Landsat and Apollo: The Forgotten Legacy

Paul D. Lowman, Jr.

Abstract This paper demonstrates that Landsat was fundamentally a result of the Apollo Program. The U.S. Geological Survey's EROS proposal of 1966, which eventually led to Landsat, was stimulated largely by the demonstrated utility of 1100 orbital photographs from the Gemini missions, Gemini being solely preparation for Apollo. In addition, Earth-oriented remote sensing research sponsored by NASA in the mid-1 960s, pri- marily support for Apollo lunar missions, included studies of Earth resource applications as well. Finally, the extensive se- ries of airborne remote sensing studies carried out by the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center was Apollo-derived in that the primary mission of MSG was to accomplish a lunar land- ing. It is concluded that, had i t not been for the Apollo Pro- gram, Landsat or its equivalent would have been delayed by 10 years or more.

As it recedes into history, the Apollo Program is increas- ingly regarded as a heroic effort, but one that did little more than put flags and footprints on the Moon. There is virtually no realization that one of Apollo's most fundamental results, too important to be trivialized as "spinoff," was the Landsat Program. Two recent reviews of Landsat's history (Lauer et al., 1997; Mack and Williamson, 1998) make little or no mention of Apollo, although Mack's (1990) earlier treatment briefly summarized the impact of Gemini photography. These and similar publications, such as Vincent's (1997) authorita- tive remote sensing text, give a misleading impression of how Landsat actually arose.

The purpose of this note is to set the record straight for the remote sensing community, for more reasons than simple historical accuracy. The Apollo Program was in its day widely criticized by scientists, including several Nobel laureates, on the grounds that unmanned spacecraft would be just as effec- tive and far less expensive. Future space efforts may be handicapped by this still-widespread view, typified by the recent statement of French space minister Claude Allegre, criticizing the International Space Station, that he was una- ware of any important scientific discovery made by an astro- naut (Space News, 22-28 June 1998).

The case for Apollo as a key element in Landsat begins with the statement by the late W. T. Pecora (1969), that Landsat's precursor concept, the Earth Resources Observation Satellite (EROS) program of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), was "conceived in 1966 largely as a direct result of the dem- onstrated utility of Mercury and Gemini orbital photography to Earth resource studies." A contemporary review of satel- lite imagery in this journal (Merifield et al., 1969) devoted its first six pages to the "superb" Gemini and Apollo 70-mm photographs. A similar paper, by a U ~ G S geologist (Fary, 1967) argued for EROS, illustrating its value with several ''magnificent" Gemini photographs. However, the link be- tween EROS and Apollo is a complex one, needing further discussion.

The American manned space program began with Pro- ject Mercury in 1958. On the last two Mercury missions (MA-

8 and MA-~), the pilots (W.M. Schirra and L.G. Cooper) carried out hand-held 70-mm terrain photography for geo- logic purposes (O'Keefe et al., 1963), suggested by P.M. Meri- field on the basis of his analyses of sounding rocket photography (Merifield and Rammelkamp, 1964). With a long (22-orbit) mission, Cooper had the opportunity to obtain 29 70-mm color photographs, chiefly of southern Asia. These photographs, backed by Cooper's seemingly incredible visual observations, were one of the main scientific results of Pro- ject Mercury (Lowman, 1965). They were displayed at a 1964 UNESCO remote sensing conference in Toulouse, triggering world-wide interest, and termed by the late W.A. Fischer "the high point of the meeting." The Mercury program ended with the MA-9 mission in 1963, but the Mercury pho- tographs led directly to the SO05 Synoptic Terrain Photogra- phy Experiment (Lowman, 1969), carried on the two-man Gemini flights beginning in 1965.

It is at this point that the link between Apollo and Land- sat emerges clearly. The Gemini Program, started after Presi- dent Kennedy's 1961 proposal for a lunar landing, was an intensive effort to develop the technology and operational techniques for lunar missions. Despite its separate designa- tion, and the supeficial resemblance of the Gemini space- craft to the Mercury capsules, Gemini was an integral part of Apollo. It produced a broad technological infrastructure and extensive experience in orbital rendezvous and extravehicu- lar activity. However, the Gemini astronauts also carried out a wide range of scientific experiments, one of them synoptic terrain photography. On the first long (4-day) mission, J.A. McDivitt and the late E.H. White took, among others, a series of 39 overlapping near-vertical color pictures from Baja Cali- fornia to central Texas (Lowman et al., 1966). All ten Gemini missions, except the aborted GT-8, produced photographs useful for geology, geography, or oceanography, eventually totaling about 1100 (Lowman, 1969a; Lowman, 1980). Many are unsurpassed to this day (Figure I), possibly because the Earth's atmosphere in areas such as Brazil is not as clear as it was before deforestation began.

Published wideIy, in magazines such as the National Ge- ographic (Lowman, 1966) and Life, the Gemini color photo- graphs generated international interest in the potential appli- cations of orbital imagery of the Earth's surface (Lillesand and Kiefer, 1994), as distinguished fiom satellite meteorol- ogy, where the value of orbital sensors had already been demonstrated. It should be emphasized here that, until the mid-1960s, there was virtually no appreciation of the scien- tific and environmental applications of orbital terrain imagery. For example, "Long Range Thinking in Space Sciences," an internal NASA document published in October 1960, al- though outlining investigations of the Earth's atmosphere, magnetic fields, and mass distribution, said nothing about

Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, Vol. 65, No. 10, October 1999, pp. 1143-1147.

Goddard Space Flight Center (Code 921), Greenbelt, MD 20771 (lowrnan@denali.gsfc.nasa.gov).

0099-1112/99/6510-1143$3.00/0 8 1999 American Society for Photogrammetry

and Remote Sensing

PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING 81 REMOTE SENSING October 1999 1143

Figure 1. Gemini 12 photograph S-66-63082 (original in color); view to east over the Zagros Mountains (left), Strait of Hormuz, and Makran Range. Persian Gulf at lower right. From Lowman and Tiedemann (1971).

man, 1996). Starting in 1963, a wide range of remote sensing studies was carried out with the support of NASA Headquar- ters under the leadership of P.C. Badgley (Lowman, 1980; Mack, 1990). Badgley coordinated remote sensing efforts for Apollo missions then being planned (Friedrnan et al., 1964), in particular, Earth-orbital Apollo Extension System (AES, later Apollo Applications Program) missions that, in effect, were eventually flown as Skylab. (He also encouraged the USGS EROS proposal.) The Earth-orbital and aircraft missions were viewed as precursors to later lunar missions (Figure 3), the terrestrial test sites being chosen for their similarity to lu- nar terrains as well as for purely terrestrial applications. The remote sensing programs developed by Badgley and his col- laborators were thus an integral part of Apollo.

A similar Apollo parentage can be shown for the Earth- oriented remote sensing programs of the NASA Manned Spacecraft Center (MSC) (now the Lyndon B, Johnson Space Center), starting in the early 1960s. MSC was, of course, the lead center for the Apollo lunar landing program (as well as the Gemini missions), but it also carried out a broad program of remote sensing research using a fleet of aircraft with a va- riety of sensors. MSC was responsible for Skylab with its complement of remote sensing instruments, the eventual re- alization of AES as mentioned above. The point is that the Manned Spacecraft Center was built solely as the result of the decision to go to the Moon; without Apollo, there would have been no MSC.

It should be added that the MSC contribution to ERTS continued after the period with which this paper is primarily concerned (Amsbury, 1989; Kaltenbach, 1969a; Kalatenbach, 1969b). The unmanned Apollo 6 mission carried a fixed 70- mm camera that produced excellent stereo pairs in color

the study of the planet's surface from orbit. The Mercury over the southwest U.S. and Africa. The Apollo 7 crew car- photographs began to remedy such omissions, but it was the ried out an extensive terrain photography Program with a va- sudden flood of high-resolution color photographs from Gem- riety of films and filters, returning about 200 photos useful ini that gave orbital remote sensing a jump start, so to speak, for geology. What has been called the ''most important ter- In particular, they stimulated the EROS proposal. rain photography" (Colwell, 1997) was the SO65 experiment

Electronic imaging from space had been carried out on Apollo 9 in 1969. Using a set of four coaxially mounted since 1960 by various meteorological satellites beginning 70-mm cameras, astronauts McDivitt, Schweikart, and Scott with the Tires series. In 1966 RCA, who had supplied the Ti- S U C C ~ S S ~ ~ ~ ~ Y carried Out a returned-film simulation for ERTS

ros television cameras, approached the terrain photography (Lowman, 196913)- In addition to producing many geologi- experimenters at Goddard Space Flight Center with the pro- cally useful pictures, the So65 experiment provided a proof- posal to use the Return Beam Vidicon (RFJV) camera on a sat- of-conce~t for ERTS. In summary, the Apollo Program not ellite to produce high resolution imagery for geological and only provided the initial stimulus for ERTS, through EROS,

related purposes. Preoccupied with the hundreds of color but continued to produce valuable experience in orbital re- photographs from the Gemini missions (Lowman a d Tiede- mote sensing up to and beyond the first E~~s/Landsat launch mann, 1971), the GSFC group referred the RCA representatives in l972. to W.A. Fischer. Already a world leader in aerial photogra- An obvious question arises at this point. Given the rapid phy and "remote sensing" (then a new term), Fischer real- progress in remote sensing during the mid-1960s, would not ized the value of an electronic Earth resources satellite. He Landsat or its equivalent have been developed anyway, and W.T. Pecora, with the cooperation of the Office of Naval sooner or later? Research and the Department of Agriculture, in the following The writer's answer is: Yes, but very much "later," not months produced the EROS proposal, originally based on the "sooner." As pointed out previously, from 1963 on NASA RBV. However, the Gemini photographs (Figure 2) were used was planning orbital remote sensing programs for later repeatedly by the USGS and NASA to justify what eventually Apollo missions, and for eventual space stations. Some of became the Earth Resources Technology Satellite, later Land- these were carried out succesfully on Skylab, as the Earth ~ sat. The original ERoS Interior Department press release (21 Resources Experiments Package (EREP). However, the Apollo September 1966) included three Gemini 70-mm photographs, Program was stopped in 1975; the successor to Skylab was and subsequent displays such as Figure 2 featured many consigned to the Smithsonian Museum; and the International more. Congressional testimony by NASA, the Interior Depart- Space Station will not be operational until the next century, ment, and other officials similarly included Gemini pictures. almost 20 years after initially proposed by President Reagan. The generous acknowledgment cited above by W.T. Pecora is The sudden emergence of the small electronic Earth re- thus documented by the Geological Survey's own publications. sources satellite concept clearly short-circuited a long and

The Apollo-Landsat connection would be demonstrable uncertain development sequence, just as Fred Singer's even without the Gemini photography. Although focussed MOUSE (Minimum Orbital Unmanned Satellite of Earth) by- primarily on a lunar landing, the Apollo Program included a passed the large space station concepts of the early 1950s substantial effort in Earth resource remote sensing, an aspect (Newell, 1980). However, it took a "long fight," in Mack's of Apollo often neglected in the technical literature (Low- (1990) term, for Landsat to become an approved program.

1144 O c t o b e r 1999 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING 81 REMOTE SENSING

I

I - I Fig\ 2. Display prepared by A. Csonl . . J.S. Geological Survey, 1967; figures and text supplied by P.D. Lowman. (Note: City of Kerman is in Iran, not "West Pakistan.")

There was intense opposition to it from all sides, starting with objections of the Budget Bureau to any new NASA pro- grams. It was argued, for example, that high-altitude aircraft could do the job as well as a satellite for much less money. Political objections were raised as to the legality of photo- graphing foreign countries from space without their pennis- sion. Even after the first Landsat launch, the phrase "solution in search of a problem" was occasionally heard. All these obstacles arose in spite of the spectacular success of the Gemini and Apollo Earth-orbital photography. Without these photographs, proponents of Earth resource satellites would have had to rely chiefly on air photos, spectral reflectance curves, and persuasion.

Another question should be answered briefly: Even with- out Apollo, would not imagery from military reconnaissance satellites have been put to civilian uses? The best answer to this is simply the fact that, even after some 20 years of suc- cessful orbital sensing by Landsat, SPOT, ERS-1, and other satel- lites, it was not until 1995 that photographs from the CORONA program, which began in 1960, were declassified (McDonald,

1997). Without Landsat, it is likely that we would be waiting for such declassification, or for a civilian "CORONA," well into the next century.

Goward (1989) has described Landsat as "one of the greatest scientific achievments of the latter twentieth century - a continuous, consistent, quality record of the continental surfaces of the Earth, dating from 1972." It seems clear that this achievment would have been delayed at least 10 years had it not been for the Apollo Program. Given the rate of en- vironmental destruction, such a delay might have had disas- trous consequences.

As and when launched in 1972, Landsat was a major part of the Apollo legacy, a tribute to the skill and dedica- tion of the astronauts, and a striking example of the seren- dipity of space exploration.

Acknowledgments The basic purpose of this paper is to document the contribu- tions of the people of the Apollo Program, and to that extent the reference list is a blanket acknowledgment. However, in

PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING O c t o b e r 1 9 9 9 1145

POSSIBLE MANNED SCIENTIFIC MISSIONS

Figure 3. Proposed sequence of Earth orbital, lunar, and planetary missions (from Badgley (1964)).

SCIENTIFIC MISSIONS 1970-74 1975-79 1980-84 11985-

EARTH ORBITAL 1. EARLY MANNED ORB ITAL

RESEARCH FLIGHTS

2. SMALL MANNED ORBITING RESEARCH LABORATORY

3. MEDIUM SIZED MANNED ORB lTlNG LABORATORY

4. LARCEOBSERVATORYAND RESEARCH LABORATORY

LUNAR

1. INITIAL SURVEY AND LANDING

2. EXPLORATION

3. EXTENDED EXPLORATION APPLICATIONS, AND OPNS. -

PLANETARY I 1. INITIAL SURVEY i

AND LANDING

A f 3 SURF TRAVEI

A C S ORM FISH

LtSA OR SIMILAR DIRECI SUPPLY SYSltN -

F L Y LANDlR '

preparing this paper, I have benefited from reviews, corre- spondence, or discussions with Dave Amsbury, Don Beattie, the late Herb Blodget, Bob Colwell, Pat Dickerson, John Kal- tenbach, Bill Muehlberger, Vince Salomonson, Herb Tiede- mann, and Lou Walter.

Lowman, P.D., Jr., 1965. Space photography - A review, Photo- grammetric Engineering, 31(1):76-86. - , 1966. The earth from orbit, National Geographic, 130(5):644- 671.

, 1969a. Geologic orbital photography: Experience from the Gemini Program, Photogrammetria, 24:77-106.

, 1969b. Apollo 9 Multispectml Photography: Geologic Analy- sis, X-644-69-423, Goddard Space Flight Center, 53 p.

, 1980. The evolution of geological space photography, Remote Sensing in Geology (B.S. Siegal and A.R. Gillespie, editors), John Wiley, New York, pp. 91-115.

, 1996. T plus twenty-five years: A defense of the Apollo Pro- gram, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, 49:71-79.

Lowman, P.D., Jr., J.A. McDivitt, and E.H. White, 11, 1966. Terrain Photography on the Gemini N Mission: Pre l imina~ Report, NASA TN D-3982,15 p.

Lowman, P.D., Jr., and H.A. Tiedemann, 1971. Terrain Photography from Gemini Spacecraft: Final Geologic Report, Goddard Space Flight Center, X-644-71-15, 75 p.

Lillesand, T.M., and R.W. Kiefer, 1994. Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation, Third Edition, John Wiley, New York, 750 p.

Mack, P.E., 1990. Viewing the Earth: The Social Construction of the Landsat Satellite System, MIT Press, Cambridge, 270 p.

Mack, P.E., and R.A. Williamson, 1998. Observing the Earth from space, Exploring the Unknown, Vol. 3 3.M. Logsdon, editor), SP- 4407, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washing- ton, D.C., pp. 155-177.

McDonald, R.A., 1997. CORONA: Success for space reconnaissance, a look into the Cold War, and a revolution for intelligence, Pho- togrammetric Engineering S. Remote Sensing, 63:689-720.

Merifield, P.M., and J. Rarnmelkamp, 1964. Photo Interpretation of White Sands Rocket Photography, Report No. 2, Contract NAS5- 3390, Lockheed California Company, 76 p.

Amsbury, D.L., 1989. United States manned observations of Earth before the Space Shuttle, Geocarto International, 1:7-14.

Badgley, P.C., 1964. The application of remote sensors in planetary exploration, presented at the Third Annual Remote Sensing Con- ference, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Colwell, R.N., 1997. History and place of photographic interpreta- tion, Manual of Photogmphic Interpretation, Second Edition (W.R. Philipson, editor), American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, pp. 3-47.

Fary, R.W., 1967. Explorers from space, Journal of Geological Educa- tion, 15:99-104.

Friedman, J.D., R.J.P. Lyon, D.A. Beattie, and J. Downey, 1964. Lunar ground data required for interpretation of AES orbital experi- ments, Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 20:381-392.

Goward, S.N., 1989. Landsat 1989; Remote sensing at the crossroads, Remote Sensing of Environment, 28:3-4.

Kaltenbach, J.L., 1969a. Science Screening Report of the Apollo 7 Mission 70mm Photogmphy and NASA Earth Resources Aircraff Mission 981 Photography, NASA Tech. Memo X-58029.

, 1969b. Science Report on the 70mm Photography of the Apollo 6 Mission, NASA Tech. Note S-217.

Lauer, D.T., S.A. Morain, and V.V. Salomonson, 1997. The Landsat Program: Its origins, evolution, and impacts, Photogrammetric Engineering 6. Remote Sensing, 63(7):831-838.

1148 October 1999 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING

Merifield, P.M., J. Cronin, L.L. Foshee, S.J. Gawarecki, J.T. Neal, R.E. Stevenson, R.O. Stone, and R.S. Williams, Jr., 1969. Satellite im- agery of the Earth, Photogrammetric Engineering, 653654468.

Newell, H.E., 1980. Beyond the Atmosphere: Early Years of Space Science, Special Publication 4211, National Aeronautics and Space Adminstration, 497 p.

O'Keefe, J.A., L. Dunkelman, S.D. Soules, W.F. Huch, and P.D. Low- man, Jr., 1963. Observations of space phenomena, Mercury Pro- ject Summary, Including Results of the Fourth Manned Orbital

Flight, Special Report 45, National Aeronautics and Space Ad- minstration, Washington, D.C., 445 p.

Pecora, W.T., 1969. Earth resource observations from an orbiting spacecraft, Manned Laboratories in Space (S.F. Singer, editor), Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 75-87.

Vincent, R.K., 1997. Geological and Environmental Remote Sensing, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 366 p.

(Received 12 August 1998; accepted 10 September 1998; revised 03 November 1998)

PLAN TO ATTEND THESE UPCOMING ASPRS CONFERENCES:

PECORA 14lLAND SATELLITE INFORMATION Ill 2000 ASPRS ANNUAL CONFERENCE "Demonstrating the Value of Satellite Imagery" May 22-26, 2000

December 6-10, 1999 Omni Shoreham Hotel Doubletree Hotel Denver Washington, DC

Denver, Colorado See page 1220 for more information See page 1134 for more information

2001 ASPRS ANNUAL CONFERENCE April 23-27, 2001

St. Louis, MO

LE,T'S RETIRE THE ASPRS BUILDING FUND BEFORE THE NEXT MILLENIUM!

REMEMBER: YES, I want to help ASPRS retire the Building Fund by the end Your contribution to the ASPRS

of the year!

O Enclosed is my contribution of $25. 0 Enclosed is my contribution in the amount of $ 0 1 want to pledge $ in 1999. Please invoice me.

METHOD OF PAYMENT: Check 0 Visa O Mastercard Make checks payable to "ASPRS Building Fund." Checks must be in US dollars drawn on a US bank.

Account Number: Exp. Date:

Signature:

Name:

Address:

Address:

City, State, Postal Code, Country:

Telephone: Membership #:

Building Fund is deductible as a charitable contribution for federal income tax purposes to the extent provided by law. ASPRS is a 50 1 (c)(3) non-profit organization.

ASPRS BUILDING 54 10 G R ~ ~ V E N ~ R

1 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING October 1999 1147