|
Author
|
Topic: Apollo command module pilots: flight status
|
moorouge
Member Posts: 2458
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009
|
posted 01-24-2015 01:01 AM
   
In the early days of Apollo it was NASA policy not to leave a 'rookie' in charge of the command module by himself.At some point between Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 this policy obviously changed. Does anyone have a date for this switch in policy and why it was made? |
Michael Cassutt
Member Posts: 358
From: Studio City CA USA
Registered: Mar 2005
|
posted 01-24-2015 12:36 PM
The date for the change in policy is late March 1969. Dave Scott's experience on Apollo 9 proved that the CMP training syllabus could prepare a "rookie" astronaut for the job. Worden was then assigned as the Apollo 12 backup CMP, with Mattingly put into the training flow as shadow A13 backup CMP a month later. |
Lou Chinal
Member Posts: 1332
From: Staten Island, NY
Registered: Jun 2007
|
posted 01-24-2015 01:49 PM
Wasn't Mattingly on the prime crew for Apollo 13 and Swigert the back-up? They had to switch a few days before the launch. |
Michael Cassutt
Member Posts: 358
From: Studio City CA USA
Registered: Mar 2005
|
posted 01-24-2015 02:24 PM
Sorry, my bad: Mattingly was shadow CMP for Apollo 11 in April 1969, before rotating to prime on 13. |
RobertB
Member Posts: 168
From: Israel
Registered: Nov 2012
|
posted 01-24-2015 10:48 PM
Was there anything in particular that Dave Scott did to show that "rookies" could pilot the CM? Or was it simply a matter of "the cookbook is good enough after three flights"?He wasn't a rookie himself, after all.  |
calcheyup
Member Posts: 125
From:
Registered: May 2014
|
posted 01-25-2015 12:40 AM
To me there's no reason why, at any point, a rookie would be flat out unfit to serve any position on an Apollo crew. These guys that were chosen were all intelligent and talented enough that, given adequate training resources and time, would be capable of learning and almost certainly excelling as a CMP or LMP.As for CDR, it goes without saying, that position ideally involves a certain skill set of intangibles and experience. Whereas a the other two positions could pretty much be completely trained for, CDR would involve a lot of things you can't teach. Not all men are leaders of men, and not all men are capable of making the tough decisions. But Gemini proved that the right first-timers could do that successfully, as well, if need be. Obviously an Apollo flight was a totally different ball of wax, and the experience was there such that they didn't need to call upon first timers to command flights again, but I don't think it's a stretch to say men of McDivitt's or Borman's (for example) talents and character couldn't have pulled it off as rookies, again given the adequate training and resources. |
moorouge
Member Posts: 2458
From: U.K.
Registered: Jul 2009
|
posted 01-25-2015 03:04 AM
quote:
Originally posted by calcheyup:
As for CDR, it goes without saying, that position ideally involves a certain skill set of intangibles and experience.
I wonder how 'ideal' then it was to have Shepard as CDR of the '14' mission. That crew had the least experience of all the Apollo flights - about 15 minutes flight time in total between them. |
calcheyup
Member Posts: 125
From:
Registered: May 2014
|
posted 01-25-2015 10:46 AM
That discussion has been done to death. The only thing I will add is that it pretty much proves my point; that even with minimal space flight experience, the right guy could command a successful Apollo mission. |
Skylon
Member Posts: 277
From:
Registered: Sep 2010
|
posted 01-27-2015 12:27 PM
I don't think it would have been possible to have enough veteran CMPs to provide for Apollo's 13 onward anyway. Bill Anders elected to resign rather than fly as 13's CMP. Eisele, Cunningham and Schweickart were not deemed acceptable for lunar flights. That leaves Gene Cernan, who was pegged as an LMP until he was promoted to a CDR. Slayton likely knew he would have to eventually fly rookie CMPs. That said, experience has shown, that NASA has, when possible, desired as many veterans as possible for the big "firsts" in spaceflight. The first lunar module flights, the D, E, F and G missions were the paramount concern - each requiring a rendezvous in untested conditions. The requirement was more to have a veteran of a space rendezvous at the stick of the Command Module in case any unknowns cropped up. As noted, each mission achieved its objectives and the training proved sound. As for Command - I think that history has proven ideally a space crew should have at least one veteran crew member. I feel Schirra's call to not punch out of GT-6 during its abort was based on his prior experience riding a rocket on Mercury. The Skylab 4 crew I believe stated that flying as rookies may have put them at a disadvantage of approaching their work timelines. But yes, any trained rookie could probably pull of a space mission successfully, in any capacity. |
advertisement