Talk:Gus Grissom: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 18:54, 10 February 2007 edit75.14.56.36 (talk) rev to prev version. discussion pages are not to be deleted, but archived.← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 13:03, 9 January 2025 edit undoCewbot (talk \| contribs)Bots7,673,714 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 6 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with unknown parameters)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion
(184 intermediate revisions by 77 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header\|search=yes}}
	{{WikiProject Indiana\|class=B\|importance=low}}
			{{Article history
			\|action1=GAN
			\|action1date=03:38, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
			\|action1link = Talk:Gus Grissom/GA1
			\|action1result=passed
			\|action1oldid=783260728

			\|action2=GTC
	==1st to go twice?==
			\|action2date=01:07, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
	]'s flights of the ]'s flights ] and ] was in ] (106 km) and ] (108 km). Gus' ] and ] was on ] and ]. -- ], 2006-04-02]12:27z
			\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Featured topic candidates/Mercury Seven/archive1
			\|action2result=passed

			\|ftname=Mercury Seven
	== Murdered to ensure his silence? ==
			\|currentstatus=GA
			\|topic=natsci

			\|otd1date=2019-04-03\|otd1oldid=890792881\|otd2date=2024-04-03\|otd2oldid=1217081949
	I just watched the 2nd video clip for a video re. the Apollo One fatalies... view it here:
			}}
	http://www.moonmovie.com/moonmovie/
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=GA\|vital=yes\|listas=Grissom, Gus\|blp=no\|1=
			{{WikiProject Biography\|military-work-group=yes\|military-priority=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Spaceflight\|importance=High}}
			{{WikiProject United States\|Purdue=yes\|Purdue-importance=high\|importance=low\|IN=yes\|IN-importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Military history\|class=GA\|Aviation=yes\|Biography=yes\|US=yes\|Cold-War=yes}}
			{{WikiProject Indiana Historical Society\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors\|user=Twofingered Typist\|date=March 27, 2017}}
			}}
			{{annual readership}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config \| algo = old(730d) \| archive = Talk:Gus Grissom/Archive %(counter)d \| counter = 1 \| maxarchivesize = 150K \| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} \| minthreadstoarchive = 1 \| minthreadsleft = 6 }}

			== Notes to work on ==
	Why would Grissom hold a press conference without permission? And why would he hang a lemon in full view -- what message was he trying to tell? And then his intercom doesn't work? And the rest of the crew describe a smell consistent with cyanide poisoning?

			*Betty Grissom's thoughts on the investigation being a sham should be included, even if they are not correct, it is significant
	And then 2 years later all the "technical problems" are resolved and the moon landing is a success?
			*Slayton was probably going to select Grissom to be the first on the Moon (Fallen Astronauts page 87)
			*Betty sued NAA (and it was settled out of court)
			*Figure out how this relates to the star in the article
			*<s>Moon and Mars citations another , </s>
			*
			*
			*,
			*
			*
			*
			*

			More to come, will be working on these. '''<span style="background:#B1810B; padding:2px; border-style:solid; border-width:1px">]]</span>''' 01:08, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
	In a world where the 9/11 official story (full of improbabilities, coincidences, and impossible physics) I guess all of that is possible... :rolleyes:.

			== Grissom as First Man: Slayton's story is not supported by his actions ==
	---

			From 'Notes to work on', above:
	Be advised the murder accusations come from either Betty Grissom, her son Scott, or a pair of psychotics living in the Houston, Tx area who "support" Betty & Scott's accusations. In all cases, these accusations are baseless, and the evidence they present to back up their claims fall apart under the slightest bit of scrutiny. While there is no disagreement that neglect and human error were major factors in the Apollo 1 fire, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the fire was the result of a deliberate, malicious, criminal act on the part of any individual, organization or combination of the two. Those who believe such and attempt to promote these false beliefs are merely dishonoring the memory of one of America's greatest heroes, and are worthing of nothing less than ridicule, derision and any legal form of abuse that can be delievered uponst them.
			:"Slayton was probably going to select Grissom to be the first on the Moon (Fallen Astronauts page 87)"

			This is an often repeated story, having been published by Michael Cassutt in his book Deke! (1994). A diligent author who strives for historical accuracy will not simply interview a person, and then publish their words presented as fact. Ok, it is clear that it is a fact that Slayton said it. But it is the job of a historian to seek supporting evidence that words like that are telling an accurate story before presenting such info as truth. A solid follow up to a statement by Slayton saying that his plan was to assign Grissom as the first to attempt the landing on the Moon would be to confirm with Slayton that Grissom was being given training prerequisites to qualify him for this mission.

			And here is where we find that this story lacks supporting evidence. We know what the requirements for flying the lunar landing mission were. One requirement Deke imposed on these crews was that they had experience flying an orbital rendezvous. The entire purpose of the Gemini program was to ensure that astronauts knew how to fly a rendezvous and docking, essential for the Earth Orbit Rendezvous mode to be used in Apollo.
	the only psychotics are the likes of yourself who first murdered grissom and THEN proclaimed him a hero! kind of like with kennedy. now, is the pay really that good that you have to swear your life by belching out these meaningless rebuttals? slimy little man you are!

			:- Grissom had no rendezvous experience. He was assigned to fly the first Gemini, and then the first Apollo. Neither of these were a rendezvous mission, with no separate Agena target to connect with.
	--I notice no signature of the above paragraph and only an IP address, rather than an easily traceable name. This fool makes wild, untrue slanders and won't sign them or take any responsibility for them. By the way, my name is Ray Barrington, and I'm happy to be responsible for anything I post on here.] 13:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

			Another critical requirement to fly the lunar landing mission was being fully trained on the Lunar Lander Training Vehicle (LLTV). In order to get fully trained, this was a lengthy process of completing training in the Lunar Landing Research Facility, the gantry contraption at Langley. Then there was helicopter training. And then there was checkout in the LLTV fixed-base simulator, and then flying the LLTV in fixed-gimbal mode, and finally a full certification in flying the LLTV in lunar-simulation mode.
	silly faggot, i feel so much safer now that all of a sudden IP addresses became untraceable! :)) you dumb piece of shit...

			:- 6 astronauts were in the first class to be selected for this LLTV training. Grissom was not among the six. (The six were Borman-Anders, Armstrong-Aldrin and Conrad-Williams.)
	==To the flaming moron who posted the above==

			The fact that Grissom was not chosen by Slayton for LLTV training has been posted to the internet since 2001 (). And that link has been available on the Misplaced Pages article on the ] for well over a decade, since 2008.
	A not so brief answer to the "10 proofs we didn't land on the moon" on the above Web site:
	10. The Soviets had a five-to-one superiority to the U.S. in manned hours in space. They were first in achieving the following seven important milestones:
	• First man-made satellite in earth orbit…
	• First man in space…
	• First man to orbit the earth…
	• First woman in space…
	• The first crew of three astronauts onboard one spacecraft…
	• The first space walk…
	• The first to have two spacecrafts orbiting simultaneously…
	This put America at a perceived military disadvantage in missile technology during the very height of the Cold War.

			The fact that Grissom was never assigned to a rendezvous mission has been widely known since the 60s.
	RETORT: True, all. But after 1964, when Kruschev was overthrown, Soviet space and missle spending dropped precipitously. They tried to get back into the game in 1967 but a fatal Soyuz accident set them back too far to recover). And that doesn’t count all the Soviet failures that never got off the ground and were never reported.

	9. Newly retouched photographs correct errors from previously released versions. Why would they be updating thirty-year-old pictures if they really went to the moon?

	RETORT: (he shows two photos, one seeming to show a large C on a rock, indicating that it’s a prop. It’s strictly a lighting trick.) As for why they’d update the photos - well, a good cinematographer should know that photographic techniques have improved by leaps and bounds since 1969.

			Anyone who had access to Deke Slayton could have asked him these simple questions as a way to provide tangible support to his words. Actions speak much louder than words. And if Deke did indeed intend to assign Grissom on the first landing mission, as he had stated according to Michael Cassutt, then he would have a lot of 'splaining to do as to why he failed to give Grissom the necessary training. The only options Slayton would have would be to send Grissom up on that mission unqualified to do the task at hand, or delay the program for months so that Grissom could catch up to these other astronauts who Slayton had picked to get the necessary qualifications.
	8. Enlarged photographs underneath the lunar lander’s 10,000 lb. thrust engine show the soil completely undisturbed. During ground tests there was grave concern for the vehicle falling into the hole the engine created as it descended. An oversight that they would have to keep consistent for all subsequent moon missions. They attributed it to the effect of no atmosphere.

			If Slayton's words were sincere, then this leaves a huge question mark as to why he would paint himself into such a tight corner regarding his choices for who would graduate from Gemini with the necessary rendezvous experience, and also who would get trained in the LLTV. But seeing the hard facts that Slayton did not groom Grissom with the necessary training, then the evidence points to Slayton having groomed people like Armstrong, Conrad and Borman to be on the short list of those who would be fully qualified when the time came to attempt the first landing.
	RETORT: What was discovered by the moon landing is that the moon has a fairly thin surface of loose soil covering a very hard surface. The astronauts had serious problems pounding objects and drilling into it. That’s why there was no major crater.

			An alternate explanation is what is known as 'eulogizing'. Slayton was saying nice things about his friend who had died.
	7. Rare, uncirculated photographs, allegedly from the moon’s surface, show scenes supposedly lit solely by sunlight. Yet they contain shadows that do not run parallel with each other, indicating supplemental artificial light. Sunlight would cast shadows that would never intersect.

			James Donovan is another author who did not thoroughly look into this story before presenting it as fact. He has repeated this story of how Slayton said he intended to give Grissom the first shot at landing. His new book has recently been published, and so the news headlines today include articles like this:
	RETORT: The photo shows an astronaut, shadow straight, with what seems to be a shadow at another angle. Dismissing intentionally retouched photograph, explanations could include equipment hidden behind the camera or reflected light from the Lunar Module. Light behaves differently on the moon with no atmosphere to refract it.

	6. Neil Armstrong, the first man to supposedly walk on the moon, recently granted an interview to 60 Minutes. Ed Bradley said, “You sometimes seems uncomfortable with your celebrity, that you’d rather not have all of this attention.” Armstong replied, “No, I just don’t deserve it.” Collins refuses to be interviewed. Aldrin, who granted an interview, threatened to sue us if we showed it to anyone.

			:''''''
	RETORT: Armstrong is noted for being near-reclusive in his inevitable fame; his view is that the landing, which included the work of Buzz Aldrin, was the hard, untested part. Aldrin was probably sensible in refusing this guy permission to twist his words, and Collins has gone over the story enough times (read “Carrying the Fire, it’s excellent).
			:Quote:

			::"He stated during his new book “Shoot for the Moon” that Gus Grissom should have commanded Apollo 11."
	5. The moon is 240,000 miles away. The space shuttle has never gone more than 400 miles from the Earth. Except for Apollo astronauts, no humans even claim to have gone beyond low-earth orbit. When the space shuttle astronauts did get to an altitude of 400 miles, the radiation of the Van Allen belts forced them to a lower altitude. The Van Allen radiation belts exist because the Earth’s magnetic field traps the solar wind.

			Had Donovan looked into the evidence for this, he could easily have seen that Slayton's words were not backed up by his actions. And Cassutt, who published his book in 1994, one year after Slayton died, had all of the Gemini rendezvous info widely available to him.
	RETORT: The shuttle is not designed to fly to the moon. This is like saying that no one has gone to Paris because taxicabs can’t cross the ocean. At least two Gemini flights also flew into the Van Allen belts, one up to 830 milss above the earth. In addition, the spacecraft walls do a good job of shielding the astronauts.

	4. The top portion of the lunar module which landed on the moon supposedly popped up off the moon with two astronauts aboard, entered lunar orbit 60 miles up, and docked with the command module in lunar orbit. To look at its design and think such could have actually occurred is absolutely ludicrous.

			It is not sufficient for Misplaced Pages editors to find something that has been published in a book, and then cite that to present it in one of our articles as fact, which the vast majority of readers will accept without scrutinizing the info. For us to do a thorough job, various sources must be examined, so that the references which present info which makes sense can be incorporated into our articles. And for the info that fails to stand up to a basic cross-referencing of info that is available in sources, we either discard it, or at least flag it.
	RETORT: And if you test it, a bumblebee can’t fly. The man forgets this is a craft designed to fly solely in space. This "proof" is just pure disbelief and has nothing to do with logical explanations.

	3. The surface of the moon is a vacuum. The landing module would have been heated to 250 degrees on the light side where they landed. There is no way they could have rejected the heat for as long as 72 hours as they claim on some Apollo missions.

			Again, from the preceding section:
	RETORT: The LM was covered in reflective materials to deflect the heat. And 250 degrees is bearable; I’ve been in a sauna at 190. Add the multiple cooling systems and it’s certainly possible.It’s interesting he can deny this but admit spacecraft returned through the atmosphere at 17,500 mph with outside temperatures of thousands of degrees.
			:"Slayton was probably going to select Grissom to be the first on the Moon (Fallen Astronauts page 87)"

	2. In 1967 three astronauts were burned alive on the launch pad. The upshot of the congressional inquiry was that the entire Apollo program was in shambles and it was a miracle no one was killed sooner. All of the problems were supposedly fixed by 1969, just two years later. With a third of a century of improved technology, why does it take longer between calamities to repair the Space Shuttle that only achieves Earth orbit?

			We have had a wealth of basic facts which have been available to us for a very long time which show Slayton's actions to be contrary to his words. -- ] (]) 04:23, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
	RETORT: It’s a thing this bozo has never heard of called hard work. The government decided it was actually going to do something and it did. That sort of dedication is lacking today.

			:Remember ]? He came back from having an ear operation that restored his flight status and claimed the next available Apollo mission (13, later postponed to 14) without serving on a backup crew or any rendezvous experience because... well, he was one of thge Mercury Seven. ] ] 05:40, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
	I might add this bozo - and I mean the filmmaker, as well as the above anonymous poster - also tries to prove that Gus Grissom and the crew of Apollo 1 was intentionally killed by NASA or the government as part of a coverup. This is beyond humbuggery and into slander. (And if they really wanted to kill him, all they had to do was sabotage his sports car. Why kill two other men?)

	1. All Apollo missions stayed in low-earth orbit for the duration of the trip. We uncovered some mislabeled, unedited, behind-the-scenes footage from NASA that shows the crew of Apollo 11 clearly staging a shot of being half-way to the moon. This clip, shown in (name of film) and explained in (name of another film) proves they did not leave low-earth orbit.

			::Alan Shepard was the fifth person to step foot onto the Moon. The issue being discussed in this section is the notion of who was going to be first, and whether or not the story that Grissom was being prepared for that role stands up to scrutiny. Here is a pertinent quote from what I had posted here (underlined for emphasis):
	RETORT There is also footage of a rehearsal for Doug McArthur wading ashore in the Phillippines in World War II, The astronauts were expected to participate in television broadcasts during the trip and did some rehearsal for them. No big whoop. This is like saying Tiger Woods never won the Masters as he had sone all his swinging before on the practice range.

			:::"<u>The only options Slayton would have would be to</u> send Grissom up on that mission unqualified to do the task at hand, or <u>delay the program for months so that Grissom could catch up to these other astronauts who Slayton had picked to get the necessary qualifications</u>."
	Sorry about the long post, but I just felt I had to say something.] 20:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

			::No one here has asserted that it would have been impossible for Grissom to be trained to fly the first landing mission. The point was that Slayton had several other astronauts who he had gotten into a much better position to do this. And if anyone, for whatever reason, had wanted Grissom to fly that first landing attempt, then it would have meant a long delay in the program.
	:''Bravissimo''. Except, I wish you hadn't. These vacuum-brained dolts shouldn't be refuted, they should be ridiculed, just like the ] lunatics. ] 13:43, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

			::That same assessment applies to Shepard, or any other astronaut in the program. It is important to note that Shepard did not step foot on the Moon until one and a half ''YEARS'' after the first landing mission had been accomplished. Any astronaut at NASA could have been sufficiently trained to fly a landing mission given one and a half years of catch up training. It is important to note, given your example, that Shepard had originally been slated to fly Apollo 13, and the reason why he got switched to Apollo 14 is for this very same reason I have been highlighting:
	=="Gusmobile" and the thruster joystick==

			::There was not sufficient time to get Shepard fully qualified.
	I'm adding a note that I read in a Smithsonian magazine profile of Grissom, he was the chief innovator (with NASA engineers, presumably) of the 3-axis (4-axis?) joystick which allowed one-handed control of the Gemini thrusters. Another reason the Gemini was nicknamed the Gusmobile. If anyone can find an online link, much appreciated. I have only my memory. - ] 14:28, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

			::So I suggest to you that Al Shepard is actually a PERFECT case study to support the points that have been made here regarding Grissom. Al did not have sufficient time to get up to speed to fly Apollo 13. And that fact underscores how Grissom could not have gotten up to speed in time to fly Apollo 11. Certainly not by July 1969. And by the time that Al launched in January of 1971, rendezvous in lunar orbit was no longer an unknown. It had been accomplished on three previous missions. There is no evidence that Slayton was willing to send anyone with no rendezvous experience to fly the first attempt of docking in the LM at the Moon. Slayton did not do this for the first, second, third or even the fourth effort to do a lunar orbit rendezvous. Shepard's mission was the fifth. His example does nothing to support the argument that Grissom was being groomed to fly the first landing attempt. At least, not in any way that I can see. -- ] (]) 16:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
	=="Shut the ], Gus."==

	I've heard (but can't source...) the ] spacecraft door was modified to open inward after ''],'' & had ''Mercury IV'' not blown, the ] door would have opened outward & none of them would have died... Can anybody confirm & include? ] 13:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
			:::The fact remains, we are still bound by our policy of ]. We cannot use ], no matter how well-reasoned it seems. Alternate history is always a speculative business. ] (]) 16:30, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
	::The link article you referenced has your answer, I think. ''"... However, the two-piece hatch was of a design which required that the crew undo several bolts in order to remove the inner section, and was impossible to open quickly. Furthermore, the inner portion of the hatch opened inwards, <u>an intentional design feature intended to exploit the cabin's air pressure in order to further tighten the hatch seal during spaceflight</u>. The hot gases produced by the fire held the hatch shut, and within a few seconds the air pressure had risen enough to prevent the crew from escaping (and, in fact, the air pressure rose so high as to rupture the capsule)."'' ] (<big><font color="darkred">] ] ]</font></big>) 16:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

			::::It appears that you are misunderstanding the purpose of why this section was created. Another possibility is that it is the WP:OR policy which is being misunderstood.
			::::This section was not started as some push to have a bunch of new info added to the article which shows that Slayton clearly was not preparing Grissom to be that First Man. My effort here has been to curtain garbage from being included in the article. Info that does not stand up to the reliable sources which we have available.

			::::There is no question that Grissom never got any rendezvous experience. And that Apollo 1 was not a rendezvous mission. There is no OR issue regarding this simple fact. And more importantly, WP:OR is not a policy which places prohibitions against ''removing'' statements which present clearly bogus info.

			::::We are in agreement in what you say about alternate history. And there is even more reason for an encyclopedia to purge itself of speculative info when such supposition has been exposed as being fully unfounded. It might help here to highlight the exact statement in the article which this section pertains to.

			:::::Quote from ''']''':
			::::<blockquote>Some contend that Grissom could have been selected as one of the astronauts to walk on the Moon. "Deke" Slayton wrote that he had hoped for one of the original Mercury astronauts to go to the Moon, noting: "It wasn't just a cut-and-dried decision as to who should make the first steps on the Moon. If I had to select on that basis, my first choice would have been Gus, which both Chris Kraft and Bob Gilruth seconded."</blockquote>

			::::The support presented for that statement is Deke! by Mike Cassutt, page 223.
			::::Then in the preceding section, we see another editor who appears to want to expand upon this, and here the reference being presented is Fallen Astronauts, page 87. I have communicated with Colin Burgess, the author of that book, and my understanding is that he never spoke to Slayton. That his story is basically a repeat of what Cassutt had published.
			::::And earlier in this current section, I cited yet another book which just came out and yet again repeats this same story.

			::::What we have here is a positive feedback loop where one author failed to do his due diligence and published this story which has a nice warm feeling to it. There certainly is an original research problem, and that is Mike Cassutt's original research which he published in his book.

			::::There is no prohibition in Misplaced Pages Policy against OR which would prevent bogus statements from being removed.

			::::Furthermore, no edit has been done to the section of the article in question. I have not done any. And in this section here, no one has yet proposed any. So I am left scratching my head as to what exactly you are objecting to. WP:OR certainly does not prohibit removal of a statement which one author decided to publish without thoroughly vetting it first. -- ] (]) 21:10, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
			:::::Sorry to waste your time, but that is just a short list of possible things to include the article or at least research further. I find a lot of information whilst looking for other information, and it seems like a waste if I put it in a document on my personal computer. The 'notes to work on' section title is accurate as to what its contents is. Feel free to ping me next time if you have anything else you need to discuss. '''<span style="background:#B1810B; padding:2px; border-style:solid; border-width:1px">]]</span>''' 01:39, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

			::::::No sweat about use of my time.
			::::::Ideally, info presented here will prove to be sufficient toward keeping bogus stories from promulgating.
			::::::Imagine if there had been a critical mass of people who had been able to nip the Moon Hoax Theories in the bud.
			::::::So if these Gus First Theories can be kept in check with a solid application of pertinent facts, then I would certainly see this investment in our time to be well spent.

			::::::Some of you all may have seen that beyond the several books that have been highlighted here, there are news outlets who have run with this story. It is clear that there are plenty of people who get paid as professionals in the news business who don't care about checking their facts before publishing them. Here are recent articles which have made some of the most brashly unfounded claims:

			:::::::'''"Man who would have been first to walk on moon honored in Indiana hometown"'''
			::::::: () (, )
			::::::From all of those I have seen, here is the report which lays it on the thickest:
			:::::::'''""'''
			::::::They present so many factual errors, it is difficult to decide where to begin. Perhaps it would be better for me to not begin. Anyone can check some of the more basic facts for themselves. Particularly the tall tales being spun by Gus's cousin Steve Grissom. Particularly in the second video on that page (WTTV's web extra).

			::::::And if you work for one of these news outlets, it is your ''duty'' to do a factchecking before presenting this kind of info to the world as truth.

			::::::Ok, I've said just about everything that I came to this article to say. I will leave it to other editors on how best to proceed so that we present solid info to readers. Unless anyone has anything pressing for me, I will switch to a read-only mode here for the coming weeks, and will check back to see how the quality of this article has progressed. Thanks for everyone's input. Hawkeye, I'm glad that we got to include Al Shepard in this. His case is an important angle on the story.

			::::::I know that there are going to be people who are heavily invested in the fictionalized version of the story who are not going to be too thrilled if and when they happen to be met with the info presented here. But incontrovertible facts have a way of proving their durability when held up against tales which do not stand on a firm foundation. So I will leave here with complete trust in that, even if the process may take a lot more time than I myself might see as being ideal. I have waited patiently over the course of several years with other topics. And for this topic here, I am fine with sitting back and letting those who see the need to take an active role toward refining our article. Goodbye for now, yall. -- ] (]) 07:15, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

			== Rating as a Featured Article? ==

			Do you believe that this article should be rated as a Featured Article? It has encyclopedic value, is of high importance to multiple projects and fits the criteria of a Featured Article. ] (]) 01:41, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

			:Featured Article status is only awarded after a rigorous ] review process. The article would not pass in its current form. ] ] 05:20, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

			== Inconsistency in article? ==

			"He was also the second American to fly in space twice, preceded only by Joe Walker with his sub-orbital X-15 flights" conflicts with the 'first human' part of "This mission made Grissom the first human and thus first NASA astronaut to fly into space twice". Suborbital vs orbital flights shouldn't make a difference here since Liberty Bell 7 was suborbital. ] (]) 15:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:03, 9 January 2025

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gus Grissom article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 years

Gus Grissom has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Gus Grissom is part of the Mercury Seven series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 1, 2017	Good article nominee	Listed
July 29, 2019	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 3, 2019, and April 3, 2024.

Current status: Good article

This

level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Military

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Spaceflight High‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Indiana / Purdue Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Indiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Indiana (assessed as Low-importance).
	Indiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Indiana - Purdue (assessed as High-importance).

Military history: Aviation / Biography / North America / United States / Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	Military biography task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)

Indiana Historical Society Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indiana Historical Society, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indiana Historical Society-related articles and topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indiana Historical SocietyWikipedia:GLAM/Indiana Historical SocietyTemplate:WikiProject Indiana Historical SocietyIndiana Historical Society
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Twofingered Typist, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on March 27, 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Notes to work on

Betty Grissom's thoughts on the investigation being a sham should be included, even if they are not correct, it is significant
Slayton was probably going to select Grissom to be the first on the Moon (Fallen Astronauts page 87)
Betty sued NAA (and it was settled out of court) link
Figure out how this relates to the star in the article link
~~Moon and Mars citations link another link, asteroid~~
Grissom's Limestone Memorial
Molly Brown transferred to Grissom Museum in Mitchell
opening of AFB museum, another article of it
Another source
Liberty Bell 7, after being raised
Dedication of memorial
Date of Bunker Hill AFB renaming

More to come, will be working on these. Kees08 (Talk) 01:08, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Grissom as First Man: Slayton's story is not supported by his actions

From 'Notes to work on', above:

"Slayton was probably going to select Grissom to be the first on the Moon (Fallen Astronauts page 87)"

This is an often repeated story, having been published by Michael Cassutt in his book Deke! (1994). A diligent author who strives for historical accuracy will not simply interview a person, and then publish their words presented as fact. Ok, it is clear that it is a fact that Slayton said it. But it is the job of a historian to seek supporting evidence that words like that are telling an accurate story before presenting such info as truth. A solid follow up to a statement by Slayton saying that his plan was to assign Grissom as the first to attempt the landing on the Moon would be to confirm with Slayton that Grissom was being given training prerequisites to qualify him for this mission.

And here is where we find that this story lacks supporting evidence. We know what the requirements for flying the lunar landing mission were. One requirement Deke imposed on these crews was that they had experience flying an orbital rendezvous. The entire purpose of the Gemini program was to ensure that astronauts knew how to fly a rendezvous and docking, essential for the Earth Orbit Rendezvous mode to be used in Apollo.

- Grissom had no rendezvous experience. He was assigned to fly the first Gemini, and then the first Apollo. Neither of these were a rendezvous mission, with no separate Agena target to connect with.

Another critical requirement to fly the lunar landing mission was being fully trained on the Lunar Lander Training Vehicle (LLTV). In order to get fully trained, this was a lengthy process of completing training in the Lunar Landing Research Facility, the gantry contraption at Langley. Then there was helicopter training. And then there was checkout in the LLTV fixed-base simulator, and then flying the LLTV in fixed-gimbal mode, and finally a full certification in flying the LLTV in lunar-simulation mode.

- 6 astronauts were in the first class to be selected for this LLTV training. Grissom was not among the six. (The six were Borman-Anders, Armstrong-Aldrin and Conrad-Williams.)

The fact that Grissom was not chosen by Slayton for LLTV training has been posted to the internet since 2001 (here). And that link has been available on the Misplaced Pages article on the LLTV for well over a decade, since 2008.

The fact that Grissom was never assigned to a rendezvous mission has been widely known since the 60s.

Anyone who had access to Deke Slayton could have asked him these simple questions as a way to provide tangible support to his words. Actions speak much louder than words. And if Deke did indeed intend to assign Grissom on the first landing mission, as he had stated according to Michael Cassutt, then he would have a lot of 'splaining to do as to why he failed to give Grissom the necessary training. The only options Slayton would have would be to send Grissom up on that mission unqualified to do the task at hand, or delay the program for months so that Grissom could catch up to these other astronauts who Slayton had picked to get the necessary qualifications.

If Slayton's words were sincere, then this leaves a huge question mark as to why he would paint himself into such a tight corner regarding his choices for who would graduate from Gemini with the necessary rendezvous experience, and also who would get trained in the LLTV. But seeing the hard facts that Slayton did not groom Grissom with the necessary training, then the evidence points to Slayton having groomed people like Armstrong, Conrad and Borman to be on the short list of those who would be fully qualified when the time came to attempt the first landing.

An alternate explanation is what is known as 'eulogizing'. Slayton was saying nice things about his friend who had died.

James Donovan is another author who did not thoroughly look into this story before presenting it as fact. He has repeated this story of how Slayton said he intended to give Grissom the first shot at landing. His new book has recently been published, and so the news headlines today include articles like this:

The man who should have taken first step on Moon – and it’s not Buzz Aldrin

Quote:

"He stated during his new book “Shoot for the Moon” that Gus Grissom should have commanded Apollo 11."

Had Donovan looked into the evidence for this, he could easily have seen that Slayton's words were not backed up by his actions. And Cassutt, who published his book in 1994, one year after Slayton died, had all of the Gemini rendezvous info widely available to him.

It is not sufficient for Misplaced Pages editors to find something that has been published in a book, and then cite that to present it in one of our articles as fact, which the vast majority of readers will accept without scrutinizing the info. For us to do a thorough job, various sources must be examined, so that the references which present info which makes sense can be incorporated into our articles. And for the info that fails to stand up to a basic cross-referencing of info that is available in sources, we either discard it, or at least flag it.

Again, from the preceding section:

"Slayton was probably going to select Grissom to be the first on the Moon (Fallen Astronauts page 87)"

We have had a wealth of basic facts which have been available to us for a very long time which show Slayton's actions to be contrary to his words. -- Tdadamemd19 (talk) 04:23, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Remember Alan Shepard? He came back from having an ear operation that restored his flight status and claimed the next available Apollo mission (13, later postponed to 14) without serving on a backup crew or any rendezvous experience because... well, he was one of thge Mercury Seven. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:40, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Alan Shepard was the fifth person to step foot onto the Moon. The issue being discussed in this section is the notion of who was going to be first, and whether or not the story that Grissom was being prepared for that role stands up to scrutiny. Here is a pertinent quote from what I had posted here (underlined for emphasis):

"The only options Slayton would have would be to send Grissom up on that mission unqualified to do the task at hand, or delay the program for months so that Grissom could catch up to these other astronauts who Slayton had picked to get the necessary qualifications."

No one here has asserted that it would have been impossible for Grissom to be trained to fly the first landing mission. The point was that Slayton had several other astronauts who he had gotten into a much better position to do this. And if anyone, for whatever reason, had wanted Grissom to fly that first landing attempt, then it would have meant a long delay in the program.

That same assessment applies to Shepard, or any other astronaut in the program. It is important to note that Shepard did not step foot on the Moon until one and a half YEARS after the first landing mission had been accomplished. Any astronaut at NASA could have been sufficiently trained to fly a landing mission given one and a half years of catch up training. It is important to note, given your example, that Shepard had originally been slated to fly Apollo 13, and the reason why he got switched to Apollo 14 is for this very same reason I have been highlighting:

There was not sufficient time to get Shepard fully qualified.

So I suggest to you that Al Shepard is actually a PERFECT case study to support the points that have been made here regarding Grissom. Al did not have sufficient time to get up to speed to fly Apollo 13. And that fact underscores how Grissom could not have gotten up to speed in time to fly Apollo 11. Certainly not by July 1969. And by the time that Al launched in January of 1971, rendezvous in lunar orbit was no longer an unknown. It had been accomplished on three previous missions. There is no evidence that Slayton was willing to send anyone with no rendezvous experience to fly the first attempt of docking in the LM at the Moon. Slayton did not do this for the first, second, third or even the fourth effort to do a lunar orbit rendezvous. Shepard's mission was the fifth. His example does nothing to support the argument that Grissom was being groomed to fly the first landing attempt. At least, not in any way that I can see. -- Tdadamemd19 (talk) 16:00, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

The fact remains, we are still bound by our policy of WP:Reliable sources. We cannot use WP:Original research, no matter how well-reasoned it seems. Alternate history is always a speculative business. JustinTime55 (talk) 16:30, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

It appears that you are misunderstanding the purpose of why this section was created. Another possibility is that it is the WP:OR policy which is being misunderstood.

This section was not started as some push to have a bunch of new info added to the article which shows that Slayton clearly was not preparing Grissom to be that First Man. My effort here has been to curtain garbage from being included in the article. Info that does not stand up to the reliable sources which we have available.

There is no question that Grissom never got any rendezvous experience. And that Apollo 1 was not a rendezvous mission. There is no OR issue regarding this simple fact. And more importantly, WP:OR is not a policy which places prohibitions against removing statements which present clearly bogus info.

We are in agreement in what you say about alternate history. And there is even more reason for an encyclopedia to purge itself of speculative info when such supposition has been exposed as being fully unfounded. It might help here to highlight the exact statement in the article which this section pertains to.

Quote from Death and legacy:

Some contend that Grissom could have been selected as one of the astronauts to walk on the Moon. "Deke" Slayton wrote that he had hoped for one of the original Mercury astronauts to go to the Moon, noting: "It wasn't just a cut-and-dried decision as to who should make the first steps on the Moon. If I had to select on that basis, my first choice would have been Gus, which both Chris Kraft and Bob Gilruth seconded."

The support presented for that statement is Deke! by Mike Cassutt, page 223.

Then in the preceding section, we see another editor who appears to want to expand upon this, and here the reference being presented is Fallen Astronauts, page 87. I have communicated with Colin Burgess, the author of that book, and my understanding is that he never spoke to Slayton. That his story is basically a repeat of what Cassutt had published.

And earlier in this current section, I cited yet another book which just came out and yet again repeats this same story.

What we have here is a positive feedback loop where one author failed to do his due diligence and published this story which has a nice warm feeling to it. There certainly is an original research problem, and that is Mike Cassutt's original research which he published in his book.

There is no prohibition in Misplaced Pages Policy against OR which would prevent bogus statements from being removed.

Furthermore, no edit has been done to the section of the article in question. I have not done any. And in this section here, no one has yet proposed any. So I am left scratching my head as to what exactly you are objecting to. WP:OR certainly does not prohibit removal of a statement which one author decided to publish without thoroughly vetting it first. -- Tdadamemd19 (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry to waste your time, but that is just a short list of possible things to include the article or at least research further. I find a lot of information whilst looking for other information, and it seems like a waste if I put it in a document on my personal computer. The 'notes to work on' section title is accurate as to what its contents is. Feel free to ping me next time if you have anything else you need to discuss. Kees08 (Talk) 01:39, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

No sweat about use of my time.

Ideally, info presented here will prove to be sufficient toward keeping bogus stories from promulgating.

Imagine if there had been a critical mass of people who had been able to nip the Moon Hoax Theories in the bud.

So if these Gus First Theories can be kept in check with a solid application of pertinent facts, then I would certainly see this investment in our time to be well spent.

Some of you all may have seen that beyond the several books that have been highlighted here, there are news outlets who have run with this story. It is clear that there are plenty of people who get paid as professionals in the news business who don't care about checking their facts before publishing them. Here are recent articles which have made some of the most brashly unfounded claims:

"Man who would have been first to walk on moon honored in Indiana hometown"

(cached article) (orig paywall link, c-j.com search)

From all of those I have seen, here is the report which lays it on the thickest:

"The Hoosier who would’ve been the first man on the moon: How tragedy changed history"

They present so many factual errors, it is difficult to decide where to begin. Perhaps it would be better for me to not begin. Anyone can check some of the more basic facts for themselves. Particularly the tall tales being spun by Gus's cousin Steve Grissom. Particularly in the second video on that page (WTTV's web extra).

And if you work for one of these news outlets, it is your duty to do a factchecking before presenting this kind of info to the world as truth.

Ok, I've said just about everything that I came to this article to say. I will leave it to other editors on how best to proceed so that we present solid info to readers. Unless anyone has anything pressing for me, I will switch to a read-only mode here for the coming weeks, and will check back to see how the quality of this article has progressed. Thanks for everyone's input. Hawkeye, I'm glad that we got to include Al Shepard in this. His case is an important angle on the story.

I know that there are going to be people who are heavily invested in the fictionalized version of the story who are not going to be too thrilled if and when they happen to be met with the info presented here. But incontrovertible facts have a way of proving their durability when held up against tales which do not stand on a firm foundation. So I will leave here with complete trust in that, even if the process may take a lot more time than I myself might see as being ideal. I have waited patiently over the course of several years with other topics. And for this topic here, I am fine with sitting back and letting those who see the need to take an active role toward refining our article. Goodbye for now, yall. -- Tdadamemd19 (talk) 07:15, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Rating as a Featured Article?

Do you believe that this article should be rated as a Featured Article? It has encyclopedic value, is of high importance to multiple projects and fits the criteria of a Featured Article. QuicksmartTortoise513 (talk) 01:41, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Featured Article status is only awarded after a rigorous Featured article candidates review process. The article would not pass in its current form. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:20, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Inconsistency in article?

"He was also the second American to fly in space twice, preceded only by Joe Walker with his sub-orbital X-15 flights" conflicts with the 'first human' part of "This mission made Grissom the first human and thus first NASA astronaut to fly into space twice". Suborbital vs orbital flights shouldn't make a difference here since Liberty Bell 7 was suborbital. 173.30.73.32 (talk) 15:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Categories: