Author
|
Topic: Apollo 13: Evaluating the CMP crew swap
|
Explorer1 Member Posts: 235 From: Los Angeles, CA, USA Registered: Apr 2019
|
posted 04-08-2020 04:53 AM
When Jack Swigert was substituted for Ken Mattingly as command module pilot (CMP) on Apollo 13, Jim Lovell insisted on seeing how well Swigert performed on the command module simulator before he would approve of the switch. Swigert obviously performed well enough for Lovell. But with just two days to go before launch, how quickly was it established that Swigert was good enough for the mission? Also what if Swigert had not performed to Lovell's satisfaction, did Lovell indicate he wouldn't fly the mission if he wasn't satisfied? |
Rick Mulheirn Member Posts: 4253 From: England Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-08-2020 07:08 AM
If I am not mistaken, the "new" crew spent two full days in the CM simulator immediately prior to launch. Two days it would seem was sufficient for Lovell to evaluate Swigert. As mission commander, Lovell would have had the authority to pull the plug if he was not happy. Who knows what might then have happened? The flight could have been pushed back a month to give them more time but by that time Mattingly would probably have been available. But I have heard concerns were expressed over the flight readiness of the spacecraft had the flight been pushed back a month. The vehicle would likely have been taken back to the VAB and "recycled." |
NavyPilot Member Posts: 49 From: Registered: Nov 2015
|
posted 04-08-2020 12:38 PM
I wouldn't think that the issue at hand was readiness or capability. Lovell had the counsel and endorsement of Young, Swigert's backup commander, which is no small deal given his judgment and experience.The issue more likely was integrating into the habit patterns, idiosyncrasies and tempo of an established crew that had been doing things a certain way for months. I was taught early on in my flying career the difference between procedures and techniques. So I would think that Lovell as commander needed to assess and tweak how Jack's technique (ways and styles) worked within the paradigm that already existed. Imagine that Mattingly always answered a specific critical prompt cue with a certain word or phrase — how did Swigert respond? Under stressful stimuli and temporal pressure, those kinds of things matter — a lot. |
Fra Mauro Member Posts: 1670 From: Bethpage, N.Y. Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 04-08-2020 02:27 PM
Would Lovell have the power to say he couldn't fly with Swigert and have the launch pushed back a month? Plus the high cost of recycling the mission. Highly doubtful. |
Rick Mulheirn Member Posts: 4253 From: England Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 04-08-2020 04:05 PM
In a very good 50th anniversary documentary I stumbled across earlier today a month long delay was very much a possibility. May 9th was named as the next launch date. But the cost of recycling the vehicles for such a delay was estimated at $800,000. That would certainly have been a consideration for management at least.And with public interest in the moon landing waning the delay would not have done NASA any PR favors. |
Kevmac Member Posts: 280 From: College Station, TX Registered: Apr 2003
|
posted 04-08-2020 11:15 PM
I listened today to Podcast Episode #1 of 13 Minutes to the Moon: Apollo 13 version. Fred Haise was interviewed and said the crew was in the simulator the evening before the launch running procedures. If you haven't listened to this BBC series, you're missing out on an excellent review of the missions. Apollo 11 was last summer and was fantastic with many of the principals interviewed recently or from past times. |
Delta7 Member Posts: 1571 From: Bluffton IN USA Registered: Oct 2007
|
posted 04-09-2020 08:51 AM
At the time of Apollo 13, lunar landing missions were scheduled up to Apollo 19. Considering Deke Slayton's crew rotation system, Ken Mattingly could have been in line to serve as backup commander of Apollo 16 then commander of Apollo 19. (Mattingly, Pogue and Carr?). Has there ever been any mention of this? If true, it would have made getting bumped from Apollo 13 a doubly bitter pill for Mattingly to swallow.And had Apollo 13 been successful, would Swigert have been considered as Apollo 16 backup commander/Apollo 19 commander? |
Blackarrow Member Posts: 3205 From: Belfast, United Kingdom Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 04-10-2020 08:31 AM
quote: Originally posted by Delta7: And had Apollo 13 been successful, would Swigert have been considered as Apollo 16 backup commander/Apollo 19 commander?
If that had happened, Jack Swigert would have had that "Gordo feeling" and would have been asking Deke Slayton, "What did I do wrong, boss?" Slayton doesn't discuss such hypotheticals in "Deke" but if Apollo 13 had succeeded, I can see no reason why Slayton would have departed from the usual rotation system for Apollo 16. The fact that Swigert was good enough to switch from back-up CMP to CMP on Apollo 13 strongly indicates that in your hypothetical scenario he would have been considered the perfect CMP for Apollo 16 and I'm sure Deke would not have deprived him of his well-earned seat to the Moon in favour of the chance of an Apollo 19 mission which, even before the shock of Apollo 13, was looking very dicey. |
perineau Member Posts: 276 From: FRANCE Registered: Jul 2007
|
posted 08-26-2020 12:28 PM
In the film "Apollo 13," we see Lovell being forced to choose between scrubbing Mattingly or being bumped himself along with his crew to another mission. Did that ultimatum really happen or was it just artistic license?Editor's note: Threads merged. |
Fra Mauro Member Posts: 1670 From: Bethpage, N.Y. Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 08-26-2020 12:54 PM
According to his autobiography, Lovell made the case for keeping Mattingly and when it was decided to replace him, that was it. Perhaps it was implied or known that if it was unacceptable, then the crew wouldn't fly, but there was no line-in-the sand moment. Artistic license to let the audience understand it better. |