A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Different Career Path For Gordon Cooper



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 8th 04, 08:56 PM
Bill Taxbox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Different Career Path For Gordon Cooper

Lets say that Deke's heart condition fails to ground him, and he flies
Delta 7......Carpenter flies MA-8, and Schirra flies MA-9. Does MA-10
fly? Is Cooper the odd man out? How would Gemini and Apollo shake out
with Deke on active flight satatus and Shepard as Chief Astronaut? How
is Cooper's career affected?
  #2  
Old July 8th 04, 11:21 PM
Michael Cassutt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Lets say that Deke's heart condition fails to ground him, and he flies Delta
7......Carpenter flies MA-8, and Schirra flies MA-9. Does MA-10 fly? Is Cooper
the odd man out? How would Gemini and Apollo shake out with Deke on active
flight satatus and Shepard as Chief Astronaut? How is Cooper's career affected?

MA-10 doesn't fly. No need for it.

Cooper doesn't fly in Mercury, and returns to the USAF in 1962 at the end of
his 3-year detail. (Which is what was originally planned for all the Mercury
astronauts.)

Slayton flies MA-7, and likely rotates to an early Gemini flight followed by a
Block I Apollo (there were four on the schedule at one time).

Unless he decides to return to the Air Force, too. He was always more
interested in flying than flying-in-space...

Michael Cassutt
  #3  
Old July 9th 04, 12:39 AM
Mike Flugennock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Bill Taxbox
wrote:

Lets say that Deke's heart condition fails to ground him, and he flies
Delta 7......Carpenter flies MA-8, and Schirra flies MA-9. Does MA-10
fly? Is Cooper the odd man out? How would Gemini and Apollo shake out
with Deke on active flight satatus and Shepard as Chief Astronaut? How
is Cooper's career affected?


I'm guessing they'd have flown that multi-day MA-10 -- you know, "Freedom
7 II" -- but after that, it's a tough guess. I'm sure there was an old
draft of the "original" Gemini rotation, with Shepard pre-ear-condition
and others, but who the hell knows if it even exists in any form anymore?

Damn. I'm guessing, then, for the hell of it, Cooper and Grissom on Gemini
III, and Shepard and one of the "New 9" (maybe White?) on Gemini IV,
though I don't know if White would've had to fight Shepard for a crack at
the EVA.

Or, are we assuming Deke's heart issue doesn't ground him, but Shepard
still gets bumped from Gemini because of the ear condition?

--
"All over, people changing their votes,
along with their overcoats;
if Adolf Hitler flew in today,
they'd send a limousine anyway!" --the clash.
__________________________________________________ _________________
Mike Flugennock, flugennock at sinkers dot org
Mike Flugennock's Mikey'zine, dubya dubya dubya dot sinkers dot org
  #4  
Old July 9th 04, 04:19 AM
MasterShrink
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Damn. I'm guessing, then, for the hell of it, Cooper and Grissom on Gemini
III, and Shepard and one of the "New 9" (maybe White?) on Gemini IV,
though I don't know if White would've had to fight Shepard for a crack at
the EVA.


Maybe. But it always seemed Deke considered GT 4 as originally planned to be
something of a proving ground flight for the "Next Nine". Hence why McDivitt
was selected to command it. Keep in mind, Gordo wasn't in line for a Gemini
flight officially until Shepard was grounded.

-A.L.
  #5  
Old July 9th 04, 11:39 AM
OM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 08 Jul 2004 22:21:07 GMT, (Michael Cassutt) wrote:

Slayton flies MA-7, and likely rotates to an early Gemini flight followed by a
Block I Apollo (there were four on the schedule at one time).


....And based on hindsight, these were originally to be really
stripped-down Block I's, too, as they were to be sent up on Saturn
I's. Weight was a serious concern, and I've seen some mission plans
that didn't last longer than 4-5 days because consumables were
significantly reduced. In addition, it also appears that only basic
capsule systems were to be tested, with only one or two advanced
systems being flown on each mission, much in the same way Gemini
progressed in development. By the time the Saturn IB's were in the
pipeline, the need for these stripped-down Block I's vanished. and the
flights were canned even before any discussion of who'd fly the damn
things.

From Mark Wade's "Your Flight Has Been Cancelled" page of broken
dreams:

http://www.astronautix.com/articles/youelled.htm

1965 Winter - Cancelled: Apollo SA-11.
From September 1962 NASA planned to fly four early manned Apollo
spacecraft on Saturn I boosters. A key prerequisite for these flights
was complete wringing out of the launch escape system.

1966 Spring - Cancelled: Apollo SA-12.
NASA originally planned to fly four early manned Apollo spacecraft on
Saturn I boosters. The decision was made to conduct all Apollo CSM
tests on the more powerful Saturn IB booster. These flights were
cancelled in October 1963, before crews were selected. This series of
four partial-system lightweight Apollos would have run from fall 1965
to the end of 1966, concurrent with the Gemini program.

1966 Summer - Cancelled: Apollo SA-13.
NASA originally planned to fly four early manned Apollo spacecraft on
Saturn I boosters. The decision was made to conduct all Apollo CSM
tests on the more powerful Saturn IB booster. These flights were
cancelled in October 1963, before crews were selected. This series of
four partial-system lightweight Apollos would have run from fall 1965
to the end of 1966, concurrent with the Gemini program.

1966 Fall - Cancelled: Apollo SA-14.
NASA originally planned to fly four early manned Apollo spacecraft on
Saturn I boosters. The decision was made to conduct all Apollo CSM
tests on the more powerful Saturn IB booster. These flights were
cancelled in October 1963, before crews were selected. This series of
four partial-system lightweight Apollos would have run from fall 1965
to the end of 1966, concurrent with the Gemini program.

....One thing I've not been able to dig up is any details on how far
NAA got on the "stripped down" designs for these four Block I's, or
even if construction got started. I asked Mark Wade about this one
back when this page went up, and at the time he wasn't sure if NAA had
done anything other than discuss the matter. Probably ought to drop
him a line and see if he ever did come up with an answer for this one.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr
  #6  
Old July 9th 04, 08:13 PM
Rick DeNatale
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 22:21:07 +0000, Michael Cassutt wrote:

Lets say that Deke's heart condition fails to ground him, and he flies Delta
7......Carpenter flies MA-8, and Schirra flies MA-9. Does MA-10 fly? Is
Cooper
the odd man out? How would Gemini and Apollo shake out with Deke on
active flight satatus and Shepard as Chief Astronaut? How is Cooper's
career affected?


It's not clear to me that Carpenter would have gotten MA-8, as opposed to
another flight.

Crew assignments weren't codified during Mercury the way they were later.
There was no backup becomes prime after skipping two missions which was
the rule later*.

The decisions were made by Gilruth and Williams and Webb
using whatever criteria they deemed appropriate at the time.

Note that Glenn was backup to both Shepard and Grissom. Deke was backup to
no one. So being a backup was neither a guarantee or requirement for
getting any particular Mercury ride.

If we back up to the time before MA-6, according to "For Spacious Skies",
the envisioned crew assignments we

MA-6 Glenn prime, Carpenter back-up
MA-7 Slayton prime, Schirra back-up
Shepard and Grissom were assigned to "troubleshooting," and Cooper was
unassigned.

Carpenter replaced Slayton because he had the most simulator training at
the time having backed up Glenn on a mission with more unknowns. He
actually had more simulator experience than Slayton did. MA-7 was
sufficiently like MA-6 to make him the natural choice to replace Deke,
however just what his, or any of the other's, assignments for MA-8 et.
seq. is a matter of some conjecture.


MA-10 doesn't fly. No need for it.


Not clear, I suspect that there was enough desire to give each of the
original 7 a ride to generate a need. Recall that the Mercury 7 were
the closest thing America had to the Beatles at the time. Henry Luce
and Loudon Wainright would have put the pressure on as well. G The need
for a 7th flight went away when Deke was grounded, and then only when
Shepard's appeals for an orbital flight were denied.



Cooper doesn't fly in Mercury, and returns to the USAF in 1962 at the
end of his 3-year detail. (Which is what was originally planned for all
the Mercury astronauts.)


I doubt that they could have convinced Shepard, Glenn, Schirra, or
Carpenter to join the USAF! G

* Actually more of a rule of thumb.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gordon Cooper 1927 - 2004 Davoud Amateur Astronomy 1 October 6th 04 12:07 PM
The Gravitational Instability Cosmological Theory Br Dan Izzo Astronomy Misc 0 August 31st 04 02:35 AM
IOTA: July 21 asteroid occ'n of 31 Psc in w. Europe; other events to Aug. 13 EFLASPO Amateur Astronomy 0 July 15th 04 12:49 PM
Gravity of the Sun and Solar system question. IWJPoel Amateur Astronomy 12 December 4th 03 08:19 AM
Career in Space Policy Aleta Jackson Policy 0 September 10th 03 10:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.