NOVA; To the Moon; Interview with David Scott, astronaut and commander of Apollo 15, part 3 of 3

Did Jim Irwin's heart problems start on the moon? Well, I don't really don't know where they started, but during our lunar expedition, if you will, why Jim's water bag inside his suit, there was a kink in the line so he couldn't get any water while we were outside. And even though the suits are comfortable and the temperature is fine, it's still very hard work, moving these suits around, doing the work you have to do with the alcephan drills and things like that. So Jim got dehydrated, fortunately we got back in the limb each day. He could sort of recoup, get his water level back, and I didn't really pay much attention to it. Neither did he. In fact, nobody knew that there had been these anomalies until we get back on the earth because nothing was really said while we were there. So I think it's still undetermined as to whether or not Jim's experience in a moon contributed to his heart failure. And in fact, I haven't been able to get anything from NASA that's definitive.

If you read the books, if you read the reports, there was a problem on the moon, but nobody has really stepped up to see whether or not it caused problems later on. So I don't think anybody really knows. Do you think that, are you proud of what the J-Missions accomplished? That's one question, but the second question is, did we accomplish it enough? Did we leave too soon, David? Well, I think the J-Missions were marvelous missions, and I think, again, the boldness of NASA management to press on and conduct the J-Missions, I think, is remarkable when you look back and see what goes on today. It's a bold stroke, and we took it to the edge, as I mentioned, we stretched the rubber band as far as it could go, and I guess, in my opinion, that was as far as we probably should have stretched it in. And the reason is, at some point, you have to stop fallback and regroup and take the next long step, because we'd stretched the Apollo system as far as it could go. We could have run more missions, but in historical perspective, gosh, it's only been 30 years. That isn't long.

When you look at the major explorations in history, there are hundreds and 200 years between the major events. So we're regrouping now. We're learning about what we learned on the moon, we're learning about how we live in space and how we might hopefully go on to Mars, or better yet, go back to the moon. So in my opinion, I think the program went just about to where it should have gone. It was 100% successful. Everybody did a great job. Everybody got home, and was time to take the next step. Interesting. Yeah, okay. Just cut. Anything else? I think that pretty much got it. David, should we go back to the moon? Absolutely. And I think the next step, the major next step, will be to Mars. But I don't think we're going to go to Mars until we go back to the moon, because the moon is such a wonderful place to learn how to explore in space, to learn planetary field geology, if you will, and also to test people to see how well they can perform in a hostile environment.

It's a hostile environment. So I think we'll go back to the moon, hopefully soon, and that will be the stepping stone to hopefully go on to Mars soon, I don't know, 50 years, 100 years, 200 years. But whatever will bring something together to make it happen, like the Apollo program. All the events, all the unique events that happen, the people involved, everybody from Kennedy to Korolev to Vaughn Brown. All these things came together at the right time, and we are able to go to the moon. Hopefully, all these things, such things will come together again, and then not to a distant future, and we'll get on back. Well, Gene Schumacher was early on, the principal investigator for Apollo 11, and he was a great geologist. In fact, I remember being in the field early on with him, and his explanation of cratering, which was pretty much against the grain at the time. He was sort of a lonely voice, but he was right down along.

But actually, Gene left before anything really took place geologically from an astronaut's point of view. And I think he triggered NASA's thinking by virtue of the fact that he resigned because NASA wasn't listening to him, and that he said that the astronauts on a moon should be like experiments. They should be tools. They should be taught to go out and explore like geologists rather than just pick up rocks. So when Gene left, I think it stimulated NASA's interest in doing something different. Fortunately, they put out bids for principal investigators in Gordon Swan and Bill Mulberger I for the H and the J missions, and they're two highly skilled geologists, and they brought in the rest of the team. So I think Schumacher really just was a catalyst, but in terms of the actual geology that took place on the J missions in particular, because we had so much more time. There's pretty much after Gene had left. But at the end of the day, you know, you've still around even working on Clementine.

I mean, he was a lunar geologist through and through, a geologist everywhere, and did a great job. Just a great guy, and it's too bad we lost him. Okay. Terrific. Okay. Thank you.