posted 06-26-2011 09:49 AM               

Once in he seemed to be able to get on with just about anyone which probably helps and in spite of the well documented mishap was a very competent astronaut.

posted 06-26-2011 10:31 AM               

Gene wanted to command his own mission. It seems to me that the ultimate prize in the Apollo program was walking on the Moon. To do it as commander would, at most, be icing on the cake. Cernan took an enormous risk here. Slayton's first choice to back-up commander for Apollo 14 was Michael Collins. Collins turned it down because he wanted to retire from the Astronaut Corps altogether. If Collins took the job, Cernan would probably have never walked the Moon.

Deke Slayton's three mission rotation was not written in stone. For example, he did not follow it with Gordo Cooper and Donn Eisele. The back-up crew for Apollo 15 was Gordon, Brand and Schmitt. Schmitt replaced Joe Engle as LMP on Apollo 17 because he was a geologist. Why not rotate the entire Apollo 15 back-up crew to being the prime crew of Apollo 17? Cernan said in his own book that if Schmitt had to fly the logical thing to do was to keep a well trained crew together. Furthermore, Richard Gordon, in addition to having not helicopter crash on his record, was the most experienced test pilot in his group. In fact, he was more experienced as a test pilot than some members of the next nine. Cernan was not a test pilot at all. Vance Brand was a test pilot and Ronald Evans was not. Jack Schmitt was not a test pilot. However, he became at least an adequate pilot of both Fixed-wing jet aircraft and helicopters and he knew the LM inside and out. Joe Engle was an outstanding test pilot, but Cernan himself said the he was not up to speed on the LM's systems. Schmitt was and was a geologist.

Both Gordon and Cernan had one Gemini mission and one Apollo mission before Apollo 17. Their Gemini missions were similar. Cernan and Gordon both orbited the moon on Apollos 10 and 12 respectively. Cernan was LMP on 10, the dress rehearsal for the lunar landing. Gordon was CMP on 12 an actual Lunar landing. Slayton considered the job of CMP to be more difficult than LMP because the former was a solo pilot.

Gordon, Brand and Schmitt were a better crew than Cernan, Evans and Engle. Furthermore, even if one disagrees withe the preceding statement, Deke was forced to put Schmitt on 17. Why then not also put Gordon and Brand on?

I also do not like the way that Cernan bad mouths other astronauts. For example, several times in his book he strongly criticizes Buzz Aldrin. Like Cernan, Buzz Aldrin was not a test pilot. However he was the most experienced non test pilot of his group. He even had combat experience. He shot down two MIG 15s in Korea. He also had a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering from MIT. He was more qualified than Cernan.

posted 06-26-2011 12:32 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Delta7:
And I always wondered why Cernan was picked for Gemini before Al Bean. The Stafford influence would explain it.

---

posted 06-26-2011 12:45 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tom:
Keep in mind, Al Bean was the first of his group to be named commander of a crew... albeit a back-up position.

---

posted 06-26-2011 12:55 PM               

Pete Conrad was Al Bean's "angel," and Tom Stafford was Gene Cernan's "angel."

posted 06-26-2011 01:07 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Delta7:
All the more reason why the fact that Cernan was chosen to fly Gemini over Bean is curious. Slayton apparently had a high degree of confidence in Bean (who was also Navy, so that angle doesn't explain it) to assign him to a command role. Again, I suspect the Stafford influence on the selection.

---

On the other hand, Stafford chose Cernan for that same reason.

posted 06-26-2011 01:17 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJS:
I also do not like the way that Cernan bad mouths other astronauts.

---

Public bad-mouthing at the time would have been detrimental to the program. But 30-40 years later, astronauts including facts and well-explained opinions about their colleagues in their memoirs just helps more completely tell the history of the space program.

Not every astronaut is portrayed as perfect in every book by another astronaut, but as long as pertains to the space program, so be it. I don't go looking for dirt in books by astronauts, but I'd also consider unreliable a book that was 300 pages of "And we were all the bestest of pals!"

posted 06-27-2011 10:26 AM               

Cernan did have an "angel" in Stafford. In turn, I'm sure he wanted Ron Evans on Apollo 17. How many of us have had someone look out for us in our jobs? As for his helicopter crash, one factor in keeping Cernan on Apollo 17 was that NASA didn't need any more bad publicity.

posted 06-27-2011 02:15 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DChudwin:
Pete Conrad was Al Bean's "angel," and Tom Stafford was Gene Cernan's "angel."

---

posted 06-27-2011 07:07 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by DJS:
In a way I do have an ax to grind. I feel that Dick Gordon was cheated. He was one of the Navy's best test pilots and he never turned down an assignment. Cernan was not a test pilot, turned down a LMP assignment, and recklessly crashed a helicopter. These things should have been taken into account when assigning the Apollo 17 crew.

---

Cernan certainly crashed a helicopter: so did at least two other astronauts in that era. There were many other violations of aircraft operating regs -- check out Walt Cunningham's book, which suggests (wrongly) that these were the rule rather than the exception. Zero zero takeoffs, failing to file flight plans, etc. etc. etc. Cernan had a public mishap... which, by the way, was investigated. Had he not been cleared, he wouldn't have been assigned.

quote:

---

Also, I feel that Cernan had irrational reasons for insulting some of his colleagues. Aldrin because he talked about rendezvous, Cunningham because he drove a Porshe instead of a Corvette, and Schweikart because he was an intellectual.

---

To go back to the original topic -- Stafford had no input into Cernan's selection aside from a single conversation with Slayton, which went like this: "Hey, how about Cernan as your pilot on the 9 backup crew?"

As to why Cernan and not, say, Bean... several reasons, most of them related to Slayton's growing perception, post Gemini 4 and White's EVA, that EVA was going to require a pilot who was in great physical condition. (That was the reason See was shifted from putative pilot GT-8 to commander GT-9; Slayton didn't think he was physically strong enough for the rigors of EVA.)

Cernan had performed well in his technical assignment (Apollo propulsion systems and Gemini-Agena). He personally got along with potential commanders... he, like Anders and Schweickart, was being groomed for an Apollo LM spot... and he did fairly well in the group's peer ratings (not at the top, but not in the bottom third).

We can never know the exact reason, but I'm fairly sure it's a combination of these things.

(And, yes, Al Bean would have been a good candidate, too, but Shepard had problems with Bean... hence his exile to AAP and other dismal jobs.)

posted 06-27-2011 07:20 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by carmelo:
John Young was the "angel" of?

---

posted 06-27-2011 11:19 PM               

Lots of astronauts were guilty of pilot error at one time or another. Granted, few were as spectacular as Cernan.

posted 06-28-2011 05:25 AM               

EVERY astronaut was human, risked their lives for their country and each was far from perfect, however, in Cernan's case he ensured his crew completed their final moon mission successfully with professionalism and much dignity.

posted 06-28-2011 10:19 AM               

Cernan chosen as an astronaut was maybe a surprise, he was no test pilot and he had not that much of a cv that some of the others in his group had.

But after he got selected he managed to get himself the grandest career of his group.

Of course faith played a big role but to say it is Bean's words: "We started all as equals but in the and Gene developed more and worked harder to become one of the very best."

posted 06-28-2011 04:15 PM               

So, for the original poster and others: we probably all have favorite astronauts, much as we have favorite athletes. It's human and fun and completely fair to prefer one to another.

DJS, you're not alone in wishing that Dick Gordon had gotten a lunar landing. You aren't even alone in looking at Gene Cernan's career with amazement -- I think it's fair to say that, from a baseline of January 1964, when the 1963 group reported to MSC, few would have predicted that young, non-test pilot Geno would tie Dave Scott for the most productive and visible astronaut career.

I just found the stated reasons to be either incomplete, outright incorrect, or plain unfortunate.

In evaluating an Apollo astronaut's career, one common failing for outsiders like us, looking back almost fifty years later . . . is to lean too much on original qualifications and experience at selection, and not performance on the job.

We are hampered in this, of course, because WE DON'T KNOW how people performed on the job -- not just the mission, but the year of training prior to the mission (how did the astronaut work with flight controllers in sims? with other astronauts? with MSC management on technical issues? with contractors?), the backup assignment before that, etc. etc. etc. Oh, yes, and flying skills and performance, and personal deportment.

More than that, we don't know what the gate-keepers, Slayton and to some extent, Shepard, were thinking -- or how their thinking about various individuals changed. (I was never able to ask Slayton why he went so sour on Ed White, for example... but he clearly did.)

We don't even know all the ins and outs of careers. You have "a problem" with Cernan because he "turned down" a backup LMP spot in hopes of getting command of a lunar mission. I don't get your "problem," but, okay:

Dick Gordon "turned down" Skylab in hopes of getting command of a lunar mission. Now, this was late 1969, early 1970, a year before the actual crew assignments were announced inside the astronaut office . . . but Pete Conrad, who was taking over Skylab at that time, was very clear to Gordon and Bean: if you want to get another flight, come to Skylab with me. Bean did; Gordon took the chance there would be an Apollo 18.

posted 06-28-2011 08:23 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Cassutt:
We don't even know all the ins and outs of careers. You have "a problem" with Cernan because he "turned down" a backup LMP spot in hopes of getting command of a lunar mission. I don't get your "problem," but, okay

---

posted 06-29-2011 09:54 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fra Mauro:
Don't forget that if Cernan flies 16, then Charlie Duke, a great guy, never gets his shot.

---

posted 06-29-2011 10:01 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by ejectr:
Like the old saying goes...it is what it is. You can wish it another way all you want, but it isn't going to change anything.

Cernan did all of us well. We couldn't have asked for a better last flight to the moon.

---