To Rise From the Earth: Alternate 'post-Apollo' space program

Is the space station the Soviets are building anything like the OTL "Mir 2" proposal from the 80s? I think that was sort of the Soviet counterpart of "Freedom", wasn't it, and they used some of the proposed modules on the ISS eventually.

And to get to the moon, were they using the same hardware as proposed in OTL, the lunar Soyuz, with the one-man LK lander and all of that spacewalking business? No, wait, you say they landed two men... So, what mission architecture were they using, precisely?
 
If you want a stable, long-term presence in space, you'll have to get private industry to get into space mostly on their own- something like Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct combined with lots of funding for NASA for research new spaceflight technologies and subsidies for companies that launch stuff into orbit to bring launch costs down below $100 per pound. Perhaps Reagan decides to approve the Industrial Space Facility and develop solar power satelites at L5?
 
Is N1 the launch vehicle for "Mir" and the Lunar expeditions?

Wouldn't the space station be more like http://www.astronautix.com/craft/os11969.htm
OTL Mir was made the way it was due to specific choice of Soyuz and Proton LVs.

'81 is actually even a bit slow to the Moon if they got N1 finally working before '75. And With N1 they had some crazy plans, like http://www.astronautix.com/craft/dlbrbase.htm

Yes, the N1 is the launch vehicle. I figured 1981 because the Soviets spend around two years building their big space station (more like the MKBS than Mir-2 to answer your question JjeeporCreepor), then a couple more years building and testing their mission architecture (Apollo 10-type stuff) and otherwise getting ready. I called it Mir because I happen to like that name and use it to indicate "advanced" Soviet/Russian space stations.

@JjeeporCreepor: The architecture is a bit different. What I figure is a two-launch architecture to get around the limits of the single-launch plan (which you nicely enumerate). With several years to rethink how to do it, and no real time pressure, they can use a better plan. Something similar to L3M.

If you want a stable, long-term presence in space, you'll have to get private industry to get into space mostly on their own- something like Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct combined with lots of funding for NASA for research new spaceflight technologies and subsidies for companies that launch stuff into orbit to bring launch costs down below $100 per pound. Perhaps Reagan decides to approve the Industrial Space Facility and develop solar power satelites at L5?

Solar power is waaay too advanced for the kinds of rockets they have. One of the questions I've had was what effect no Shuttle might have on some space advocates in the '70s, particularly the O'Nellians--they really needed the low-cost launch of Shuttle to work out. My guess is they come up with the same plans and realize they need very low cost launch vehicles to make it work, then focus on that. I have been thinking about private spaceflight, but my feeling is that there isn't going to be much movement on that until the late '80s at best; and given that a fair amount is going to be going on then, probably not until the '90s. I'm not really sure how to go about making a flourishing private sector, to be entirely honest. Probably NASA focus on advanced tech. On the bright side, the high launch rates they need to supply Freedom and do all the other things they want means they will definitely be more interested in RLVs than IOTL.
 
If you want a stable, long-term presence in space, you'll have to get private industry to get into space mostly on their own- something like Robert Zubrin's Mars Direct combined with lots of funding for NASA for research new spaceflight technologies and subsidies for companies that launch stuff into orbit to bring launch costs down below $100 per pound. Perhaps Reagan decides to approve the Industrial Space Facility and develop solar power satelites at L5?
Or have something like the Sea Dragon... :cool:;)
 
nice TL, truth is life

some note on EUROPA rocket of ELDO

with a success of flight F-7 had save the Program in 1968
OTL because Stage 2/3 pyrotech cutter produce gas inside stage
that produced a short-circuit in not isolated circuit of SELF DESTRUCTION SYSTEM !
and Stage 3 exploded, in 1969 the Great Britian politics deciding to leave ELDO in 1971

had the germans build the Stage 3 better (its was first major space project after V-2 !!!)
this had never happend

so future of EUROPA Rocket ?
next to EUROPA 1 flights F-8 to F-10 came EUROPA 2 for GEO satellite
with obligatory failure on first flight F-11 from Kourou, OTL short-circuit in Autopilot
a year overwork and successful launch in 1973 with F-12
later Symphonie 1+2, COS and GEOS are launch with EUROPA 2
EUROPA 3 used Blue Streak from Older version but used new H14 Upperstage (Lox/Lh2 Fuels)
the fist launch in 1978 wend anomalous good for a Europa rocket
but later flight show problems with HM7 engines on H14.
for more playload used EUROPA 2/3TA with french booster
2xL-17 (Diamant B firstage) 2-4xP10 (french SSBM firststage)
but they neede bigger Booster so came the
EUROPA 4 using 3 Blue Streak (2 as Booster, one altitude ignited) and H14 Upperstage
first launch consider around 1988
 
Like most other launcher systems of the time, even the Proton or mighty N-1, the Europa rocket had its origins in a ballistic missile--Blue Streak, developed as an IRBM comparable to the American Thor, but built all in Britain. The ballistic missile project was cancelled in 1960 due to problems in siting the vulnerable kerolox missiles, but again like its American counterpart, it had a long second life in the launcher business. In 1964, an agreement was signed, primarily involving Germany and France, to develop a European satellite launcher in direct competition with the Soviet Union and the United States. The Europa development program was long and troubled, but Blue Streak soldiered on, performing flawlessly through over 20 development flights before the Europa 4 design finally entered service in 1977. Almost immediately, the limited performance of the existing design began to manifest itself, though the advantageous positioning of the French Guianese launch site and the limited official manifest (as the Europeans lacked the significant governmental space program of the United States) made it attractive to the commercial space companies that were just beginning to emerge...

--...United in the Heavens: Europe in the Space Age

From at least the mid-1970s, space station studies had considered using foreign-designed and -built modules, or at least foreign astronauts and experiments. The cost and political aspects of outsourcing (as it would now be called) some construction and research activity were too obvious to ignore, and at the time space was becoming increasingly a tool for international politics rather than just international competition. The ASTP in 1975 had marked a new era in detente, and by the end of the decade cosmonauts from countries aligned with or at least friendly to the Soviet Union were routinely being flown to Mir. As a result, studies of European and Japanese cooperation were becoming increasingly common as the decade proceeded, and by 1978 there had been extensive contact between the United States, Europe, and Japan about joint activities on Skylab II, which was just about to launch. This period of contact culminated in the launch of Europe's first non-Communist astronaut, Harry Archer, in 1981 to Skylab II. This news, while trumpeted in Europe at the time, was shortly overshadowed by the Soviet moon landing. However, the stage was set for much more substantive cooperation...

--Touching the Sky: History of Human Space Flight

...the design of NASA spacesuits was also modified at this time. The A7L series had been designed for moonwalking. Now that NASA was moving towards prolonged operations in low Earth orbit, and towards a culture of greater cost-consciousness, the suitability of this series for operation in LEO was being seriously assessed. The A7L was heavy (weighing as much as 245 pounds fully loaded), required custom-fitting to each astronaut, and had certain features that were simply unnecessary in Earth orbit operations. A new design could be cheaper and more effective, attractive to a newly-lean organization. As a result, design contracts were let and on January 29th, 1975 NASA announced that Hamilton Sundstrand had won a contract to design and build a new series of space suits, the S1H...

--Touching the Sky: History of Human Space Flight
 
Sorry for the delay. Last week I was having a bit of a break from life between moving out of the dorms and then moving back in today. Now that that's done, I've gone ahead and posted this next update!
 
the Europa 4 design finally entered service in 1977.
that's to early ! why?
ELDO had it planed 3-4 years after Europa III launch in 1978
in 1973-1978 designates for EUROPA 3 R&D and final test (like OTL Ariane 1)
also was the budgeted money.
EUROPA 3 Payload 3 tons in Low Orbit 0.5 Ton in GEO

as soon as possible is a EUROPA 3 TA/L with 2 Stap-on Blue Streak
TA = thrust augment L=Liquid

after EUROPA 3 can start the R&D on EUROPA 4
core stage engine modification for altitude ignition (new engine nozzel ?)
jettison system for 2 Booster
EUROPA 4 Payload 7 tons in Low orbit 2 tons in GEO

a EUROPA 5 with 4 Boosterstage and one corestage ?
 
that's to early ! why?
ELDO had it planed 3-4 years after Europa III launch in 1978
in 1973-1978 designates for EUROPA 3 R&D and final test (like OTL Ariane 1)
also was the budgeted money.
EUROPA 3 Payload 3 tons in Low Orbit 0.5 Ton in GEO

as soon as possible is a EUROPA 3 TA/L with 2 Stap-on Blue Streak
TA = thrust augment L=Liquid

after EUROPA 3 can start the R&D on EUROPA 4
core stage engine modification for altitude ignition (new engine nozzel ?)
jettison system for 2 Booster
EUROPA 4 Payload 7 tons in Low orbit 2 tons in GEO

a EUROPA 5 with 4 Boosterstage and one corestage ?

Ah...the history is diverging a bit. I figured Europa 3 was a more advanced (slightly reengineered) test vehicle, and Europa 4 was the final production version. It has been 8 years since the POD, after all...the butterflies are beginning to swarm.
 
Ah...the history is diverging a bit. I figured Europa 3 was a more advanced (slightly reengineered) test vehicle, and Europa 4 was the final production version. It has been 8 years since the POD, after all...the butterflies are beginning to swarm.

in that case take EUROPA 3 TA/L with 2 Stap-on Blue Streak
replace the H14 by a H20 Stage (that's 20 tons of Liquid Hydrogene)

questions
OTL NASA ask ELDO for Space Tug R&D in 1970
will ELDO make of this design a early ATV for U.S. Space Station ?
in 1969 CNES presendet a HERMES like Manned spacecraft for Europa Rocket
so will ELDO make R&D for Small Lifting Body Manned spacecraft in this TL?
and do you need more Info about Apollo CSM modification for AAP ?
 
Great work on this timeline. I've never seen such thorough work.
As to the Europeans...

We have astronauts, taikonauts, cosmonauts, why not some Euronauts?
 
Great work on this timeline. I've never seen such thorough work.
As to the Europeans...

We have astronauts, taikonauts, cosmonauts, why not some Euronauts?

Effusive and wholly undeserved praise :eek:

My thinking exactly on the Euronauts, too, we need Brits and Germans and Italians and such IN SPACE!!!!!

Also, a word from our sponsors:

As I have become dissatisfied with certain stylistic elements of this TL, am ashamed at the brevity of my updates, and have lost all of my notes, I am ending this TL. Rest assured that I have not abandoned the concept, and instead plan to write a new TL using the ideas first developed here. I just want to finish writing it *before* I post it; currently, I expect to be done in about 2-3 months, though it may take longer depending on how much time my school work takes up this coming semester. That way, I can ensure a consistent, quality stream of updates. I will of course be starting threads in the future to hopefully get some additional details about areas of version 3 (still not sure what to call it; maybe that should be the first thing I ask :p), and I would be very grateful if you responded.
 
Effusive and wholly undeserved praise :eek:

My thinking exactly on the Euronauts, too, we need Brits and Germans and Italians and such IN SPACE!!!!!

Also, a word from our sponsors:

As I have become dissatisfied with certain stylistic elements of this TL, am ashamed at the brevity of my updates, and have lost all of my notes, I am ending this TL. Rest assured that I have not abandoned the concept, and instead plan to write a new TL using the ideas first developed here. I just want to finish writing it *before* I post it; currently, I expect to be done in about 2-3 months, though it may take longer depending on how much time my school work takes up this coming semester. That way, I can ensure a consistent, quality stream of updates. I will of course be starting threads in the future to hopefully get some additional details about areas of version 3 (still not sure what to call it; maybe that should be the first thing I ask :p), and I would be very grateful if you responded.
Nooooo!

Aw, if you must... well, I hope you can work it out. Please give us a link here when you start the thing again. I've certainly enjoyed this :).
 
Top