Why Stafford before Armstrong?

Here's a question which has been bothering me for awhile.

Why did Tom Stafford command an Apollo mission before Neil Armstrong?

In Gemini, the New-Nine command order (the order in which New-Nine
astronauts commanded missions) was: McDivitt, Borman, Armstrong, Stafford,
Young, Conrad, Lovell.

But in Apollo, New-Nine commanded in this order: Borman, McDivitt, Stafford,
Armstrong, Conrad, Lovell. We all understand why McDivitt and Borman were
switched, of course (due to the LEM not being ready, etc.), But I have never
found an explanation as to why Stafford commanded a mission ahead of
Armstrong.

Theory: After the Apollo 1 fire, it became clear to Slayton, and possibly
all of the astronauts, that Armstrong was in line for the moon landing due
to the perceived (or actual) flight rotation at that time and to the
perceived number of mission-types, which, I believe at that time may have
been *4*.

Possibly, before the Apollo 1 fire, Slayton had already designated *at
least* the first 6 Apollo commanders as: Grissom, Schirra, McDivitt, Borman,
Armstrong, Stafford, thus maintaining, among the New-Nine, the previous
Gemini command order (and, I believe, ignoring the Cooper wild-card due to
unpredictability).

Keeping in mind that, prior to the fire, Owen Maynard's alphabetical mission
sequence had not yet been devised, really, and that, at that time the only
reasonably-clearly-defined manned Apollo mission-types were the two
low-Earth-orbit missions, which would later be designated as the C and D
missions, it is, nevertheless reasonably to assume that, as far as bringing
the program up to the point of having completed the Big Moon Landing, only
*2* other manned Apollo missions-types were envisioned, which would later
turn out to be the missions designated as F and G.

Now, it can be argued that, ultimately, not only did it take five manned
Apollo missions to bring us up to the completed Moon landing, but even five
mission-types were originally envisioned as missions-types A through G
(post-fire), nevertheless, there were never really more than *four* manned
Apollo mission-types:

C: Test CSM in LEO.
D: Test CSM and LEM in LOE.
F: Test LOR.
G: Land on the Moon.

So why were there five missions? And five planned mission types? Well, as we
all know, mission E was scrubbed (or radically altered), yet Borman, Lovell,
and Anders went around the Moon on Christmas 1968 in a mission which I have
seen as variously designated C prime, E prime, Or F prime, since in
fulfilled mission objectives for each (mostly E and F). This was done, not
to fulfill any direct space-program objectives, but to beat the Russians to
the Moon, which was a clear political objective which played a major part in
justifying the existence of the program in the eyes of the public.

So, in essence, as I believe most people involved in the Apollo program saw
it in January, 1967, there were only *4* real manned Apollo mission-types.

So here is my guess at the sequence of events: After the fire Slayton sees
that his list of Apollo commanders is now Schirra, McDivitt, Borman,
Armstrong, etc, and since he *assumes* that four manned missions will result
in a Moon landing, he sees that Armstrong is in line for the landing, and
this knowledge leaks out and becomes generally known by the astronauts.

Then Maynard decides five manned missions are necessary to produce a moon
landing, thus effectively bumping Armstrong from the coveted first landing
spot. Since this sort of bump is not something that the astronauts would
generally accept as valid, Slayton decides to *switch* Armstrong and
Stafford in the flight rotation order, most likely with the knowledge and
approval of both.

I'm probably way off, but I still can't figure out why Stafford and
Armstrong seem to have been switched.

"MasterDebater" wrote:

Here's a question which has been bothering me for awhile.

Why did Tom Stafford command an Apollo mission before Neil Armstrong?

In Gemini, the New-Nine command order (the order in which New-Nine
astronauts commanded missions) was: McDivitt, Borman, Armstrong, Stafford,
Young, Conrad, Lovell.

The important point here is that Stafford was elevated up the pecking order
by the deaths of See and Bassett. Up until that time (28 Feb 66) he was the
backup CDR of GT-9 which should have seen him fly as CDR of GT-12. Lovell
would not have commanded a Gemini at all.

But in Apollo, New-Nine commanded in this order: Borman, McDivitt, Stafford,
Armstrong, Conrad, Lovell. We all understand why McDivitt and Borman were
switched, of course (due to the LEM not being ready, etc.), But I have never
found an explanation as to why Stafford commanded a mission ahead of
Armstrong.

The first four Apollo crews were formed in December '65/January '66 - Grissom
(backup McDivitt) and Schirra (backup Borman). This was just after the Gemini
7/6 flights. In theory the next few Apollo CDRs would have been Armstrong, See,
Young, Conrad and then Stafford. We know from Slayton that he wasn't planning
to use See on Apollo, and at that time he planned to utilise Young and Stafford
as CMPs. Armstrong and Conrad were pencilled in as the next two Apollo CDRs.

Stafford flew GT-9 and was immediately available for another assignment. Deke
had planned to use both Armstrong and See as backup CDRs for the last two Apollos,
so used Stafford in the slot planned for See. Stafford was also assigned as
Borman's CMP, replacing the deceased Charlie Bassett.

When Apollo 2 was cancelled (Nov '66) Stafford was "promoted" from Borman's CMP
to backup CDR of Apollo 2. The four crews were then Grissom (backup Schirra) and
McDivitt (backup Stafford). An additional two crews were assigned at about this
time, with Borman commanding Apollo 3 (backup Conrad). The schedule at that time
was:

AS-01 Grissom (Schirra)
AS-02 McDivitt (Stafford)
AS-03 Borman (Conrad)

Theoretically Schirra could have commanded Apollo 4, with Stafford getting Apollo 5
and Conrad Apollo 6. Armstrong was the only other potential commander (ignoring
Cooper) and could be assumed to get Apollo 7. Of course Deke had plans to assign
Grissom, McDivitt and Borman to early landing flights, so the rotation would not
necessarily have followed the above order.

Clearly Conrad was also ahead of Armstrong at that time - they swapped roles in
the McDivitt/Borman exchange.

Theory: After the Apollo 1 fire, it became clear to Slayton, and possibly
all of the astronauts, that Armstrong was in line for the moon landing due
to the perceived (or actual) flight rotation at that time and to the
perceived number of mission-types, which, I believe at that time may have
been *4*.

The manned mission types at that time were "C" (earth orbit CSM only / flown by
Apollo 7), "D" (earth orbit CSM/LM / flown by Apollo 9), "E" (high Earth orbit
CSM/LM / superceded by Apollo 8 [C' C Prime]), "F" (lunar orbit sim. / Apollo 10),
and "G" (first landing / Apollo 11). It was anticipated, if not expected, that
some of these missions would be repeated because not all planned events would
have been successful.

Post-fire Armstrong's crew came into the rotation, but at that time still below
Conrad. By then Stafford was in line for the F mission (Apollo 10) and Conrad for
the G mission. However, in theory the first landing attempt could have been made
by any of the CDRs.

Possibly, before the Apollo 1 fire, Slayton had already designated *at
least* the first 6 Apollo commanders as: Grissom, Schirra, McDivitt, Borman,
Armstrong, Stafford, thus maintaining, among the New-Nine, the previous
Gemini command order (and, I believe, ignoring the Cooper wild-card due to
unpredictability).

Immediately pre-fire the order was Grissom, McDivitt, Borman, and potentially
Schirra, Stafford, Conrad, with Armstrong waiting "in the wings".

Keeping in mind that, prior to the fire, Owen Maynard's alphabetical mission
sequence had not yet been devised, really, and that, at that time the only
reasonably-clearly-defined manned Apollo mission-types were the two
low-Earth-orbit missions, which would later be designated as the C and D
missions, it is, nevertheless reasonably to assume that, as far as bringing
the program up to the point of having completed the Big Moon Landing, only
*2* other manned Apollo missions-types were envisioned, which would later
turn out to be the missions designated as F and G.

I believe that Maynard's system was devised in late 1966, shortly before the
cancellation of Apollo 2. Also, I believe that H, I & J mission types were
under consideration, probably not with those designators, many months before
the fire.

[snip]

So, in essence, as I believe most people involved in the Apollo program saw
it in January, 1967, there were only *4* real manned Apollo mission-types.

No, the E mission was still planned, and the H, I & J missions were in planning.

So here is my guess at the sequence of events: After the fire Slayton sees
that his list of Apollo commanders is now Schirra, McDivitt, Borman,
Armstrong, etc, and since he *assumes* that four manned missions will result
in a Moon landing, he sees that Armstrong is in line for the landing, and
this knowledge leaks out and becomes generally known by the astronauts.

His list included those and Conrad, but not necessarily in that order. Here's
a quote from "Deke!", "The assignment to the C mission Apollo left McDivitt ..
as the crew for D, along with Borman, .. for E. I kept Conrad-Gordon-Williams
as a crew and had them backing up McDivitt's guys. I put together a new crew
of Armstrong, Lovell and Aldrin and assigned them as backups to Borman. Eighteen
guys, prime and backup crews for the first three missions. These were the guys
who were going to get us to the moon and make the first landing, though not
necessarily in those crews or that order."

He certainly didn't assume that they would achieve a landing on the fourth
manned mission - just the opposite in fact, he assumed that it would take
several more missions. No one really expected that it would take so few
missions as it actually did.

Then Maynard decides five manned missions are necessary to produce a moon
landing, thus effectively bumping Armstrong from the coveted first landing
spot. Since this sort of bump is not something that the astronauts would
generally accept as valid, Slayton decides to *switch* Armstrong and
Stafford in the flight rotation order, most likely with the knowledge and
approval of both.

Maynard's system was in place well before the fire, and it didn't decide on
"five manned missions", it defined five mission types - C, D, E, F & G, any
of which might have included two or more flights. Flights that might have
been flown by the original crew, by the backup crew, by the next crew in line,
or by a new crew.

I'm probably way off, but I still can't figure out why Stafford and
Armstrong seem to have been switched.

They were not switched per se. Commanders were not assigned solely in the
order previously established, although the previous order did have some
bearing - assignments depended on who was "available" after previous flights.
That said, it seems clear that in late 1966 Deke created what would become
the Apollo 10 crew (Stafford/Young/Cernan) with the idea that they would be
in line for the F or G missions. They were the most experienced of the early-
Apollo crews - the only other no-rookie crew being Apollo 11. If the pecking
order had been important then Armstrong (or Conrad) would have been assigned
as commander of that crew. The logical assumption would be that those two
would be better utilised on early landing missions - at that time we assume
that Deke had plans to recycle Gus to command the first landing.

Deke rated both Armstrong and Conrad as excellent Apollo commanders - and even
as Gemini commanders. Although McDivitt and Borman were the first to command
Gemini missions they were both assigned to relatively simple missions, while
Armstrong was kept back for the technically more demanding first docking mission.
Conrad was originally planned as commander of Gemini 7 with Borman assigned to
fly under Grissom's command on Gemini 6. Conrad lost out in the early Gemini
crew shuffles, but was always one of Deke's favourites - Pete was very close
to becoming a Mercury astronaut too.


--

Brian Lawrence

Wantage, Oxfordshire, UK


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 17/09/2004

"Brian Lawrence" wrote in message
...
"MasterDebater" wrote:

Here's a question which has been bothering me for awhile.

Why did Tom Stafford command an Apollo mission before Neil Armstrong?

In Gemini, the New-Nine command order (the order in which New-Nine
astronauts commanded missions) was: McDivitt, Borman, Armstrong,
Stafford,
Young, Conrad, Lovell.

But in Apollo, New-Nine commanded in this order: Borman, McDivitt,
Stafford,
Armstrong, Conrad, Lovell. We all understand why McDivitt and Borman
were
switched, of course (due to the LEM not being ready, etc.), But I have
never
found an explanation as to why Stafford commanded a mission ahead of
Armstrong.


[snipped and rearranged your response]

Thank you for the explanation, though I must admit in all candor that, after
reading it,
I still don't understand why Stafford commanded an Apollo mission before
Armstrong,
though it was certainly lucky for Armstrong that this occurred.



The important point here is that Stafford was elevated up the pecking
order
by the deaths of See and Bassett. Up until that time (28 Feb 66) he was
the
backup CDR of GT-9 which should have seen him fly as CDR of GT-12. Lovell
would not have commanded a Gemini at all.



I think it is clear that all of the New-Nine would have commanded a Gemini
before
any got to command a second time, otherwise how do we explain the fact that
this
is exactly what occurred. This is too much of a coincidence. Therefore, if
Gemini
had continued beyond Gemini 12, I believe that White would have commanded
Gemini 13.


The first four Apollo crews were formed in December '65/January '66 -
Grissom
(backup McDivitt) and Schirra (backup Borman). This was just after the
Gemini
7/6 flights. In theory the next few Apollo CDRs would have been Armstrong,
See,
Young, Conrad and then Stafford. We know from Slayton that he wasn't
planning
to use See on Apollo, and at that time he planned to utilise Young and
Stafford
as CMPs. Armstrong and Conrad were pencilled in as the next two Apollo
CDRs.



I also seems clear that the flight rotation was reset to the beginning at
the beginning
of Apollo, thus Mercury vets were assigned first, then New-Nine in the
original
order McDivitt, Borman, Armstrong, Stafford, etc.

Thus the order: Grissom, Schirra, McDivitt, Borman, Armstrong, Stafford;
along
with the understanding that the fifth mission would be the landing would put
Armstrong
for the landing.

After the fire, the order was probably revised, putting Stafford ahead of
Armstrong
so as to preserve Armstrong's previous spot [the landing].


[snip remainder]

On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 11:29:43 -0700, "MasterDebater"
wrote:

After the fire, the order was probably revised, putting Stafford ahead of
Armstrong so as to preserve Armstrong's previous spot [the landing].

....The problem here is that this calls for Deke to have had some sort
of preference for Armstrong as the "E" mission CDR from the beginning,
when it's clear that - at least prior to the A1 fire - that Gus was in
line for that slot regardless of rotation. Speculation that such a
preference on Deke's part in fact existed leads to that old CT saw
about how Armstrong was picked only because he was the only civilian
qualified to be a CDR and the first man on the moon shouldn't be a
soldier/sailor/jarhead/"pilot", and that way lies madness.

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

"MasterDebater" wrote:

[snipped and rearranged your response]

Thank you for the explanation, though I must admit in all candor that, after
reading it, I still don't understand why Stafford commanded an Apollo mission
before Armstrong, though it was certainly lucky for Armstrong that this occurred.

The important point here is that Stafford was elevated up the pecking
order by the deaths of See and Bassett. Up until that time (28 Feb 66) he was
the backup CDR of GT-9 which should have seen him fly as CDR of GT-12. Lovell
would not have commanded a Gemini at all.

I think it is clear that all of the New-Nine would have commanded a Gemini
before any got to command a second time, otherwise how do we explain the fact
that this is exactly what occurred. This is too much of a coincidence. Therefore,
if Gemini had continued beyond Gemini 12, I believe that White would have commanded
Gemini 13.

Ed White was backup CDR of Gemini 7, putting him in line to command Gemini 10. Deke
then moved him to the Apollo 1 crew as CMP, and replaced him with John Young. Recent
insights into Deke's planning say that White was going to be moved on to AAP after
Apollo 1, so it seems debatable that he would have got a Gemini command in any
circumstances.

The first four Apollo crews were formed in December '65/January '66 -
Grissom (backup McDivitt) and Schirra (backup Borman). This was just after the
Gemini 7/6 flights. In theory the next few Apollo CDRs would have been Armstrong,
See, Young, Conrad and then Stafford. We know from Slayton that he wasn't
planning to use See on Apollo, and at that time he planned to utilise Young and
Stafford as CMPs. Armstrong and Conrad were pencilled in as the next two Apollo
CDRs.

I also seems clear that the flight rotation was reset to the beginning at
the beginning of Apollo, thus Mercury vets were assigned first, then New-Nine in
the original order McDivitt, Borman, Armstrong, Stafford, etc.

The Gemini flight crews were mainly chosen with later Apollo crews in mind, but
the "normal" flight rotation wasn't particularly relevant - if there were reasons
to fly someone "out of sequence" it would have been done.

Thus the order: Grissom, Schirra, McDivitt, Borman, Armstrong, Stafford;
along with the understanding that the fifth mission would be the landing would put
Armstrong for the landing.

There was no understanding that the fifth mission would be the landing. And anyway,
Gus would have flown the first landing. Also, as I said before, Conrad was ahead
of Armstrong until the switch of missions for 8 & 9.

After the fire, the order was probably revised, putting Stafford ahead of
Armstrong so as to preserve Armstrong's previous spot [the landing].

As I said before - perhaps not very clearly - in December 1966 (before the fire),
Deke had six crews in training, prime and backup for three missions. The CDRs
were Grissom, McDivitt & Borman, with backups of Schirra, Stafford & Conrad. So,
before the fire, Stafford was in the rotation while Armstrong wasn't. Hypothetically
at that time Stafford was in line for the G mission, although that assumes that
Schirra would have been recycled to fly the F mission, which is possible but it
would have been with a new crew.

Following the fire the Schirra crew moved from backup for the C mission to prime,
with the other two backup crews (Stafford & Conrad) moving up one mission - so
Conrad replaced Stafford as potential CDR for the G mission. Armstrong came into
the schedule as backup to Borman with the potential to command the second landing.

It wasn't until August 1968 when the 8 & 9 crews swapped missions that Armstrong
moved ahead of Conrad.

It might be worth repeating a couple of points.

Stafford was ranked behind Armstrong throughout Gemini - he only flew 9 because
See was killed. He was supposed to fly 12 before moving on to Apollo. Because
he flew 9 in June 1966 he was available for Apollo training in July. Armstrong,
as backup CDR of Gemini 11 wasn't available for Apollo training until September
1966. At that time (September '66), Stafford was assigned as Borman's CMP while
Armstrong was just starting Apollo training. Stafford was "promoted" to CDR in
December after about five months Apollo training - Armstrong was still 2-3
months behind him. The New-Nine flight order could have been preserved by
putting Armstrong ahead of Stafford as backup CDR of Apollo 2, which would have
put him in line for the G mission (ignoring that Gus would have got the G mission)
- that wasn't done.


--

Brian Lawrence

Wantage, Oxfordshire, UK


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.769 / Virus Database: 516 - Release Date: 24/09/2004

On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 11:45:57 +0100, "Brian Lawrence"
wrote:

Recent insights into Deke's planning say that White was going to be moved on to AAP after
Apollo 1, so it seems debatable that he would have got a Gemini command in any
circumstances.

....Which begs the question: since AAP was, by then, considered the
portion of "Tomorrowland" that Disney decided to either scale down or
simply not build, what exactly did White do that knocked himself down
Deke's totem pole? AAP was where Deke was essentially exiling Astros
who weren't quite up to his specs - Al Bean was there, albeit
historically proven to be an error in assignment - Eliot See would
have wound up there had he not augered that T-38, Walt Cunningham was
exiled there after A7, although Donn Eisele apparently was in the BCMP
loop for a while in the same capacity.

So, what were Deke's justifications for his plans to toss White into
the AAP dungeon?

[Cue cass54]

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

OM wrote:
...Which begs the question: since AAP was, by then, considered the
portion of "Tomorrowland" that Disney decided to either scale down or
simply not build, what exactly did White do that knocked himself down
Deke's totem pole? AAP was where Deke was essentially exiling Astros
who weren't quite up to his specs - Al Bean was there, albeit
historically proven to be an error in assignment - Eliot See would
have wound up there had he not augered that T-38, Walt Cunningham was
exiled there after A7, although Donn Eisele apparently was in the BCMP
loop for a while in the same capacity.

So, what were Deke's justifications for his plans to toss White into
the AAP dungeon?

I'm not 100% sure Deke really was sending White for AAP. The best justification
I can think of is Deke may have wanted flown guys he felt were weaker to
command AAP missions (See would have fit this category had he flown GT 9) and
Ed White may have fit that bill. However, many people saw Ed White as getting a
"head start" on Apollo by being assigned to Apollo 1.

Deke also referred to AS 204 and 205 as flights where he wanted to "try out"
some of the guys he felt were weaker. Which sounds to me like he wanted to see
how Chaffee, Eisele and Cunningham did on flights before sending them to AAP or
moving them or to lunar landings. Chaffee we'll never know about, but the
attitude of the Apollo 7 crew seemed to be what screwed them over more than any
initial impressions. Eisele might have had a chance to get a lunar flight after
his AS 10 backup stint, but most accounts state his work ethic basically went
to crap at that point.

One thought that had crossed my mind though, was that the situation with
Schirra's crew would have been different had Ed White been on it. If the AS 205
crew had remained Schirra, White, Cunningham versus Schirra, Eisele,
Cunningham, they would have been avaiable for reassignment to a flight with a
Lunar Module when 205 was canceled as Ed White was a CMP with flight
experience. Maybe Deke had a feeling 205 would be written off the books and
initially wanted an flown CMP in the event he had to reassign them.

On the Al Bean note, reading Deke, it seemed Al Bean was the only one assigned
to AAP because Deke felt highly of him. He saw Bean as someone who could
possibly get the program into shape. Frankly, in today's Astronaut Office, a
management position like that for someone who had not yet flown in space
usually indicates the bosses at JSC like you.

-A.L.

Brian Lawrence wrote:
Stafford was ranked behind Armstrong throughout Gemini - he only flew 9
because
See was killed. He was supposed to fly 12 before moving on to Apollo. Because
he flew 9 in June 1966 he was available for Apollo training in July.
Armstrong,
as backup CDR of Gemini 11 wasn't available for Apollo training until
September
1966. At that time (September '66), Stafford was assigned as Borman's CMP
while
Armstrong was just starting Apollo training. Stafford was "promoted" to CDR
in
December after about five months Apollo training - Armstrong was still 2-3
months behind him

Eh, dunno if one can say "throughout Gemini". Stafford was originally pegged
for Gemini 3 with Alan Shepard. Who knows what that one would have done to the
rotation. But, to make a long story short, the deaths of See and Bassett, the
Apollo 1 fire and the Apollo 8/9 swap were the big factors in deteriming who
walked on the moon by requiring changes in the flight rotation. To paraphrase
"Deke!", "it could have just as easily been Tom Stafford or Pete Conrad".
Stafford was also regarded as the strongest guy in rendevous among the Nine.

It is kind of curious how Deke ranked the New Nine. Clearly he felt McDivitt
and Borman were the strongest, and Elliot See the weakest. Armstrong he clearly
felt was very capable as Deke never gave him anything less than crew commander,
but he was kind of "bringing up the rear" in that category in Gemini, and was
one of the last of the Nine to move over to Apollo because of that.

-A.L.

On 26 Sep 2004 16:27:07 GMT, (MasterShrink)
wrote:

It is kind of curious how Deke ranked the New Nine. Clearly he felt McDivitt
and Borman were the strongest, and Elliot See the weakest. Armstrong he clearly
felt was very capable as Deke never gave him anything less than crew commander,
but he was kind of "bringing up the rear" in that category in Gemini, and was
one of the last of the Nine to move over to Apollo because of that.

....Some of the recollections of Neil's interactions amongst the rest
of the Astros may shed some light into why Deke had him ranked
somewhat lower than Borman or McDivitt. He was somewhat of an aloof
person at times, and difficult to read at others. A couple of stories
come to mind that reflect this:

* Neil would be asked a question by someone, to which Neil would
immediately stare back blankly at the questioner, as if he hadn't
heard the question and/or understood it. Just when the question was
about to be asked again, Neil would suddenly go into a precision
diatribe in response, and even give alternative suggestions and/or
observations as to why the question was or wasn't valid to begin with.

* Neil and Yeager, IIRC, were out at Edwards after a rainstorm had
passed through the region, Neil argued that the dry lake bed was once
again dry enough to land on. Yeager disagreed. Neil went into one of
his precise diatribes, and the two took a plane out to test Neil's
theory. The plane landed safely, but got stuck in the mud and the two
had to wait for retrieval rather than taxiing back to the hangar.
Yeager basically said "how now, brown cow?", to which Neil replied
with a "."

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

"MasterShrink" wrote in message
...
Stafford was also regarded as the strongest guy in rendevous among the
Nine.

Could that be why he got a divorce?