisement




July 20, 1969: Astronaut Buzz Aldrin stands alongside the U.S. flag after he and Neil Armstrong became the first two people to set foot on the moon. Astronaut Michael Collins orbited in the command module during the mission.

Neil A. Armstrong/NASA/The Associated Press

June 15, 1989: Mr. Aldrin holds up a copy of The Globe and Mail from July 21, 1969, which he autographed.

Edward Regan/The Globe and Mail

LESSONS LEARNED

Poets and engineers alike have reflected on the enduring allure of the moon. Once a metaphor for the unattainable, it became an ever-present focus in the early days of space flight, as the United States and the Soviet Union vied to be the first to land humans on the lunar surface. So intense was the race that it’s hard to imagine how the first chapter of space exploration would have unfolded had fate not provided Earthlings with such a visible and tantalizing prize.

As the United States’ Apollo program wound down after six manned landings from 1969 to 1972, NASA moved on to the space shuttle and then the ISS. The new theatre of operation was low Earth orbit, and the new paradigm was all about making space routine and accessible to many more individuals from many more countries, including Canada. Over the years, this second chapter of space history had its share of tragedies and setbacks. Yet, its outcomes have included almost two decades of continuous human presence in orbit, along with some key lessons about how the next chapter is likely to unfold.

The first lesson is about the importance of robots. This comes courtesy of the Canadarm 2, which has become indispensable to operations on the ISS. When the arm was still on the drawing board in the 1990s, some were skeptical that it would be of much use after the station was complete. Now, it seems to be used for almost everything, including catching visiting spacecraft. According to MDA, the past three-month period has been among the busiest in the Canadarm’s history.

“We’ve learned a lot of things operating a robot on the station for the past 18 years,” said Gilles Leclerc, director-general of space exploration for the Canadian Space Agency.

Canada’s track record with the arm has set the stage for its contribution to the Lunar Gateway. But the second lesson to come from the space-station era, the growing role of the private sector as an accelerator of space exploration, is having an even larger impact. The trend began in 2006, when NASA, already looking to decommission its fleet of space shuttles after two disastrous accidents, began inviting industry players to take over the job of ferrying supplies to the ISS. This opened the door to new cadre of space service companies, including Elon Musk’s SpaceX.

Using the same blueprint, NASA recently awarded contracts to three companies to carry scientific payloads to the moon in the next two years. One of them, Pittsburgh-based Astrobotic Technology, has also inked an agreement with Canadensys to send some of the Ontario company’s gear to the lunar surface. The developments are a further sign that the envelope of commercial activity in space is expanding and that entrepreneurs are getting serious about developing their lunar strategies.




Hurricane Emily looms behind Canadarm 2 in July, 2005, as photographed by astronaut John Phillips on the International Space Station. After the Apollo missions ended, space science turned to low Earth orbit, where countries such as Canada began to play a larger role.

NASA

This artist's rendition of the proposed Lunar Gateway space station shows a Canadarm in orbit around the moon.

MDA, Maxar Technologies

DOUBLE VISIONS

Canada’s decision to join the Lunar Gateway project came after months of lobbying from industry as well as from NASA chief administrator Jim Bridenstine. Yet, within weeks of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announcing the commitment, the White House appeared to upend the entire plan by declaring that it wanted American astronauts walking on the lunar surface again by 2024 – the final year of what would be U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term.

The announcement caught even NASA by surprise and it raised questions in Canada about whether the Gateway had effectively been sidelined by politics. Last month, NASA unveiled a retooled moon program to follow through on the Trump directive. Symbolically dubbed Artemis – the twin sister of Apollo in Greek mythology – the plan explicitly includes landing the first woman on the moon as part of its inaugural crew. The news immediately attracted more attention than the Gateway, which is designed to operate for long stretches without any human presence.

Despite this split objective, Mr. Leclerc said the message from NASA is that Canada’s contribution to the Gateway is still needed by its originally planned 2025 delivery date – and sooner if possible. One reason is that it still requires a significant amount of energy to fly straight to the lunar surface and back. In such a mission scenario, even the fuel for the return trip has to be brought down to the landing site and lifted back up again. Apollo missions got around this by sending a combined lander and an orbiter to the moon. For Artemis, the plan includes docking with the Gateway as the transfer point for astronauts en route to a lunar landing.

There are serious questions about whether NASA can make the 2024 deadline for its U.S.-only lunar landing. For one thing, the lander itself has not yet been designed and tested. And it is easy to imagine how budget battles with Congress or a change in administration could delay the plan.

The Gateway also has its detractors, but proponents say that if the overarching goal of the lunar program is establishing a long-term presence beyond low Earth orbit, then an orbiting platform that can serve as a test bed for deep space missions is the way to go. That perception is reinforced by expectations that Europe, Japan and Russia will join the United States and Canada as partners in the Gateway, which would make the project harder to kill.

"History has shown that international collaboration fosters a more persistent activity,” MDA’s Mr. Greenley said.

Story continues below advertisement




An artist's concept of a landing craft and its crew on the lunar surface. NASA had originally sought U.S. companies' help to design reusable lunar landing systems, test them by 2024 and get a crew on the moon by 2028, but the Trump administration accelerated that timetable. Now the goal is to land on the moon by 2024.

NASA

This rover and lander model, dubbed Heracles, is part of a joint European-Japanese-Canadian effort to send a robotic mission to the moon in the 2020s, scouting for the arrival of astronauts.

ESA/ATG Medialab

WHEELS ON THE GROUND

At the same time, businesses that are looking to the moon as an economic opportunity are not waiting for the Gateway to be built and are not thinking only of lunar orbit. For example, next month Canadensys will begin road-testing a wheel designed for a lunar rover. The test involves hours of rolling the wheel on a turntable covered with simulated lunar soil. Similar projects are under way by aerospace companies looking to develop moon-ready hardware, including cameras, sensors and drills.

To boost Canada’s presence in the expanding moon market and its technological spinoffs, this year’s federal budget included a $150-million injection dubbed the Lunar Exploration Accelerator Program (LEAP). In the first stage of the program, Mr. Leclerc said that, as of last month, the space agency had received more than a hundred pitches from various companies and collaborations, of which a smaller number will be invited to submit formal proposals.

Scientists, too, are anticipating new opportunities for lunar exploration. While the moon is not Mars, it is full of mysteries that have lingered since the Apollo era. Over the years, researchers have developed long lists of possible landing sites they would like to explore – with both robotic and manned spacecraft. The missions would combine two research goals: studying the moon’s long-preserved geologic record for clues to the deep history of Earth and the rest of the solar system; and sussing out resources that could be valuable to an expanding lunar community, including ice near the moon’s poles and gases such as hydrogen and oxygen, which could be trapped in minerals and used for energy and life support.

This is why next month’s CanMoon simulation in Lanzarote, run jointly by Western and the University of Winnipeg, was designed with a specific mission opportunity in mind. That mission, known as Heracles, would be a combined European, Japanese and Canadian effort to put a small lander with a rover on the moon in the coming decade, once the Gateway is in place.

For Cassandra Marion, a PhD student at Western who is managing the simulation, the exercise is not just about developing technologies and procedures, but above all about producing a cohort of Canadian-trained scientists who are qualified to run lunar missions.

Whether those missions are done in partnership with other countries or as private ventures, she said, “we’ll have people to donate to the cause."

Story continues below advertisement




WHERE TO LAND ON THE MOON

All six Apollo landing sites are on the side of the

moon that faces Earth and they are relatively

close to the moon’s equator. The six additional

locations shown are among those identified as

potential landing sites for future missions. They

reflect a more diverse set of lunar

landforms, where mission planners are hoping

to discover resources and answer questions

about the moon’s past.

THEN …

Apollo landing sites on the near side

of the moon

Apollo 15

Apollo 17

Apollo 11

Apollo 12 & 14

Apollo 16

… AND NOW

Shown are six potential landing sites

NEAR SIDE

2

3

1

4

Site sizes are schematic

1

Mare Orientale (95°W, 20°S)

Only partly visible from Earth, this is the

youngest of the moon’s large impact basins.

Pinning down its age would shed light on a key

turning point in lunar history.

 

Aristarchus plateau (50°W, 25°N)

Rising two kilometres above the surrounding

plains, the plateau has a complex geology, and

its rocks are thought to be rich in oxygen.

 

 

Rima Bode (3.5°W, 12°N)

Black mineral deposits at this site are rich in

titanium and may act as a trap for hydrogen

atoms streaming away from the sun.

 

Shackleton crater (0.0°E, 89.9°S)

Because it is nearly at the moon’s south pole,

sunlight never touches some parts of this

crater. Orbital missions have detected ice in

shadowed areas.

2

3

4

FAR SIDE

5

6

5

Moscoviense basin (147°E, 26°N)

This deep impact feature exposes the ancient

crust on the moon’s far side. It includes a series

of unusual swirls on the basin floor that may be

due to a magnetic anomaly.

 

 

Schrodinger basin (135°E, 75°S)

Lava deposits in this large impact crater offer

rare evidence that the moon remained

volcanically active for billions of years after

its formation.

6

CARRIE COCKBURN / THE GLOBE AND MAIL,

BLENDER CONSULTATION: OWEN HELLUM,

SOURCES: PLANETPIXELEMPORIUM.COM; BBC

WHERE TO LAND ON THE MOON

All six Apollo landing sites are on the side of the moon

that faces Earth and they are relatively close to the moon’s

equator. The six additional locations shown are among

those identified as potential landing sites for future

missions. They reflect a more diverse set of lunar

landforms, where mission planners are hoping to discover

resources and answer questions about the moon’s past.

THEN …

Apollo landing sites on the near side of the moon

Apollo 15

Apollo 17

Apollo 11

Apollo 12 & 14

Apollo 16

… AND NOW

Shown are six potential landing sites

NEAR SIDE

2

3

1

4

Site sizes are schematic

1

Mare Orientale (95°W, 20°S)

Only partly visible from Earth, this is the youngest of the

moon’s large impact basins. Pinning down its age would

shed light on a key turning point in lunar history.

 

Aristarchus plateau (50°W, 25°N)

Rising two kilometres above the surrounding plains, the

plateau has a complex geology, and its rocks are thought

to be rich in oxygen.

 

 

Rima Bode (3.5°W, 12°N)

Black mineral deposits at this site are rich in titanium and

may act as a trap for hydrogen atoms streaming away

from the sun.

 

Shackleton crater (0.0°E, 89.9°S)

Because it is nearly at the moon’s south pole, sunlight

never touches some parts of this crater. Orbital missions

have detected ice in shadowed areas.

2

3

4

FAR SIDE

5

6

5

Moscoviense basin (147°E, 26°N)

This deep impact feature exposes the ancient crust on the

moon’s far side. It includes a series of unusual swirls on

the basin floor that may be due to a magnetic anomaly.

 

 

Schrodinger basin (135°E, 75°S)

Lava deposits in this large impact crater offer rare

evidence that the moon remained volcanically active for

billions of years after its formation.

6

CARRIE COCKBURN / THE GLOBE AND MAIL,

BLENDER CONSULTATION: OWEN HELLUM,

SOURCES: PLANETPIXELEMPORIUM.COM; BBC

WHERE TO LAND ON THE MOON

THEN …

Apollo landing

sites on the

near side of

the moon

All six Apollo landing sites are on

the side of the moon that faces

Earth and they are relatively close

to the moon’s equator. The six

additional locations shown are

among those identified as potential

landing sites for future missions.

They reflect a more diverse set of

lunar landforms, where mission

planners are hoping to discover

resources and answer questions

about the moon’s past.

Apollo 15

Apollo 17

Apollo 11

Apollo 12 & 14

Apollo 16

… AND NOW

Shown are six potential landing sites

FAR SIDE

NEAR SIDE

FAR SIDE

5

2

3

1

6

4

Site sizes are schematic

1

4

Mare Orientale (95°W, 20°S)

Only partly visible from Earth, this is the

youngest of the moon’s large impact basins.

Pinning down its age would shed light on a

key turning point in lunar history.

 

Aristarchus plateau (50°W, 25°N)

Rising two kilometres above the surrounding

plains, the plateau has a complex geology,

and its rocks are thought to be rich in

oxygen.

 

 

Rima Bode (3.5°W, 12°N)

Black mineral deposits at this site are rich in

titanium and may act as a trap for hydrogen

atoms streaming away from the sun.

Shackleton crater (0.0°E, 89.9°S)

Because it is nearly at the moon’s south pole,

sunlight never touches some parts of this

crater. Orbital missions have detected ice in

shadowed areas.

 

 

Moscoviense basin (147°E, 26°N)

This deep impact feature exposes the ancient

crust on the moon’s far side. It includes a

series of unusual swirls on the basin floor

that may be due to a magnetic anomaly.

 

 

Schrodinger basin (135°E, 75°S)

Lava deposits in this large impact crater offer

rare evidence that the moon remained

volcanically active for billions of years

after its formation.

2

5

3

6

CARRIE COCKBURN / THE GLOBE AND MAIL,

BLENDER CONSULTATION: OWEN HELLUM,

SOURCES: PLANETPIXELEMPORIUM.COM; BBC




Houston, 1969: Owen Maynard, middle, a Canadian engineer who oversaw development of the lunar module, sits in the Spacecraft Analysis (SPAN) room at the Mission Control Center during the flight of Apollo 11. According to Canadian space historian Chris Gainor, Mr. Maynard chose to sleep through Neil Armstrong’s famous first step on the moon in order to be well-rested for the launch of the lunar module’s ascent stage, which would begin the journey home for Mr. Armstrong and his crewmate, Edwin 'Buzz' Aldrin. Here, Mr. Maynard is flanked by industry contractors Thomas J. Kelly of Grumman, left, and Dale Myers of North American Rockwell, right.

NASA

Canada’s lunar legacy

The Apollo program was an unprecedented U.S.

achievement that engaged scientists and engi-

neers from around the world. Among them

were many Canadians, including some who

played key roles in shaping the effort to land

humans on the moon.

Jim Chamberlin

Born in Kamploops, B.C., he was chief of technical

design for the Avro Arrow, Canada’s trailblazing

interceptor jet. When the Arrow was cancelled in

1959, he was snapped up by NASA along with more

than a dozen Avro engineers. Within NASA, he was

a key supporter of the “lunar orbit rendezvous”

approach to landing on the moon, which required

the development of a lunar module.

Owen Maynard

A Sarnia, Ont., native, he was another former Avro

engineer who arrived at NASA and soon found

himself playing a leading role in the nascent U.S.

space program. After overseeing the development

of the lunar module, he headed up Apollo’s

systems engineering division, which was tasked

with making sure all of the various components of

the complex system were able to work together

Lunar module

Height:

6.7 metres

Diameter:

9.4 metres

Radar

antenna

S-Band

antenna

RCS

thrust

nozzle

Entrance

hatch

Landing

gear

Descent

stage

Landing

pad

Héroux Machine Parts Limited: Now called

Héroux-Devtek, the Longueuil, Que., company special-

izes in aircraft landing gear. It built the legs on the

lunar module’s descent stage, six sets of which remain-

on the moon to this day.

Lunar orbit rendezvous

Each Apollo mission involved a single launch

that put both a command module and lunar

module in Earth orbit along with a three-man

crew (A). The modules travelled together on a

three-day flight to the moon (B). Once in orbit

around the moon, the lunar module separated

to bring two crewmembers down to the surface

while one stayed behind in the command

module (C) . Only the crew portion of the com-

mand module returned to Earth at the end of

the journey.

Trajectory

A

C

B

Earth

Moon

Rendezvous

After a 385,000-km voyage,

Command Service Module

rotates and docks with the

Lunar Module

4

Saturn V rocket

THIRD STAGE

Single J-2 engine boosts

craft into Earth orbit, from

where Trans Lunar Injection

(TLI) burn increases

spacecraft’s velocity close

to Earth’s escape velocity

of 40,320 km/h

SECOND STAGE

Five J-2 engines burn for

six minutes, lifting craft to

176km at 25,182 km/h.

Fuel: Liquid hydrogen,

liquid oxygen

FIRST STAGE

Five F-1 engines, powered

by RP-1 (refined kerosene)

and liquid oxygen, lift

Apollo spacecraft to

height of 67.6 km in just

168 seconds

IVAN SEMENIUK, murat yükselir

and john sopinski/the globe

and mail, sources: nasa;

natIonal air and space

museum; graphic news

The Apollo program was an unprecedented U.S.

achievement that engaged scientists and engineers

from around the world. Among them were many Cana-

dians, including some who played key roles in shaping

the effort to land humans on the moon.

Jim Chamberlin

Born in Kamploops, B.C., he was chief of technical design for

the Avro Arrow, Canada’s trailblazing interceptor jet. When

the Arrow was cancelled in 1959, he was snapped up by

NASA along with more than a dozen Avro engineers. Within

NASA, he was a key supporter of the “lunar orbit rendez-

vous” approach to landing on the moon, which required the

development of a lunar module.

Owen Maynard

A Sarnia, Ont., native, he was another former Avro engineer

who arrived at NASA and soon found himself playing a lead-

ing role in the nascent U.S. space program. After overseeing

the development of the lunar module, he headed up Apollo’s

systems engineering division, which was tasked with making

sure all of the various components of the complex system

were able to work together

Lunar module

Height:

6.7 metres

Diameter:

9.4 metres

Radar

antenna

S-Band

antenna

RCS

thrust

nozzle

Entrance

hatch

Landing

gear

Descent

stage

Landing

pad

Héroux Machine Parts Limited: Now called

Héroux-Devtek, the Longueuil, Que., company special-

izes in aircraft landing gear. It built the legs on the lunar

module’s descent stage, six sets of which remain on

the moon to this day.

Lunar orbit rendezvous

Each Apollo mission involved a single launch that put

both a command module and lunar module in Earth

orbit along with a three-man crew (A). The modules

travelled together on a three-day flight to the moon (B).

Once in orbit around the moon, the lunar module sepa-

rated to bring two crewmembers down to the surface

while one stayed behind in the command module (C) .

Only the crew portion of the command module returned

to Earth at the end of the journey.

Trajectory

A

C

B

Earth

Moon

Rendezvous

After a 385,000-km voyage,

Command Service Module rotates

and docks with Lunar Module

4

Saturn V rocket

THIRD STAGE

Single J-2 engine boosts

craft into Earth orbit, from

where Trans Lunar Injection

(TLI) burn increases spacecraft’s

velocity close to Earth’s

escape velocity of 40,320 km/h

SECOND STAGE

Five J-2 engines burn for

six minutes, lifting craft to

176km at 25,182 km/h.

Fuel: Liquid hydrogen,

liquid oxygen

FIRST STAGE

Five F-1 engines, powered

by RP-1 (refined kerosene)

and liquid oxygen, lift Apollo

spacecraft to height of

67.6 km in just 168 seconds

IVAN SEMENIUK, murat yükselir

and john sopinski/the globe

and mail, sources: nasa;

natIonal air and space

museum; graphic news

The Apollo program was an unprecedented U.S. achievement that engaged scientists and engi-

neers from around the world. Among them were many Canadians, including some who played

key roles in shaping the effort to land humans on the moon.

Jim Chamberlin

Owen Maynard

Born in Kamploops,

B.C., he was chief of

technical design for the

Avro Arrow, Canada’s

trailblazing interceptor

jet. When the Arrow

was cancelled in 1959,

he was snapped up by

NASA along with more

than a dozen Avro

engineers. Within

NASA, he was a key

supporter of the “lunar

orbit rendezvous”

approach

to landing on the moon,

which required the

development of a lunar

module.

A Sarnia, Ont., native, he

was another former Avro

engineer who arrived at

NASA and soon found

himself playing a leading

role in the nascent U.S.

space program. After

overseeing the develop

ment of the lunar

module, he headed up

Apollo’s systems engi-

neering division, which

was tasked with making

sure all of the various

components of the

complex system were

able to work together

Radar

antenna

S-Band

antenna

Ascent

stage

RCS

thrust

nozzle

Entrance

hatch

Landing

gear

Lunar module

Height:

6.7 metres

Descent

stage

Diameter:

9.4 metres

Weight (Earth launch):

14,061 kilograms

Landing

pad

Héroux Machine Parts Limited: Now called Héroux-Devtek, the Longueuil, Que., company special-

izes in aircraft landing gear. It built the legs on the lunar module’s descent stage, six sets of which

remain on the moon to this day.

Lunar orbit rendezvous

Each Apollo mission involved a single launch that put both a command module and lunar

module in Earth orbit along with a three-man crew (A). The modules travelled together on a

three-day flight to the moon (B). Once in orbit around the moon, the lunar module separated

to bring two crewmembers down to the surface while one stayed behind in the command

module (C) . Only the crew portion of the command module returned to Earth at the end of

the journey.

A

C

B

Trajectory

Earth

Moon

Rendezvous

After a 385,000-km voyage,

Command Service Module rotates

and docks with Lunar Module

4

Saturn V rocket

THIRD STAGE

Single J-2 engine boosts craft into

Earth orbit, from where Trans Lunar

Injection (TLI) burn increases

spacecraft’s velocity close to Earth’s

escape velocity of 40,320 km/h

SECOND STAGE

Five J-2 engines burn for six minutes,

lifting craft to 176km at 25,182 km/h.

Fuel: Liquid hydrogen, liquid oxygen

FIRST STAGE

Five F-1 engines, powered by RP-1

(refined kerosene) and liquid oxygen,

lift Apollo spacecraft to height of

67.6 km in just 168 seconds

IVAN SEMENIUK, murat yükselir

and john sopinski/the globe and mail

sources: nasa; natIonal air and space

museum; graphic news



Editor’s note: A previous version of this story stated that India's first lunar lander was launched in June.

Join science reporter Ivan Semeniuk and a panel of experts for a live discussion about Canada’s future on the Moon, this coming Monday at 7 p.m. (ET) at The Globe and Mail Centre in Toronto (free for subscribers). Register at tgam.ca/experiences.



Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...