posted 07-15-2010 05:08 PM               

Who commands Apollo 13? Cooper? McDivitt? (assuming Lovell sticks with Apollo 14).

posted 07-19-2010 07:08 AM               

What if Al Shepard had the operation to cure his Meniere's earlier, and, say, was returned to flight status in early 1967? Would Deke have assigned him to command the first lunar landing (as he had originally planned for Grissom)?

Shepard would basically have had at least 2 years to train. The early command slots were already taken (Schirra/McDivitt/Borman/Stafford/Conrad.) And I'm pretty sure he would have set his sights on it.

I think there would have been a very good chance that Deke would have told Al the mission was his, and would have put together and announced the whole crew at the appropriate time.

posted 07-19-2010 07:14 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by cddfspace:
Who commands Apollo 13? Cooper? McDivitt? (assuming Lovell sticks with Apollo 14).

---

posted 08-02-2014 12:01 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by WAWalsh [in 2004]:
The only obvious crew selection that requires scrutiny is Apollo 14. Yanking Gordo out of the flight rotation and jumping Alan Shepard back to the front of the line is inconsistent with all prior crew selections.

---

Further to that argument, can anyone really say that Shepard "bumped" anyone who should have been in that CDR seat? He paid his dues more than enough to earn a shot to command a lunar mission. Going down the list:

• Schirra - Retired after 7.
  
• Eisele - was never in consideration.
  
• Borman - by Chaikin`s account, had 11 offered to him, but did not want it.
  
• Lovell - CDR of 13. Got his lunar mission.
  
• McDivitt - Despite rumors that he refused to crew with Shepard, moved on to an office gig after 9.
  
• Scott - Got his lunar mission on 15.
  
• Stafford - Flew on 10 and certainly would have been given a CDR seat on a lunar landing mission if he had wanted it.
  
• Cernan - CDR of 17.
  
• Young - CDR of 16.

Don't get it.

On edit: And, as has been mentioned here, Shepard had nothing to prove to anyone serving as a backup, and no matter what his name was, he wasn't getting a CDR seat on a lunar mission if everyone — not just his buddy Deke - at NASA wasn't fully convinced he'd fly a good mission. And he did. So really that puts that argument to bed. 14 may not have been a perfect mission, but it was a good one and more importantly, put the program back on track and gave NASA three more shots at the moon.

posted 08-02-2014 06:22 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by calcheyup:
So who, exactly, actually WANTED a lunar mission in the CDR seat, "deserved" it more than America's first in space, and didn't get it on account of Shepard pulling rank and jumping to the front of the line?

---

posted 08-02-2014 07:44 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by moorouge:
Would crew selections have been any different had the Russians got there first?

---

posted 08-02-2014 09:21 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by RichieB16:
I don't think the issue was so much that he got a lunar command, it was that he was immediately put to the head of the rotation.

---

quote:

---

You are right, he had nothing to prove to management by serving on a backup crew, but he did have something to prove to the other astronauts. He should have been given a backup CDR roll and then later commanded a missing. History would have worked out the same with probably the exact same people walking on the moon, just in a different order.

---

As for proving it to his colleagues, he had up having no problem doing that on 14.

posted 08-02-2014 09:59 AM            

Shepard absolutely did use his position and influence to strongarm to the front of the line. But even had Al Shepard not been Al Shepard (with regards to his personality), I have a hard time believing NASA would have made their first astronaut (regardless of whether it was Shepard) begin at the back of the line and possibly miss a lunar command altogether with missions being cancelled.

posted 08-02-2014 10:10 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by calcheyup:
While I can agree that naming Shepard CDR of Apollo 14 would be "inconsistent," Shepard didn't bump Cooper. Going by rotation, Cooper would have been in line to be CDR of Apollo 13, not 14...

---

Why? Because Deke named Shepard as CDR of Apollo 13, not 14. And NASA HQ said "no" because they did not believe (and rightly so) that he would have enough time to train for the mission.

Realistically, what probably should have happened is Shepard should have been backup CDR on 13, then rotate to prime crew on 16. That was one of the big reasons to have backup crews in the first place: the backup crew got some priority in the sims, which allowed them to train for a future mission (or to take over if needed).

Presumably, Lovell would have remained (with Haise and Mattingly) on Apollo 14 ... or, depending upon who else would be in the pipeline, Lovell's crew still might have moved up to prime on 13 and a different crew selected for 14.

There are simply too many moving parts to be able to work out how the dominoes would have fallen if Shepard had not stepped in when he did. But, if Shepard had been backup on 13, he would have gone to the moon with a rover on 16 and spent a lot more time there. Shepard got preferential treatment because he had the political clout to do so, and he used it. Plain and simple.

Interestingly, if Shepard had not been prime on 14, then Gene Cernan may have been the odd man out in the rotation. Cernan may well have not gotten the backup CDR slot on 14 if Shepard were not the prime crew CDR. And without the backup assignment on 14, he would have had no chance to command 17 (which perhaps would have been commanded by Dick Gordon?). Of course, in that course of events, Cernan likely would have accepted the LMP slot on Apollo 16 (would this have even been offered absent the Apollo 14 backup CDR slot?). Who knows?

posted 08-02-2014 10:22 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by capoetc:
However, there is solid evidence that NASA management did not feel that he had enough time to adequately train to command a mission in time.

---

I'm just saying that any doubts and skepticism from anyone - that a pilot of Al Shepard's caliber, given appropriate time to familiarize himself with the spacecraft and train, couldn't command a good lunar mission is just hogwash.

quote:

---

Realistically, what probably should have happened is Shepard should have been backup CDR on 13, then rotate to prime crew on 16.

---

posted 08-02-2014 01:50 PM               

It was all about using his political power to cut the line -- he was stepping on others' toes, he knew it, and quite frankly he just didn't care. Good for him, it was a game of hardball and he played the game better than anyone.

And there really is no reason why you wouldn't put Shepard "a heartbeat away" from the command on Apollo 13 -- if the need arose, then they would make the decision as to whether to elevate Shepard, elevate Shepard and slip the mission, or just slip the mission until Lovell was ready.

Do you think that, if Stafford had broken his arm a week before Apollo 10 NASA would have given Cooper command of Apollo 10? I don't. Interesting to think of what they would do ... my guess is they either would slip the mission or swap the 11 and 10 crews (more likely -- they really wanted to land on the moon by Dec 1969, and wanted enough time for at least 2 tries if possible). Now that I think of it ... if Stafford had gotten injured or worse prior to Apollo 10, with the known concerns that NASA HQ had about Cooper's readiness to step in, it might have really thrown a wrench into the works!

posted 08-02-2014 03:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by capoetc:
I really don't understand why you keep talking about speculation that Shepard couldn't handle a lunar mission. I've never heard of anyone saying anything like that. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I've just never heard that criticism.

---

And really, why even bother having a backup crew if you would never use the backup? Having someone that can step into the role for a mission is more important than getting a guy you have no intention of using some sim time. Do you really think NASA says "Hey Deke, if anything goes sour for Lovell you can't use him, and you won't have a replacement and the mission will be pushed,but name Shepard backup CDR so he can get into the rotation and get experience for a command later on"? To me that seems absolutely ridiculous!

posted 08-02-2014 04:46 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by calcheyup:
You need look no further than this very topic to find comments stating that Shepard somehow had "something to prove" to his fellow astronauts when he got 14.

---

posted 08-02-2014 05:36 PM               

Whereas 10 years ago, there was a segment of the community that openly questioned Shepard's command abilities, that view has diminished over the past decade. I think most agree today that he was a more than capable commander.

posted 08-02-2014 05:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by capoetc:
I agree that Cooper would have done a fine job. The question is, did NASA HQ think so at the time?

---

posted 08-02-2014 06:28 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by capoetc:
The question is, did NASA HQ think so at the time?

---

What I am finding amusing are the statements here that Shepard was so unbelievably capable that he had some moral right to jump the line. There were half a dozen astronauts in the program in 1969 who were better qualified to command a lunar landing and whose flying skills, program management accomplishments and pure test pilot experience were superior to Shepard's: Borman, McDivitt, Conrad, Armstrong, Stafford and Young. And several of these (and not just these) were highly critical of Slayton's original assignment of Shepard as A13 commander.

posted 08-02-2014 08:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Cassutt:
What I am finding amusing are the statements here that Shepard was so unbelievably capable that he had some moral right to jump the line.

---

To wit: although I personally don't think it was as big of a deal as it was made out to be, nobody here is arguing Shepard was just SO GOOD that he got to jump the line. Shepard, while a first-rate pilot, jumped the line because he was America's first in space and had connections with people who mattered at NASA. His ability to do the job is a conversation that came about independently from the merits of how he got a command in the first place. You've mashed these points together, in improper order I might add, to create an argument that doesn't exist.

As a matter of fact, I do understand and respect the viewpoint that Shepard shouldn't have "cut the line." I don't necessarily agree with it completely, but nor do I think Shepard had a "moral right" due to his flight experience to do what he did and have never stated as such. The fact is Shepard DID do it, and everything that happened afterwards and because of it is what we are discussing here.

Hopefully I've clarified that.

quote:

---

There were half a dozen astronauts in the program in 1969 who were better qualified to command a lunar landing and whose flying skills, program management accomplishments and pure test pilot experience were superior to Shepard's: Borman, McDivitt, Conrad, Armstrong, Stafford and Young.

---

• Borman: didn't want a lunar mission or he could have had 11.
  
• McDivitt: went to the office after 9.
  
• Conrad and Armstrong: Landed on the moon before Shepard so why they are even in the conversation right now is completely befuddling.
  
• Young: Got his own (better, I might add) lunar mission.
  
• Stafford: Certainly would have been given command of his own lunar landing mission had he wanted it. EDIT: Cut out the part about the LM incident on 10. No need to go there.

posted 08-02-2014 10:07 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by calcheyup:
I guess because he didn't fly for 10 years apparently made everyone forget that, in NASA's mind, this guy was the best pilot they had. Better than Grissom. Better than Schirra (whose praises are sung on high in every thread here, deservingly so). Better than Cooper. Better than anyone in the second group that wasn't chosen as part of the 7. So why it would be a surprise to anyone that Shepard would fly a good mission is sort of baffling to me.

---

posted 08-02-2014 10:34 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Cassutt:
Perhaps my reading comprehension isn't what it was. Or perhaps there's another explanation.

---

Specifically, I was referencing the comment that after Shepard's selection to command a lunar mission, that he had "something to prove" to the other astronauts, and the implication that it was surprising Shepard flew as good a mission as he did. Which is where I diverge from the script completely; to me, no matter how much one may dislike his personality, it's outlandish to think that a pilot and astronaut of Alan Shepard's caliber couldn't, given familiarity and training with the Apollo spacecraft, command a successful lunar mission (and he did). And my point sort of with that comment was that Shepard was not some also-ran that showed up off the streets; this guy was a top of the line pilot and astronaut. So no matter what you think of how he got command of a lunar mission, the guy was among the best of the best and had nothing to further prove to anyone in my opinion before commanding an Apollo flight.

As for Shepard's assignment partially leading to McDivitt taking an office job, I will take your word for it. But let's be honest here — if Jim McDivitt really wanted to walk on the moon, there's no way he was going to let Al Shepard being named CDR of 14 stop him.

posted 08-03-2014 10:31 AM               

Apollos 15 and 19 have not been cancelled and Mike Collins has accepted command of the J-2 Apollo 17. What would you do about Gene Cernan? Remember that he turned down the LMP slot on John Young's upcoming J-1 Apollo 16 mission.

posted 08-03-2014 10:39 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Delta7:
And before Shepard became available. That's when the discussion changed to McDivitt serving as Shepard's LMP and McDivitt said no thanks.

---

posted 08-04-2014 12:28 PM            

But it's not odd that some astronauts would be annoyed with him being made Commander without doing a backup rotation. Nobody likes anyone who cuts in front of a well established line. Can't say that Shepard's pulling of rank to put himself as Commander of 13 is admirable, particularly as it indirectly caused Lovell and Haise to miss their shot at walking on the Moon.

quote:

---

Originally posted by capoetc:
Of course, in that course of events, Cernan likely would have accepted the LMP slot on Apollo 16 (would this have even been offered absent the Apollo 14 backup CDR slot?). Who knows?

---

posted 08-06-2014 08:22 AM               

While we can speculate all we want about who would have been better, Slayton's plan wasn't just for the upcoming mission or two, it was for 2 and 3 years beyond that. I don't know this for a fact, but I think that's probably where he started his crew selection process and worked his way backwards from there.

As for Shepard, it's not so surprising that he'd want to get a flight as soon as possible after returning to flight status. He was after all, the oldest astronaut and I'm sure he wanted to get his flight out of the way before he became grounded again. As for his training, as Chief of the Astronaut Office, his job was to train astronauts for flights. He knew the routine better than anyone since he designed the training. He also kept up with the training while grounded. It wasn't like he jumped into Apollo 14 from nothing. He'd been much more than a backup for the 8 years prior to his Apollo 14 flight.