posted 06-15-2017 02:10 AM               

Imagine if 11 aborted due to the computer problems and it was determined that they should have been allowed to continue. I think the entire crew would have been knocking on Paine's door. The press didn't know of Paine's offer, but under the above circumstances, they would certainly have asked them if they would like to go back to the moon and try it again.

If Paine said "Sorry, I didn't really mean it," imagine the always outspoken Buzz Aldrin keeping silent. Would NASA really want the headlines that would result?

I doubt the astronauts would have done as Dick Gordon said and walked out. When Swigert replaced Mattingly, proper procedure was to replace the entire crew. No one squawked. Engle was replaced by Schmitt. Cernan and Evans didn't like it but they went along with it. Astronauts who would be shifted to a later mission would still keep their seats. Would they risk losing their flights? At the time of Apollo 11, not all of the crews had been assigned and I can't imagine unassigned astronauts would join Gordon. If assigned crews walked out, these guys would now have a chance at a flight.

My two cents says there would have been loud grumbles and the Apollo 11 crew would fly Apollo 12. It the 12 crew quit over this, then later flights would continue as assigned.

posted 06-15-2017 10:47 AM            

As you know, I've made it a practice to go down to the Cape and talk to the fellows before every mission in an informal way, just making sure that they don't have any possible reservation that they've hesitated to bring up with Deke [Slayton] or Chris [Kraft] or Bob Gilruth, Rocco [Petrone], Sam Phillips (in his day)- just to make sure that they know they have this channel. Nothing has ever been turned up in these meetings. I always made one other point with them, and that was to urge them to feel free at any time, if they didn't feel comfortable with the way the mission was progressing even if they couldn't put their finger on all the specifics, to feel very comfortable about aborting the mission. And I've assured them that in the event that they made a decision to bring the ship back prematurely, that if they then requested the opportunity to fly on another mission immediately afterwards — I won't say the next flight, but immediately afterwards-that I would see to it that we bent all the rules and gave them this opportunity.

posted 06-22-2017 01:18 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Headshot:
I interpret Paine's comments to mean that if Apollo 11 did not land, and the crew requested to be put back into flight contention, he would have them assigned not to Apollo 12, but to Apollo 13.

---

The Apollo 11 crew was going to get the first landing. Undoubtedly a big deal for any astronaut. Paine wanted them to be cautious, and not allow being first to overrule good judgement. If he offered them the second landing as compensation (Apollo 12 would get the first landing), and the first landing was actually as important to them as Paine thinks it may have been, this offer would have no effect on their judgement. Also, by bumping them to Apollo 13, they would have to put in another nine months of training before flying. Only re-assignment to Apollo 12 would accomplish Paine's good intentions.

Also, how do you justify the Apollo 12 crew keeping its launch date for no discernible reason, and every other crew getting pushed back six months or so?

If he was reassigned to 13, what a change that would have been for Neil's status. Three flights: three failed missions!

Imagine the delight of the "Neil-Knockers," e.g. Armstrong "screwing up" an X-15 flight by bouncing off the atmosphere during re-entry. As Bill Dana said, "The only reason this didn't happen to anyone else was because it happened to Neil first." They didn't think that would happen under those conditions. They learned, and it didn't happen again.

posted 06-22-2017 03:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by taneal1:
Also, how do you justify the 12 crew keeping its launch date for no discernible reason, and every other crew getting pushed back 6 months or so?

---

quote:

---

If you haven't read Bob Smith's evaluation of this event, then you only know Yeager's fabrication.

---

posted 06-22-2017 10:55 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by David C:
Easy, Kennedy's deadline.

---

If you put the 11 crew on 13, the crews after 11 are gonna be pissed that the 11 crew gets a 2nd try, AND because the 12 crew keeps their mission when everyone else is delayed. There's no reason to put the 11 crew on 13 instead of 12, so why add fuel to the fire?

quote:

---

The program wasn't being run for the individual glory of astronauts.

---