NASA backup crews

When Mattingly was pulled off of Apollo 13, the rest of the primary
crew remained. Up until then I had always heard that if a crew change
would have to be made, the whole crew would be changed (Gemini and
Apollo). Was that the policy? Why was it changed for A13?

I can see that the two LM guys have to work more closely together, so
that may be a factor.

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 11:37:15 -0400, Jan Philips wrote:

When Mattingly was pulled off of Apollo 13, the rest of the primary crew
remained. Up until then I had always heard that if a crew change would
have to be made, the whole crew would be changed (Gemini and Apollo).
Was that the policy? Why was it changed for A13?


I don't believe that there was EVER a set in stone policy for wholesale
replacement of the prime crew by the backup crew, in fact there's some
evidence that just the contrary is true.

Going back to the first time a US manned spaceflight needed crew
replacement, the ENTIRE backup crew was bypassed. When Deke Slayton was
grounded two months prior to his scheduled MA-7 flight, his backup was
Wally Schirra, but instead Scott Carpenter was substituted. Carpenter had
been Glenn's backup for MA-6, and at the time it was felt that his
training in that role made him better prepared for MA-7.

Lots of individual crew member shuffling happened, but not usually as
close to the flight, one example was the replacement of Mike Collins in
Frank Borman's crew by Jim Lovell, when Collins needed back surgery. This
happened prior to any manned Apollo flight.

In Gemini, the replacement of the entire crew of GT-9 was necessary
because, unfortunately, both prime crew members died in their T-38 crash.

As for the situation which arose when the Apollo 13 prime crew was exposed
to the measles. Deke Slayton's memoirs describe three options:

1) Replace the entire prime crew with the backup crew. Deke say's that
this was "pretty much out of the question." The prime crew was better
trained by far.
2) Just replace Mattingly with Swigert. The downside was that Swigert
hadn't trained very much with the rest of the crew, and so wouldn't be
able to communicate with them as efficiently. On the other hand, as you
point out, he would be flying much of the mission alone in the CM anyway.
3) Postpone the mission a month to let Mattingly get through the
incubation period. This wasn't considered much, if at all at the time,
because of the expense. In retrospect, Deke says that this might have been
the best option.


In fact Deke says this about the role of the backup crew while discussing
the situation on Apollo 13. "The Russians had always said that they
trained two pilots or crews for each mission and that neither one knew
until the last day which would fly. Bob Gilruth had wanted to do the same
thing with us back in Mercury, until he got talked out of it. And the
Russians hadn't done that in practice, either."
"The prime crew was just better trained, period. They had first demand on
simulators, on everything. The backup crew was basically there as
insurance in case of disaster, somebody getting killed in a plane flight
--- which had happened. You didn't want to have to postpone a mission for
several months." (Deke! p[p 256-7)

From reading this passage, it seems that the backup crew was always
viewed as a source of last minute replacement crew members, rather than as
a replacement crew.

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 13:59:50 -0400, Rick DeNatale
wrote:

I don't believe that there was EVER a set in stone policy for wholesale
replacement of the prime crew by the backup crew, in fact there's some
evidence that just the contrary is true.

My memory of what I saw on TV 30+ years ago is that they said that the
entire crew would be replaced if necessary. Of course my memory could
be wrong or the TV could be wrong.

Jan Philips writes:

When Mattingly was pulled off of Apollo 13, the rest of the primary
crew remained. Up until then I had always heard that if a crew change
would have to be made, the whole crew would be changed (Gemini and
Apollo). Was that the policy? Why was it changed for A13?

Well, my recollection is that Charlie Duke, backup Lunar Module
pilot, got the German measles, so he couldn't fly. And Ken Mattingly
had been exposed and was at risk; so they couldn't fly the entire prime
or the entire backup crew. The only choice was to match parts.

Joseph Nebus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From Joseph Nebus:
Jan Philips writes:

When Mattingly was pulled off of Apollo 13, the rest of the primary
crew remained. Up until then I had always heard that if a crew change
would have to be made, the whole crew would be changed (Gemini and
Apollo). Was that the policy? Why was it changed for A13?

Well, my recollection is that Charlie Duke, backup Lunar Module
pilot, got the German measles, so he couldn't fly. And Ken Mattingly
had been exposed and was at risk; so they couldn't fly the entire prime
or the entire backup crew. The only choice was to match parts.

Only? I'm sure that Ken would be quick to point out the option of
just flying him anyway.

The deepest significance to Ken from this decision has been lost to
subsequent events. But at the time, in 1970, Ken as CMP was due to
fly on Apollo 13 and then come back into the rotation in line to take
command of his own landing mission (Apollo 19 had not yet been
relegated to become a lawn ornament).

So when the flight surgeons had their way with the A13 crew, Deke
wasn't just telling Ken, "Hey, you'll just have to wait a bit longer
before you fly out and drone circles around the Moon." The message
Ken received those few days prior to launch was, "We're taking away
your chance to walk on the Moon."

So while subsequent mission cancellations eventually made this a moot
point (and not worthy of covering in the movie) the news must have
been devastating to Ken at the time.


This point was posted a couple of years ago. Here is another excerpt
from that thread:
------
Michael Cassutt:
"Slayton had a firm rule at that time (indeed, through the first
manned test of the LM) that any CMP, prime or backup, had to be
flight-experienced."

I believe the requirement was not just flight experienced, but
rendezvous experienced. And it was also a requirement for someone on
the LM to have rendezvous experience as well.

-snip-

"Rookie 14" is the only CSM/LM flight where there was no rendezvous
experience on either side. As is widely known, they were so
inexperienced that they had to switch Shepard's and Lovell's crews.
Here is the untold story: after being pushed up, Lovell is now faced
with the first flight where the primary CMP does not have rendezvous
experience. Oh, by the way, he is a rookie. Not nervous enough? OK,
we will swap him out a few days before launch with the backup rookie!
------
(Full thread at http://tinyurl.com/mkm2)


~ CT

"Stuf4" wrote in message
om...

The deepest significance to Ken from this decision has been lost to
subsequent events. But at the time, in 1970, Ken as CMP was due to
fly on Apollo 13 and then come back into the rotation in line to take
command of his own landing mission (Apollo 19 had not yet been
relegated to become a lawn ornament).

Well, he would have had a chance of being named to command Apollo 19, but so
did Fred Haise, it was not a certainty that Mattingly would get 19. It took
him out of the running, but Deke always intended to use LMPs Haise, Mitchell
and Irwin as CDRs of later flights if they were needed.

John

Well, he would have had a chance of being named to command Apollo 19, but so
did Fred Haise, it was not a certainty that Mattingly would get 19. It took
him out of the running, but Deke always intended to use LMPs Haise, Mitchell
and Irwin as CDRs of later flights if they were needed.

Possibly for later AAP flights. Fred Haise probably really would have gotten
the CDR slot on 19 because he had lost his shot to walk on the moon on Apollo
13. And since Deke seemed to regard him rather highly he didn't have a problem
moving him to the CDR slot since Jim Lovell was retiring and Deke "didn't want
to send poor Jack Swigert around the Moon again"

If 13 had gone off without a problem I bet Swigert (or Mattingly, depending on
who flew) would have been most likely to get 19.

-A.L.

"MasterShrink" wrote in message
...
Well, he would have had a chance of being named to command Apollo 19, but
so
did Fred Haise, it was not a certainty that Mattingly would get 19. It
took
him out of the running, but Deke always intended to use LMPs Haise,
Mitchell
and Irwin as CDRs of later flights if they were needed.

Possibly for later AAP flights. Fred Haise probably really would have
gotten
the CDR slot on 19 because he had lost his shot to walk on the moon on
Apollo
13. And since Deke seemed to regard him rather highly he didn't have a
problem
moving him to the CDR slot since Jim Lovell was retiring and Deke "didn't
want
to send poor Jack Swigert around the Moon again"

If 13 had gone off without a problem I bet Swigert (or Mattingly,
depending on
who flew) would have been most likely to get 19.

Not necessarily. Michael Cassutt has stated many times that Slayton always
considered Haise, Mitchell and Irwin as future Apollo CDRs. I don't want to
put words in Mike's mouth, but I believe he thinks that the most likely
commander of Apollo 20 was Mitchell, despite his having already walked on
the moon (I prefer Roosa, but that's another often discussed topic). Haise
was No.1 in the 1966 group followed by Mitchell and both would have had
commands. Was Mattingly a potential CDR? Probably, but there was nothing
automatic about CMPs from the 1966 group moving up to CDR on their next
flight. I had thought that Haise getting 19 was due to him missing out on 13
as well, but apparently Haise was always being considered for a Command.

In article , says...
Jan Philips writes:

When Mattingly was pulled off of Apollo 13, the rest of the primary
crew remained. Up until then I had always heard that if a crew change
would have to be made, the whole crew would be changed (Gemini and
Apollo). Was that the policy? Why was it changed for A13?

Well, my recollection is that Charlie Duke, backup Lunar Module
pilot, got the German measles, so he couldn't fly. And Ken Mattingly
had been exposed and was at risk; so they couldn't fly the entire prime
or the entire backup crew. The only choice was to match parts.

Exactly right. While Slayton states in his autobiography that the prime
crew was better trained, and you wouldn't use the backup crew unless the
whole prime crew died or was incapacitated, if you absolutely could not
fly the prime CDR or LMP, you'd probably either a) slip the launch until
you could, or b) fly the whole backup crew. That's because the CDR and
LMP worked very closely together during flight phases and during the
EVAs. You could swap out a CMP with little danger, but the CDR and LMP
were generally a paired set.

And since Charlie Duke was the only member of either the prime or the
backup crew who actually came down with the German measles, and was still
recovering at time of launch, the only choices would have been to swap
out CMPs or slip the launch a month. No matter which crew you flew, if
you swapped out full crews both had one member that the doctors would not
allow to fly.

Poor Charlie -- his health forced a couple of Apollo dramas. His case of
German measles forced a late crew change on Apollo 13, and his
contracting a serious case of the flu (with pneumonia follow-on, IIRC) on
a geology trip to Hawaii was a contributing factor to Apollo 16 being
slipped a month, from March to April, 1972. Apollo 16 would likely have
been slipped a month anyway, due to a couple of technical problems that
forced a return to the VAB and re-rollout of the Saturn V, but Charlie's
health was also a concern.

I don't recall any other astronaut whose health ignited as many dramas as
Charlie...

--

Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for | Doug Van Dorn
thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup |

"Jan Philips" wrote in message
...

When Mattingly was pulled off of Apollo 13, the rest of the primary
crew remained. Up until then I had always heard that if a crew change
would have to be made, the whole crew would be changed (Gemini and
Apollo). Was that the policy? Why was it changed for A13?

But during Gemini Kennedy's goal was still staring the nation in the face.
We *had to* beat the Russians to the moon by the end of the decade.

Flash forward to April 1970: the goal has been met (so what's NASA still
doing sending people up there when there are so many urgent problems down
here on Earth? went the refrain), and most importantly, the new
Administration was already making lots of nasty noises about cutting NASA's
budget. Oh, and "Moonrocks: The Sequel" had technical difficulties and
stiffed bigtime.

So four days before Episode III comes to a cineplex near you (sorry, getting
punchy here) and one of the stars gets
maybe-sick-next-week-at-the-worst-possible-time, NASA decides to:

a) postpone the premiere, thereby risking draconian budget cuts and even
more public ennui
b) swap out the entire cast with understudies, thereby risking ****ups (and
draconian cuts in the training budget--if the backup guys can get up to
speed in four days, why all that preproduction?)
c) do the bureaucratically correct thing and just replace the one guy

The correct answer is (c), the option that entails the least expenditure of
resources and bureaucratic capital but is simultaneously a very visible
effort to Address The Issues.

Moral of the story: first a government agency, always a government agency.

--
Terrell Miller


"In the early days as often
as not the (rocket) exploded on or near the launch pad; that
seldom happens any longer."
-Columbia Accident Investigation Board report, vol.1 p.19