The mechanics of cancelling Apollo

[12oh2alarm]

Maybe mechanics is not the right word, but as a physicist I like to think in terms of causes and effects.

We all know that initially there were plans for at least three more manned landings, Apollos 18 through 20, parts of which ended up being used in the Skylab and ASTP missions.

The big picture is politics and economics. No doubt about it. But what about the paper trail? Did the President's science advisor tell NASA to drop it? Did congress simply cut the NASA budget in half and the NASA administrator had to figure out what projects to cut down or cancel? What speech or document could be considered the beginning of the end of Apollo? If something of a plausible and documented chain of events could be demonstrated, it might provide a thorough answer to the hoaxer meme of Why didn't we go again? For the same reason it was cancelled: cost. And here's where it all began...

[bknight]

I don't think one can put a end point to Apollo.  More a series of acts starting with the march on Cape Canaveral the day that A11 launched.  That brought into focus, I believe, that the countries priorities were not in beating Russia to the moon, as this would be completed very soon.  But that those in Congress were not willing to continue funding a large program when the Great Society beckoned funds as well as the Vietnamese war. 
I think it might have been be stated by Frank Borman in a NOVA(?) documentary, where he stated the "Americans weren't interested in exploration, but they were damn interested in beating the Russians".
So in a way the program died of success.

[mako88sb]

So in a way the program died of success.

How many more missions would of went ahead had Apollo 13 ended in tragedy? I'm assuming Apollo 14 would of still gone but I have my doubts about the rest.

[bknight]

How many more missions would of went ahead had Apollo 13 ended in tragedy? I'm assuming Apollo 14 would of still gone but I have my doubts about the rest.

Interesting speculation, but since we have history both shuttle disasters the program probably would have endured a hiatus before being completed, IMO.

[smartcooky]

How many more missions would of went ahead had Apollo 13 ended in tragedy? I'm assuming Apollo 14 would of still gone but I have my doubts about the rest.

Interesting speculation, but since we have history both shuttle disasters the program probably would have endured a hiatus before being completed, IMO.

Yes.

The Apollo 1 fire didn't stop them, and I don't think that if Apollo 13 had gone the other way, that it would have stopped them either.

[bknight]

Interesting speculation, but since we have history both shuttle disasters the program probably would have endured a hiatus before being completed, IMO.

Yes.

The Apollo 1 fire didn't stop them, and I don't think that if Apollo 13 had gone the other way, that it would have stopped them either.

Of course, how careless of me to forget those 3 valiant guys.  RIP Gus, Ed, Roger

[mako88sb]

How many more missions would of went ahead had Apollo 13 ended in tragedy? I'm assuming Apollo 14 would of still gone but I have my doubts about the rest.

Interesting speculation, but since we have history both shuttle disasters the program probably would have endured a hiatus before being completed, IMO.

Yes.

The Apollo 1 fire didn't stop them, and I don't think that if Apollo 13 had gone the other way, that it would have stopped them either.

Well, I think the fact that public interest had already started to wane considerably by Apollo 13 is why I'm not sure if the program would of lasted past Apollo 14. I realize that there was little chance for a rescue in orbit if a shuttle experienced a serious problem but most people tend to think of them as safer compared to the trip to the moon and back.