|
Author
|
Topic: New Reason for Apollo 7 Grumpy Crew?
|
garymilgrom
Member Posts: 1966
From: Atlanta, GA
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 04-09-2007 09:54 AM
   
With all due respect to Wally Schirra, one of my original heroes and the only man to ride an Atlas, Titan and Saturn booster - there is no doubt about the bravery and commitment shown by Wally!It is well known that Apollo 7 had a somewhat reluctant or grumpy crew that was not eager to follow the ever increasing demands of the ground crew. The reason for this is often cited as sinus pain due to colds the crew suffered in orbit. On page 175 of the book Tracking Apollo to the Moon, the author states that Wally was very concerned his crew not be launched into an onshore wind because the Block 1 couches used on his flight would not fully protect the crew on a land landing. The book goes on to say Wally's Saturn 1B was launched into a 20-knot easterly wind. I quote "From that moment Schirra was very angry - a potentially life-threatening rule had been broken right at the start of the mission." The author does not mention the exact rule broken - which is opposite to the writing for the launch of Apollo 12, where he states " ... in defiance of Mission Rule 1-404, which said no vehicle shall be launched in a thunderstorm, the huge Saturn ..." So - does anyone know if there was indeed a rule against launching into onshore winds? Thank you. Gary Milgrom |
FFrench
Member Posts: 3165
From: San Diego
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-09-2007 10:00 AM
Wally talks about that in this interview:
www.collectspace.com/news/news-022202a.html |
Michael Davis
Member Posts: 530
From: Houston, Texas
Registered: Aug 2002
|
posted 04-09-2007 10:58 AM
The Apollo 7 episode of "From the Earth to the Moon" (1998) also details the wind speed launch rule and why it was waived. |
SpaceHillbilly
New Member Posts:
From:
Registered:
|
posted 05-08-2007 10:50 PM
I've read this before and I'm pretty sure it was in "Schirra's Space."I think Wally (the greatest spacecraft pilot ever) thoroughly covers the whole "grumpy crew" deal in his book. |
VolMan
Member Posts: 11
From: Atlanta, GA USA
Registered: May 2007
|
posted 05-14-2007 07:17 PM
Also, I wonder of Wally was having an on-going "nic fit". I believe Wally was a smoker. His previous two flights were short term (9 hours and 1.5 days approx) compared to his 11 days in A7.Combine the winds at liftoff issue, the ongoing requests from the ground, the colds, the nic fit, being in the can for 11 days, Wally knowing this is his last flight - well that would lead to a tense situation. The crew and the mission was great. 3 perfect flights for Wally, so no pun intended at him. Did all that stuff lead to the crew not flying again, I am not 100% sure of that. Wally was retiring, I have been told that Walt could be grating on his associates, and Eisle just did not show the zeal to get himself another rotation. I do not think they were high on Deke's list to start and A7 and the other did not help them. Deke appears to have given guys a fair shot a things - a good boss. I am open to other opinions. The "nic fit" thing is often not mentioned, and I think it was a big contributor to things IMHO. |
garymilgrom
Member Posts: 1966
From: Atlanta, GA
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 05-15-2007 04:54 PM
VolMan - you make some excellent points. Thank you for your thoughts. Regards, Gary Milgrom |
FFrench
Member Posts: 3165
From: San Diego
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 05-17-2007 11:45 AM
To put this speculation into a bit more perspective, you may wish to read the eulogy that Walt Cunningham publicly released today on his home page:
www.waltercunningham.com and particularly the section: "The importance of this critical mission, as well as accomplishing all of the mission and test objectives is sometimes lost in the discussion of colds in space and television camera schedules. No one should ever forget that Wally’s last spaceflight was described as '101 percent successful'." In addition, the point you raised had already been suggested, and disproved, in this thread:
http://collectspace.com/ubb/Forum38/HTML/000441.html Wally gave up smoking in January 1968, long before the mission. There's no need to look for medical reasons for what were, in Schirra's opinion, valid operational concerns to raise. Schirra was quite comfortable - even happy - to explain and defend his actions. |
garymilgrom
Member Posts: 1966
From: Atlanta, GA
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 05-17-2007 12:31 PM
Thank you Francis for this information.Coincidentally I am sitting outside enjoying a warm spring day in the Southeast and I'm just finishing your book Into That Silent Sea - it doesn't get much better than this! |
ejectr
Member Posts: 1758
From: Killingly, CT
Registered: Mar 2002
|
posted 05-17-2007 12:37 PM
He was a Navy man. A Captain in rank, but more than that, the Captain of his vessel. I've been stationed aboard many types of ships and water craft that were commanded by people other than those with the rank of Captain, but still, you addressed them as "Captain". They are in command. Wally, being a Naval aviator was also used to being "pilot in command" of his aircraft the moment he sat in it. Naval aviators, unlike Air Force pilots are not under the direction of some AWACS aircraft orchestrating the strike. In the Navy, it was and is each aviator's responsibility to accomplish their mission using any resource they deem necessary to do so. We used to say aboard the carrier I was on, "you have to go out...you don't have to come back". He was "Captain" of his ship and his command was law. Right or wrong, it was law for that ship and the people aboard. It was his responsibility to see that the vessel performed its mission to the best of his crew's ability using his best judgement in use of the resources given him without the outside intervention of others. He did that just like he would have flown his fighter or commanded an aircraft carrier had his dream came true. What the world saw and heard was not grumbling and testiness, but a highly trained Naval officer doing what he was charged to do by the United States of America and it's Congress when he accepted the commission that was given him. |
FFrench
Member Posts: 3165
From: San Diego
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 05-17-2007 01:11 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Gary: Coincidentally I am sitting outside enjoying a warm spring day in the Southeast and I'm just finishing your book Into That Silent Sea - it doesn't get much better than this!
I'm delighted to hear that you have enjoyed it so much. As it relates directly to this thread, I should mention that the second book, out in the summertime, has a chapter about Apollo 7 with a great deal of input from Schirra, Cunningham, and both wives of Donn Eisele. We look at many of these stories, assumptions etc., plus a lot of never-before-told stories. Schirra and Cunningham were both VERY frank in their interviews with us, and I think it will be an illuminating read for many about this often-overlooked flight. And, of course, we are so glad we were able to talk to Schirra on the record like this in time.
Edited by FFrench |
garymilgrom
Member Posts: 1966
From: Atlanta, GA
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 05-17-2007 01:45 PM
ejectr thank you for those interesting comments. I have no military background and appreciate the distinctions you posted.Francis I have pre-ordered that book too. Please send me a PM when you have a moment. Thanks.
Edited by garymilgrom |
Glint
Member Posts: 1044
From: New Windsor, Maryland USA
Registered: Jan 2004
|
posted 05-17-2007 03:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by SpaceHillbilly:
I've read this before and I'm pretty sure it was in "Schirra's Space."
I thought the exact same thing. Wonder if that book author footnoted it as a reference. As I recall Wally didn't give book, chapter, and verse for the rule. But he was still plenty miffed over it years later when he wrote about it.
Edited by Glint |
advertisement