[provost]

Yes, it was very incremental. They even sent the orbiter around the moon on a mission before even attempting to land. And there were a number of other tests (manned and unmanned), and even ones without an official Apollo designation.

More info: https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apollo.html

[LifeLiverTransp]

Sorry, but Apollo was a clash of german waterfall with american move fast and breaking things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun#NASA_career

I assume to have those two directions as two camps in your company, fighting each other generates the most optimal result. If you fail, the cautious camp wins and carefull analysis and slow methodic itteration become stronger.

If you win, the move fast team takes over and pushes towards new exploration data and scaling up towards new problem areas.

[mannykannot]

Pre-sputnik and pre-Gagarin, the US approach to space exploration was conservative, and my understanding is that Braun was pushing for a less cautious approach [1]. One issue was apparently a reluctance to lean too heavily on 'Nazi' technology. This caution contrasted with the US' approach to airplane development, which had a lot of moving fast and breaking things (and people.)

Ironically, if von Braun had got what he wanted then, there may have been no Moon race and no Apollo program.

[1] Angle of Attack: Harrison Storms and the Race to the Moon, Mike Gray, ISBN 978-0393325133

[acqq]

Before I get the chance to read the book, can you please explain in short what von Braun wanted that wouldn’t be a Moon race?

[mannykannot]

Von Braun wanted to send people to the Moon (and he really wanted to get them to Mars), but I am guessing that if the US had adopted his plan to orbit a satellite with a modified Redstone rocket, and done so before Sputnik, followed by the first human orbital flight, there might not have been the impetus for a Moon race, no Apollo, and no Moon landing in 1969 or any time soon after. This speculation, of course, depends partly on how the USSR would have responded to these developments.

[LifeLiverTransp]

Von Brauns push for additional testing prevented the first human in space from beeing american.

"After the flight of Mercury-Redstone 2 in January 1961 experienced a string of problems, von Braun insisted on one more test before the Redstone could be deemed man-rated. His overly cautious nature brought about clashes with other people involved in the program, who argued that MR-2's technical issues were simple and had been resolved shortly after the flight. He overruled them, so a test mission involving a Redstone on a boilerplate capsule was flown successfully in March. Von Braun's stubbornness was blamed for the inability of the U.S. to launch a manned space mission before the Soviet Union, which ended up putting the first man in space the following month.[citation needed]"

[mannykannot]

I guess the story is more complicated than generalizations will allow. It is rarely obvious when decisions made in good faith will come back to haunt you, as with the decision to give the Apollo command module a sturdy hatch that could not be quickly jettisoned. For everyone saying the Shuttle booster 'O' rings were in danger of failing, there was someone saying that they had been fine so far.

In the case of MR-2, was the schedule to have an orbital flight before what turned out to be Gagarin's day of destiny? The response to Glenn's flight leaves little doubt that, in the popular view, it is orbital flight that counts as being 'in space', and the start of the Moon race might have hung on that perception.

[provost]

> “Sorry, but..”

So are you refuting that the missions were incremental? Because if you look at the mission outcomes, they certainly were..