StMU Research Scholars

Featuring Scholarly Research, Writing, and Media at St. Mary’s University

November 8, 2017

“Houston, we’ve had a problem”: Apollo 13

The Apollo 13 lunar expedition suddenly turned into a survival mission when an explosion risked the lives of the crew, but turned out to be a successful failure. Before we examine the remarkable success accomplished by NASA, let’s travel back to the beginning of the mission. The main objective of Apollo 13 was to performed a lunar expedition. However, the crew encountered unexpected outcomes throughout the trip. The adventure of Apollo 13 lasted 143 hours and began on April 11, 1970, in Cape Kennedy, Florida. At 2:13 p.m., Apollo 13 was heading to the moon and its respective mission, when it experienced an explosion, then malfunctions, and subsequently doubts of ever making it back home alive.

Apollo 13 launching from Kennedy Space Center | Courtesy by NASA

During the first two days of the mission, the crew ran into minor surprises. But everything was looking as if Apollo 13 was the smoothest flight of NASA’s so far. A message came by Joe Kerwin, the capsule communicator, after 46 hours and 43 minutes, saying, “The spacecraft is in real good shape as far as we are concerned. We’re bored to tears down here.” That would be the last time somebody mentioned the word bored for a long time.1

At 55 hours and 46 minutes the crew finished a TV broadcast on how comfortable they were and that everything was fine in space. Nine minutes after the TV broadcast, a massive explosion occurred inside the spacecraft, causing a loss of electricity, light, and water. After the explosion, Apollo 13 was about 200,000 miles from Earth. The message was transmitted to Earth at 9:08 p.m., April 13, with the famous phrase, “Houston, we’ve had a problem.” James Lovell, the commander, told the ground that the main breaker was undervolted.2

The explosion left the crew in very bad shape, as they lost two of three fuel cells, which were the spacecraft’s prime source of electricity. Thirteen minutes after the explosion, Lovell saw through the window the final evidence of the catastrophe. “We are venting something out into the … into space,” Lovell reported to Houston. As Capcom Jack Lousma replied, “Roger, we copy you venting.” Lovell said, “It’s a gas of some sort.” The substance venting out was oxygen gas escaping at a high rate from the second and last oxygen tanks.3

An hour after the explosion, mission control sent a message, “we are now looking toward an alternative mission, swinging around the Moon and using the lunar module power systems because of the situation that has developed here this evening.” The crew was instructed to move to the lunar module, which would now be used as a lifeboat, and turn off completely the command module for re-entry. Meanwhile, the damaged Apollo 13 swung around the moon. The idea of landing on the moon was no longer an option for NASA. It was now a rescue mission.4

The crew and ground control were confronted with two problems to solve. First, getting the spacecraft and crew on the fastest route back home. Second, conserving consumables, power, oxygen, and water. The conservation of consumables began by shutting down the command module, which was only used as a bedroom. They also turned down all the systems in the lunar module, except for those required as life support, communication, and environmental control. For the first issue, after a great dealing of calculations and simulations at the Mission Control on Earth, they concluded that the Lunar Module’s engines could handle the requirements. Thus, the engines were fired to boost their speed another 860 fps, cutting the flight time by 10 hours.5

Apollo 13 emblem | Courtesy by NASA

Finally, Apollo 13 rounded the Moon and began its journey back home. However, the problems were not entirely eradicated. The re-entry procedure required two more corrections. One was to align the spacecraft more towards the re-entry route. Moreover, the second issue was to fine tune the angle of entry, which had to be between the narrow range of 5.5 and 7.5 degrees. As the shuttle lacked power, the crew was forced to determine the altitude of the spacecraft manually. Normally the procedure would be routine; however, they experienced difficulties during the process, because the explosion had caused them to be surrounded with debris. Subsequently, they could not observe star sights, so the altitude of the shuttle became challenging to estimate. Mission control gave the answer to use the same strategy Apollo 8 used, in which the sun would be used as the alignment star.6

Just short of four hours before re-entry, Apollo 13 ejected the damaged Service Module. As the Service Module move away, Apollo 13 was able to see the damage. Two and a half hours before re-entry, Apollo 13 brought the command module back to life. As the system turned on, everyone aboard and at Mission Control, and around the world, had a sigh of relief. An hour later, the Lunar Module was also ejected. Mission control send a message, “Farewell, Aquarius, and we thank you.”6

The Apollo 13 Command Module carrying Jim Lovell, Fred Haise, and Jack Swigert, touch the Pacific Ocean on April 17, 1970 at 1:07 p.m. EST. Forty-five minutes later, USS Iwo Jima, recovery ship, came and brought the crew aboard. After 142 hours 54 minutes 41 seconds, Apollo 13 returned to Earth. The survival mission ended up being a successful failure, as nobody died and all came back to Earth alive from an almost impossible mission 200,000 miles from home.

  1. Office of Public Affairs, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Apollo 13: “Houston we’ve got a problem,” Washington: Library Catalog, 1970.
  2. Encyclopedia Britannica, s.v. “Apollo 13”, last modified September 7, 2017, https://www.britannica.com
  3. Michael S. Rosenwald, “’Houston, we have a problem’: The amazing history of the iconic Apollo 13 misquote,” The Washington Post, April 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com.
  4. Nick Greene, “Apollo 13: A Mission in Trouble,” ThoughtCo., (2017). https://www.thoughtco.com.
  5. Encyclopedia Britannica, s.v. “Apollo 13”, last modified September 7, 2017 https://www.britannica.com .
  6. Nick Greene, “Apollo 13: A Mission in Trouble,” ThoughtCo., (2017). https://www.thoughtco.com.
  7. Nick Greene, “Apollo 13: A Mission in Trouble,” ThoughtCo., (2017). https://www.thoughtco.com.

Recent Comments

Josselyn Arrieta-Meraz

Such an informative and well written article about such the astonishing catastrophe of Apollo 13. I was aware of such event but never actually knew whether the brave astronauts made it back safely, which now I know and I’m glad they did. To think that the mission of Apollo 13 was in the 70’s makes it seem like such a long time although it isn’t. These man made shuttles do not guarantee what we wish we they would, sometimes there’s trial and error but because of such we are able to learn and improve for the future.

reply

09/11/2017

8:27 am

Morghan Armenta

I cannot even begin to fathom how difficult it most of been to manually calculate the degree of entry under the conditions they were in. The strength and intelligence of these individuals is impressive and although this article did use a lot of NASA jargon in parts of the story, I felt as though I understood the story for the most part.

reply

09/11/2017

8:27 am

Samman Tyata

Great article! Your article successfully provides the catastrophe of Apollo 13. What I found amazing is that, though the circumstances were bad, the engines were still fired to boost their speed. It was upsetting to read that the mission experienced an explosion with the doubts of never making it to Earth alive. To sum it up, it was an informative and a good read.

reply

09/11/2017

8:27 am

Maria Callejas

First of all, great title choice! It gives a great and brief preview of what you will talk about. The only prior knowledge I had about Apollo 13, was the Hollywood version of the incident, directed by Ron Howard. Great usage of quotes, specifically when you wrote that what Joe Kerwin said, about them being “bored”. Your sentence structure and style is great, I felt I was on the edge of my seat the whole time. (For example, when you described how they realized they were losing oxygen). It is amazing to see how NASA and the astronauts prevented what would have been a tragedy. Great work!

reply

10/11/2017

8:27 am

Michael Mandujano

What influenced me most to read this article, was its clever title: “Houston we’ve had a Problem: Apollo 13.” Prior to reading this article, I was familiar with Apollo 13 being a mission, but I had no idea of its intent nor the mishap that occurred during this Lunar expedition. Considering the malfunctions that had occurred on this mission, it is promising that no one was injured nor killed. Overall, the author conducted a very well-structured and interesting article.

reply

10/11/2017

8:27 am

1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply