WI: Europe dominated space exploration from the 50s onwards, instead of the US.

I am thinking of making a full fledged ATL where ESA is the dominant space agency of the world.

Currently, I have ESA being founded in 1956, but I'm not sure what a 50's Europe satellite launcher would look like.
 
With additional funding from other European countries earlier on a launcher evolved from Blue Streak could have easily had a great future. It was a very capable launcher and extremely reliable for its era.

As it happens my father was an electrical technician on the project in the late 1950's. He used to make up the prototype circuit boards that the "boffins" designed for the thing and remembers watching the films of the test launches that were screened for the team.

It was the TSR-2 of rocketry (British, and better than what the American's had, but cancelled anyway).
 
Well, maybe a TL were the US after WWII go back to their isolationist politics (but the Marshall Plan still happen due to economic motivation) and Europe is more or less 'forced' to stick together to counter the Soviet. Better if Europe is a little less devastated and spent by the war (maybe Market Garden work or Hitler is offed and Germany go down due to internal chaos)
 
In 1956 the combined GDPs of Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Greece, Portugal, the UK and West Germany was 87% of that of the USA and that improved over the next 20years. This suggests that the economy of western Europe was large enough to have a space program that could have been competitive with the USSR and the USA. The will to do something like this would have been the biggest hurdle.
 
I assume the PoD is after, say, 1950. Otherwise it is very easy to put together a timeline where the allies France and Britain (and maybe USSR) crushes Germany like a bug by 1941, avoiding almost all of the damage done to Europe during the war (even occupied Germany is much better off, not having gone through years of self-inflicted genocide and the military-industrial-national equivalent of smashing one's head against a brick wall).

All of Western Europe, plus partners like Canada and Japan, should be able to financially and technically support a space programme rivalling the Soviet Union. Consider that both France and Britain were able to launch their own satellites on their own rockets not long after the Soviets, despite their much lower population. The challenge is political. The Soviets can do everything by themselves, and theoretically plan ahead for years. Could Britain or France be absolutely sure that next year's Italian Prime Minister will front their fair share of the costs? Who decides who pays for what vehicle, which mission? Leaving aside that the United States, a huge economy and an unrivalled defence industry, is still around. U.S. Needs to get screwed hard for them to not care about a space program to best everyone else.
 

Nebogipfel

Monthly Donor
In 1956 the combined GDPs of Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Greece, Portugal, the UK and West Germany was 87% of that of the USA and that improved over the next 20years. This suggests that the economy of western Europe was large enough to have a space program that could have been competitive with the USSR and the USA. The will to do something like this would have been the biggest hurdle.
So what reason would places like Germany that were busy rebuilding their nations have to spend lots of money on a civilian space program ? I guess infrastructure and things like that would have priority well into the 60s - then I could imagine something like a more serious attempt. You have to sell it to the voters first.
 

Deleted member 1487

I am thinking of making a full fledged ATL where ESA is the dominant space agency of the world.

Currently, I have ESA being founded in 1956, but I'm not sure what a 50's Europe satellite launcher would look like.
The only way that was possible is without WW2. WW2 destroyed Europe and they were still recovering in the 1950s, not to mention were on the front lines of the Cold War, while the US had not been damaged in either WW1 or WW2 and was more prosperous than any other country in history. Its simply impossible for anyone in the world to compete with the US in anything the US chooses to devote resources to.
 
So what reason would places like Germany that were busy rebuilding their nations have to spend lots of money on a civilian space program ? I guess infrastructure and things like that would have priority well into the 60s - then I could imagine something like a more serious attempt. You have to sell it to the voters first.

You also need nationalism to do something like a space program which offers no immediate rewards other then pride and German nationalism has been a nonexistent force in the post war world only self interest and if it was up to self interest alone there really is no reason to go to the moon or do the other things that Kennedy talked about.
 
This is part of my British Aviation 1945-75 essay, in which a British launched satellite beats Sputnik one by up to 3 months. However, it doesn't allow for the Americans taking the British project more seriously than they did the Soviet Union and accelerating their efforts in response. Also I wrote it about 2 years ago before I knew more about the Europa project than I now do.

a) Black Knight and Blue Streak

Westland's Saunders Roe Division didn't build the Princess flying boat, SR.53 and SR.177. Instead it concentrated on helicopters and ballistic missiles. Thus the Black Knight research rocket made its first flight in 1950 rather than 1958. In common with the real world 25 missiles were built of which 22 were launched between 1950 and 1957.

In the real world Westland proposed the 54" diameter Black Knight Mk 3 to follow on from the 36" diameter Mk 1 and 2 versions, but the Government decided to buy the Black Arrow small satellite launcher because it did not have the money for both projects. Instead the Project Sparta RTV programme which Black Prince Mk 3 was intended to support used second-hand Redstone rockets bought from the Americans. In this version of history the Black Knight Mk 3 was proposed 8 years earlier and was operational by 1958.

Black Knight was built to test re-entry test vehicles for the Blue Streak ballistic missile and was begun 8 years earlier because Blue Streak was also begun 8 years earlier. In the real world the first launch was scheduled to take place in the last quarter of 1960, but that does not mean it happened in the last quarter of 1952 in this version of history. This is because the Government bought ballistic missile technology from the USA to accelerate the development programme. The real Blue Streak and its Rolls Royce RZ.2 engine were based technology purchased from America, that is the Atlas ICBM and the Rocketdyne S-3D engine[1]. There was no Americans technology to buy in 1947 so the British engineers had to start from scratch. I half remember reading that buying American technology saved 2 years, but I have deliberately been more conservative by putting the first test launch in the last quarter of 1956 rather than the end of 1954.

Blue Streak entered RAF service in 1958 and 60 were deployed in place of the American Thor missiles used in the real world. In common with the American missiles these missiles were deployed on vulnerable open launch pads and galloping technology meant they were stood down in 1963.

b) Black Arrow and Black Prince

In the real world the British Government decided that it could not afford to a national satellite launcher because we did not have the money to pay for the R&D and the number of national satellites was too small to make economical use of production and launch facilities. Ironically the UK ended up developing the technology with Black Arrow and ELDO-A (Europa I/II) and threw it away. In this version of history the earlier start on Blue Streak and a huge amount of hindsight mean the British taxpayer gets more value for money.

In this version of history the British Government decided to launch a series of satellites during the International Geophysical Year (1st July 1957 to 31st December 1958). In the middle of 1955 the RAE presented it with the following alternatives:
  • Black Arrow The small satellite launcher eventually built in the real world. First launch 1958
  • Black Prince Mk 1 Blue Streak plus Black Knight (36" version) First launch 1957
  • Black Prince Mk 2 Blue Streak plus Black Knight (54" version) First launch 1958
  • Black Prince Mk 3 Blue Streak plus Black Arrow First launch 1958
The Government selected Black Prince Mks 1 and 2. The first of 6 Black Prince Mk 1 rockets was launched in January 1957 and there was an interval of 2 months between launches. The first 3 carried dummy payloads and the others test satellites. If all went well the UK would have launched 2 satellites (July and September 1957) before Sputnik 1 in October 1957. This was followed by 6 scientific satellites launched by Black Prince Mk 2 in 1958.

In the opinion of the author things would have gone very well. The 36" Black Knight had been flying since 1950 and all the bugs should be cured by 1957. The 54" Black Knight should be easy to develop and reliable because it was the avionics and engines of the earlier rocket in a larger body. Blue Streak was a reliable rocket in the real world and I see no reason why it should not be in this version of history.

Low technical risk, rapid development and reliability were three reasons why Black Prince Mks 1 and 2 were developed instead of the others. The fourth reason was cost: the R&D cost was covered by the RTV and MRBM programmes. Six 36" Black Knights and six 54" Black Knights were cheaper to build than 12 Black Arrows because they were already in production. 12 Blue Streak MRBM were taken off the production line and modified as Black Prince first stages and 12 more MRBM were ordered to replace them but that did not increase the production cost of the missiles by 20%. The cost of using Spadeham, the Isle of Wight and Woomera was covered by the ballistic missile and RTV programmes.

The IGY satellite programme was a huge success so the Government approved a follow on programme. Development of Black Arrow was approved because the use of proven Black Knight technology meant it could be built relatively quickly and cheaply at low technical risk. Black Arrow gave the UK a small satellite launcher that could also be used as the upper stages of the improved Black Prince Mk 3,[2] which effectively meant 2 new rockets for the price of one. Test flights began in 1959, but in common with the real Black Arrow there were several launch failures and it did not launch a satellite until the end of 1960.

In the real world ELDO proposed 3 space rockets based on the Blue Streak:
  • ELDO-A Europa I. With the PAS fourth stage added this became Europa II;
  • ELDO-B Blue Streak with new upper stages using high-energy propellants (i.e. liquid hydrogen);
  • ELDO-C A new first stage with 4 rather than 2 RZ.2 engines and high-energy upper stages.
What happened after that isn't clear. I think that ELDO-B became Europa III when ELDO-A/PAS was renamed Europa II. The lukewarm British attitude to ELDO led to Europa IIIB with a new first stage, with 4 Viking engines instead of 2 RZ.2 engines so it was effectively ELDO-C, rather than a variant of ELDO-B. Then the high-energy upper stages were replaced with a second stage powered by one Viking engine and a third stage developed from Diamant the French national launcher and Coralie the ELDO-A second stage. This rocket is better known as Ariane.

Black Prince Mk 3 gave Britain a launcher in the Europa II class in 1960. Black Arrow Mk 2 with the Stentor engine developed for Blue Steel in place of the original Gamma engines was developed with the money used to keep Blue Streak ticking over while ELDO was being organised. The Blue Streak-Black Arrow Mk 2 combination (Black Prince Mk 4) had the same performance as ELDO-B/Europa III and was ready by 1965.

The money the British taxpayer spent on Europa and Black Arrow would have gone a long way towards Super Black Prince which was equivalent to ELDO-C and Ariane. The first stage would have 4 RZ.2 engines, the second one RZ.2 and the third would be derived from Black Arrow. If adequately funded it would have been ready for 1970.

The 60 RAF Blue Streak rockets were retired in 1963 and could be recycled as Black Prince Mk 3 first stages and enough Stentor rockets for 40 Blue Streak Mk 2 became available after Blue Steel Mk 1 was retired. However, there were only 13 all-British satellites between 1962 and 1980 in the real world so what would all these rockets launch?

If Concorde was built in this version of history it would have taken less time to develop and been less expensive, but no more than 20 would have been built so it would still have been a commercial failure. An alternative use for the money would be space either through ESRO/ESA or a stronger national programme.

There was probably no ELDO in this version of history, but there was still ESRO and that organisations satellites were launched by British launchers because the UK Government made that a condition of British membership. If there was no ELDO and Europa the money spent on it by the other members might go into ESRO and the CETS communications satellite organisation with the extra satellites launched by Black Arrow and Black Prince. Instead of Ariane the newly formed ESA could use the development money on more satellites as it already had a launch vehicle in that class or use it to improve the existing launchers.

If the British Government had been prepared to spend the extra money the European Space Agency of today would be using launchers based on the Blue Streak and Black Knight, built in British factories rather than French built Arianes. This creates the question, "How would the French feel about that?" and "What would they do with the money that they spent on Concorde, Europa and Black Prince?"

[1] The Rolls Royce copy of the S-3D was designated RZ.1. The RZ.2 was a new engine developed from the RZ.1.
[2] In the real world the Black Arrow was designed so that it could have had replaced Coralie and Astris as the upper stages of the ELDO-A/Europa I rocket.
 

This is a fascinating read! Ariane-sized rocket by 1970? That's beginning to appraoch the size needed for a manned capsule. Although, by 1970, with the Soviets sending multiple men up for weeks (or near that capability) and the Americans going to the Moon, I don't think a manned program built around a Mercury-class capsule would be even desirable. Does the essay consider autonomous probes? Beating Mariners 8 and 9 by a launch window would be tight, but a flyby spacecraft is doable if started ahead of time. Though I'm not sure on the mass of the trans-Mars stage.
 
This is a fascinating read! Ariane-sized rocket by 1970? That's beginning to appraoch the size needed for a manned capsule. Although, by 1970, with the Soviets sending multiple men up for weeks (or near that capability) and the Americans going to the Moon, I don't think a manned program built around a Mercury-class capsule would be even desirable. Does the essay consider autonomous probes? Beating Mariners 8 and 9 by a launch window would be tight, but a flyby spacecraft is doable if started ahead of time. Though I'm not sure on the mass of the trans-Mars stage.
No I didn't go into that much detail. Another thing I didn't mention was using Blue Streaks as strap-on boosters for Black Prince and Super Black Prince. IOTL there was an Europa IV proposal, which was the ELDO-B/Europa III with 2 Blue Streaks strapped on. IIRC from David Baker's rocket book that could have launched a Gemini class spacecraft.
 
In 1956 the combined GDPs of Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Greece, Portugal, the UK and West Germany was 87% of that of the USA and that improved over the next 20years. This suggests that the economy of western Europe was large enough to have a space program that could have been competitive with the USSR and the USA. The will to do something like this would have been the biggest hurdle.

You want Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Greece, Portugal, the UK and West Germany to all agree on what to build? Good luck with that!!!!
 
While from a technological point of view the Europeans could have been in the small satellite business more or less on the same timeline as the US/USSR, the problem is economics. Even with the Marshall Plan it took 10-15 years for the destruction of WWII to be effectively rebuilt. At the same time the Europeans were having to rearm and staff their share of NATO (unless you make the USSR and the WP go away). The most technically advanced countries, the UK and France, were also spending money on their nuclear programs (I leave out the FRG here for obvious reasons). For the USA and the USSR the development of more powerful launchers went hand in hand with the development of ICBMs which only have a reason with powerful nuclear weapons that are small enough to fit on rockets. So absent these warheads, why build ICBMs/more powerful rockets. Finally, while the current EU zone may have had a combined GDP approaching the USA in 1956, there was no EU and even today the EU would be hard pressed to get the political will for a space program - and in 1956 the Netherlands are more interested in land reclamation, other European nations in rebuilding or infrastructure etc.

IMHO you could get European lead in space if no WWII, and a space race between France, Germany, and UK or an earlier and more united EU. With WWII, no way.
 
While from a technological point of view the Europeans could have been in the small satellite business more or less on the same timeline as the US/USSR, the problem is economics. Even with the Marshall Plan it took 10-15 years for the destruction of WWII to be effectively rebuilt. At the same time the Europeans were having to rearm and staff their share of NATO (unless you make the USSR and the WP go away). The most technically advanced countries, the UK and France, were also spending money on their nuclear programs (I leave out the FRG here for obvious reasons). For the USA and the USSR the development of more powerful launchers went hand in hand with the development of ICBMs which only have a reason with powerful nuclear weapons that are small enough to fit on rockets. So absent these warheads, why build ICBMs/more powerful rockets. Finally, while the current EU zone may have had a combined GDP approaching the USA in 1956, there was no EU and even today the EU would be hard pressed to get the political will for a space program - and in 1956 the Netherlands are more interested in land reclamation, other European nations in rebuilding or infrastructure etc.

IMHO you could get European lead in space if no WWII, and a space race between France, Germany, and UK or an earlier and more united EU. With WWII, no way.
I think having the Indochinese war not starting (i.e. success of the Indochinese independence negotiations) could've helped. It cost France quite a bit which I think wasn't balanced by the economic value (taxes and tariffs) given by Indochina. For that matter, no Indochinese war means France can rebuild a bit faster and doesn't get embroiled as quickly as OTL into Algeria, with a possible chance of the Algerian War being solved peacefully. An independent formation of a Gaullist government would bring France to collaborate since the space programs are about as prestigious as one can get.
 
Top