Small Apollo

[SAVORYapple]

is there a possible POD where the apollo program, instead of using the Saturn V, uses small boosters instead and on-orbit assembly?

[danwild6]

I suppose the US beating the Soviets into space may work. The method chosen really reflected the US fear of being beaten again.

[ryackov]

It would delay the Apollo landings as there would have to be several orbital tests of the procedures.

[The Kiat]

Originally Posted by danwild6

I suppose the US beating the Soviets into space may work. The method chosen really reflected the US fear of being beaten again.

The bloke who came up with the idea of LOR went to some of NASA's head with the idea, and you know what they first did? They went to his immediate supervisor and ask why his underling jumped over several layers of management. Never mind that his idea was sound, the fact he didn't go through channels was their first reaction. Can't remember if the supervisor rejected the idea outright, and that's why he went to the top with it. Either way, EOR and DC were the two methods that management were debating at the start of the program. Had LOR gone through so-called proper channels, it might just now be reaching the head of NASA's desk. I tend to have a dim view of any organization with fifteen layers of management. No matter how good an idea you might have, all it takes is one manager who thinks he knows everything to block it. I think something similar happened with an FBI agent investigating Saudi subjects who were trying to learn how to steer planes but weren't too keen on learning how to land (which has nothing to do with Apollo, and only illustrates similarities in FBI and NASA organization in that managers take it upon themselves to block info).

[Archibald]

I had some rough timeline like this. Two major PODs

- John Houbolt dies when his airliner catch fire after a fuel spill, late July 1961 (it nearly happened)

- the mighty F1 never cure its combustion instability problems in 1962.

That totally derail Saturn evolution. The fattest Saturn is now the C-2 http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/saturnc2.htm

Payload: 22 tons to earth orbit. Yet this rocket can be augmented with a couple of Titan III solids: should be 40 tons to orbit.
Let's call it Saturn C2S.

LOR doesn't survive to Houbolt death in 1961. Von Braun (and Kennedy advisor Wiesner) win the day with Earth Orbit Rendezvous.

IF they managed to fix EOR issues, then that result in a much more flexible Apollo program with fuel depots in Earth orbit. Smaller Saturns are also much more affordable.

Calculations to come in another post.

[Archibald]

Some calculations...

Let's imagine the lunar stack in earth orbit.
S-IVB: 120 tons
(80 tons of LOX, 20 tons of liquid hydrogen, 20 tons of empty structure)
Apollo CSM: 30 tons
Apollo LM: 15 tons

That's 165 tons when Saturn V lift only 120 tons, which explains by the fact the S-IVB burns part of its propellant as a third stage.

In my alternate scenario:

1*Saturn C2 brings the LM
1*Saturn C2S brings the CSM
1*Saturn C2 brings the liquid hydrogen
1*Saturn C2 brings the empty S-IVB
2*Saturn C2S bring the LOX

That's six launches.

The fuel depot can be expanded for Mars missions, and a manned space station can also be build nearby.

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Originally Posted by lookupshootup

is there a possible POD where the apollo program, instead of using the Saturn V, uses small boosters instead and on-orbit assembly?

Well, if there is the same space race and if the rockets work, then a Saturn V equivalent is likely. OTL, one prospect was EOR (earth orbit rendezvous) where 2 Saturn Vs would launch into LEO and assemble a massive stack for direct travel to the moon. This would mean the reentry module goes down to the moon and back up, meaning the lunar lander would be huge.

So, getting assembly using 'small' rockets would be difficult. Would probably actually do away with the whole lunar expedition, as being too difficult and expensive. IMO