Speaking of US manned Mars mission concepts:
Not real I know but what are the odds?
Randy
That's quite interesting.
Counter-proposal:
(Seriously KSP is awesome)
Korolev had brought up a Lunar mission right after Sputnik, and pushed it again after Gagarin and while Khrushchev was in general supportive he was pretty clear the budget would be limited due to military needs. On the other hand he was also demanding more space stunts and firsts but without a new LV development program and a heavier payload capability they were stuck with variations of the R7 and Vostok. The early 1962 meeting essentially DID authorize a vague Lunar program as the development of the N1 was greenlit at that meeting but that support was tertiary to the development of the R36 ICBM, and the UR500/Proton as a military ICBM/LV. So the 'support' was already split three ways since an 'assumption' was that work would continue on the UR700 for the Lunar mission alongside the N1 development.
Actually I could see that but it would take someone looking at the whole from a somewhat 'outside' perspective to see how badly organized the Soviet space "program" was. Someone would need to organize and select a committee that would review the space and ICBM efforts and make a report on how each would be 'better' organized and run which would essentially feed into that particualr meeting. Essentially it has to come out from there that the "space" program needs a seperate and more cohesive organization and support structure in order to keep gaining 'firsts' and spectecles in space as they are reaching the limits of the current sysems and capability. While some long term goals and plans are discussed here but no solid plans are made. The N1 is authorized for further study, (if Chelomie is still around) the UR500 authorized as a Heavy ICBM and LV and Yangel gets priority for the R36. We'll assume that Korolev doesn't lose any influance to Chelomie so that he is undesputed "Chief Designer" of the "space" program.
Once Kennedy announces the US Lunar goal the Soviet's at least take him seriously even if they don't belive he'll stick to the goal. So an early 1963 decision is made to 'match' the American effort as long as the ICBM program is moving forward. The N1, LK, and Soyuz projects are given a higher priority and support along with the UR500. Still, it's going to be hard to free up enough resources to cover all this and the ICBM program as well.
Korolev and Glushko had been butting heads since the early days. Yangel used to work for Korolev who felt somewhat betrayed when he was moved out and given his own beuro. (The military had a saying {paraphrased} that Koroleve worked for space, Chelomie worked for Khrushchev, and Yangel works for Us, see:
https://falsesteps.wordpress.com/2016/09/11/the-r-56yangel-works-for-us/) And then there was Chelomie who figured he had an 'in' with hiring Khrushchev's son, (he wasn't wrong) and was clearly out to take over the whole rocket and spacecraft development program which Korolev had issues with but he found a kindered sprit in Glushko and Yangel since they advocated storable propellants. Glusko had also failed to deliver on several 'promised' engines for the early R1 and R7 which forced Korolev to devote resources to design and build the engines and upgrades which did not endear the two.
Convince (or force) Glushko to crack the combustion instabilty issue or maybe Korolev that large H2O2/kerosene engines are viable and have them become a closer team. Have Yangel present first and use his time to point out the flaws in the current space and ICBM program. Maybe get rid of Chelomie?
Modification? Have Glushko also build the requested upper stage engines to improve the R7 though I'm not sure keroxide would provide the needed performance it might. Glushko could pitch the fact that decomposed peroxide auto-ignites kerosene which would avoid the combustion instabilities he's encountering in the large kerolox engine designs.
Ok, that setup sounds great. So have Glushko get a breakthrough in H2O2/kerosene engines, pitch it to Korolev, and have the N-series and UR-series rockets redesigned around them. Then have all of the designers meet in 1960 and have one of them state that competing would only reduce the chances of them getting funding for their own projects and that they should work together. I'm guessing at first they would reject that, but have Glushko say he would build a standard set of engines for all of them using H2O2 propellent, and they might agree. At this point, Chelomei would probably abandon the UR series of rockets and work with Korlev to develop the N1/N11/N111. Have Yangel present first at the meeting with Khrushchev and point out that by pooling their resources they were able to create a family of rocket vehicles better than if they had competed with each other, and that continuing that collaboration is paramount to their success.
Khrushchev, after seeing how standardizing their engine configurations helped speed up the development of the vehicles agrees to create a unified controlling agency that the bureaus would report to, in the hopes of reducing the amount of money wasted designing multiple competing vehicles in the future. By the end of the meeting, the N-series would have been selected for further development into SLVs and heavy ICBMs, and the R-36 have been selected as a light ICBM.
Then let's have Chelomei, Glushko, and Korolev agree to try and standardize their rocket fleet. Korolev's N1 rocket would still be used as the super-heavy lifter. Chelomei's UR-series of rockets would have most likely died on the drawing board two years prior, so the N11 would fill the role of the heavy lifter. The medium lifter would be provided by the R-7, and later the N111. Yangel would be appointed to coordinating the entire operation, being assisted by Korolev. Glushko would build the engines, Korolev would design the rockets and Soyuz command vehicle and Chelomei would assist Korolev and also design the other orbital spacecraft and space stations.
By early 1964 the N-series designs would be frozen and proper development on it would start. By early 1966 the Soyuz spacecraft would have been finished and would start flying uncrewed test missions, and by the end of the year the N11 would be ready and the Zond program would start sending Soyuz capsules uncrewed around the Moon. Soyuz 1 would probably fly in early 1967 and a crewed circumlunar mission would be attempted sometime in late 1967. By early 1968 the N1 rocket would be ready for flight, and without the 30 engines on its first stage, it would be more successful. A crewed Lunar orbital flight would probably fly in late 1968, and a Lunar landing in early 1969.
N111 "Vulkain"? And the 'standardized' or "Universal" rocket fleet was Chelomie more than Glushko and was part of his attempt to take over all rocket production.
Good name! And sorry, I did mean Chelomie.
Well without an earlier POD that might effect US missile development then it's likely that Congress still mandates the US develop an IRBM which the Army had already done with Jupiter which was the basis of the USAF's Thor. Now it's possible a more confident USSR makes more protests of the planned deployment in Italy and Turkey, enough that they actually stand firm about not wanting them deployed in their countries. If they don't get deployed then there's less pressure on Khrushchev to 'counter' the deployment by putting missiles into Cuba.
Ok, so no missile crisis. How does that affect history? A
lot of things are going to get butterflied by that.
By the mid-60s no one really took a 'military' use for the Moon seriously anymore. Like orbting nuclear weapon the reality of the them compared to any other more plausible, (and affordable) terrestrial alternative was clear. I won't repeat most of the already mentioned arguments but the main one is there is no stealth in space, (your radar mirror won't work because they are also optically tracking the warheads/station and even if it 'disappears' it will remain going in the same direction and speed unless there is a very visible and obvious application of a LOT of thrust) and your warheads have only limited utility over most of their flight path. Oh, and I see no one mentioned the BIG thing that 'killed' this idea... Mainteance and operations costs and utility. Those warheads have to be maintained and they degrade over time due to cosmic and solar radiation. You have to have a large orbital infrastructure to care and maintain those orbiting assets all of which is highly vulnerable to any surface launched area-effect attack.
Korolev and others tried to interest the military in orbital bases and constellations of 'battle satellites' along with satellite inspection and interception mission but the military wasn't biting. Even the US efforts there quickly lost interest. Just about anything you need done in space can be done easier and cheaper with an unmanned platform and most of it can be done from the ground anyway.
The ONE possible utility has always been a deep-space/Cis-Lunar command and control station which both sides studied extensivly. It just didn't come out as any better than alternative concepts that were cheaper and easier to accomplish.
I chose a mirror system because they are, rather infamously, the only known exception to the 'no stealth in space' rule. However, now that I'm looking at that it seems that they would only work in deep space, where you don't have any light sources nearby. In LEO you could just track the Earth's reflection on them. Solar radiation would also be a big issue, like could you imagine if their computer got set off accidentally by a cosmic ray or something? Actually, that sounds like a good plot for a movie.
Anyways, there are solutions to those issues. The real problem here is whether or not a military presence in space would help get the Lunar program more funding, which was why I originally brought it up. By the way, the US didn't lose interest in them, they kept working on them but classified everything. In fact, a lot of stuff on US military space-to-space weapons development and operation is
still classified. I'm not a conspiracy theorist or anything but I do find that rather interesting. At the very least we know that the US is still looking into concepts for the crewed inspection and destruction of satellites.
There's a LOT of preliminary work that needs to happen that wasn't just falling behind because of the Proton. The N11 and N1 would still be essentially flight tested rather than ground tested which will inevitibly lead to more rather than fewer failures. N11 failures would be less of an issue than Proton or N1 failures but even in the best case they ORIGINALLY hoped to land on the Moon by 1968 and that slipped to 1969 before they began having major problems. The only succssfully space tested part of the LK system was the lunar module engine OTL everything else was behind schedule and slipping even further. TTL they are going to have to perform orbital docking, manuevering, and rendezvous operations with the whole and parts of the complex that are going to be obvious to the Americans
The first N11 would probably fly around early to late 1966, so it would have had 4 years of development. I'm not sure if that's enough to get the reliability higher than the OTL Proton though. But without Korolev's death and with a more unified agency they shouldn't have a problem getting all of the other technologies tested out in time. Soyuz 1 & 2 can practice rendezvous in early 1966, and in late 1966 Soyuz 3 and 4 can practice docking. By 1967 they should have that down, and the LK will probably be test-flown uncrewed by the end of that year. Also in late 1967 would be a crewed Lunar flyby, and by 1968 they can start doing orbital crewed test flights of the LK.
Now as you said, the Americans will probably figure out what's happening. The Soyuz spacecraft could be written off as a space station service craft, but once they see an LK fly they're going to have the best flight analysts in the country trying to figure it out. The early solo LK flights would be written off as satellites, but once they rendezvous a Soyuz with it they'll know exactly what it is. Even if they can't get images of it there's a decent chance they'll realize its a Lunar lander from its flight profile, and if those flights happen in early 1968 they will have enough time to accelerate their program, and maybe get Apollo 9 to land on the Moon in February or March of 1969. Still, if the Soviets land in January it'll be too late. Also keep in mind the Americans are going to see LK-3 literally blow up on their radar screens, which might make them think the Soviets aren't progressing very fast.
Nope, three (3) crew without space suits, modified to two to the Moon, (since the crew had to wear space suits both for the trip and to perform the EVA's needed to get to and from the LK-lander) but standard three. Put an ejector seat in there and I'm not sure you'd have enough room for two cosmonauts
I was originally imagining that only the first, one-man flight would have one, but upon reflection having Soyuz 2 rescue him would be better.
The "Zond" is supposed to have more delta-v than the Lander can even think about so it should be no issue and you want to remain in visual range just in case of problems like this one. (Not to mention getting good video/film of the whole evolution
) You'll move out of visual range on one of the later test flights but that would likely be over the Moon ala-Apollo 10 or something.
The Soyuz 7K-LOK needed only about one km/s to break out of Lunar orbit, the LK needs twice that, even without the crasher stage. Plus, doing two burns at once with spacecraft practically right next to each other is all but asking for them to collide. Then again, having good footage of it would be awesome.
Ahhh, not so fast! One of the 'advantages' of an unmanned sample return mission is that the chances of contamination are a lot lower than with an astro/cosmonaut involved. We actually DID discover that there was more water on the Moon than we'd originally thought but because it tested as essentialy chemically similar to terrestrial water it was ruled as contamination due to the sample cross-section size. (See instead of a 'coreing' drill the Apollo crews 'duel-used' a drill made to bury sensors in the regolith. Since the cross-section was only about an inch in diameter and the sample case seals had dust and regolith all over them it was assumed the 'water' came from either the astronauts suits or some Earthly source. Later studies determined that several of the sample were NOT contaminated and that in fact the regolith had a higher water contect than had been assumed) Once it's determined that the regolith itself has more H2O than assumed then it follows that there are either sources on the Moon for water or it is an ongoing process. The 'heat-trap' concept follows pretty rapidly from there.
Re-fueling or other Earth orbital operations would help of course but the N1/LK program was aimed at being as close to a single launch mission as possible because that was the fastest way. Once you start expanding operations you really no longer want single person missions anyway so you wait on the later series to do such tasks and take more than one person to the surface.
In the original TL for this thread, I had the N1-LK-LOK refuel in Earth orbit, with Leonov attaching a transfer line to a refueling stage launched by a Proton. They did ullage burns simultaneously to settle the propellents for the transfer. But, I would imagine in real life they would wait until they had more capable landers like the TLK.
You know depending on the overall situation a joint mission to the Lunar poles would make a 'better' analog to OTL's Apollo-Soyuz mission...
It would be, but that would make the chances of continuing the race to Mars all but disappear. Of course, they might do a joint Mars mission...
No that's actually worse
You'd simply wait for another crew member, (or two) to be along before you do anything like this
Ok, so no water ice early on then. I guess Zvezda will have to make do with baking the water out of the soil.
Ya I noted that but thought I'd either misread or a mistake
The main issues as I understand it was less "Tereshkova" herself but a general lack of ability to put multiple females throught the training, (her flight was supposed to be a dual female mission but the second launch was scrubbed) and a lack of interest in repeating what was upfront a 'stunt' mission. These were essentially 'military' pilots assigned as cosmonauts and like the American program the initial requirements were pretty exclusive. Essentially if the American's plan or succeed in putting a woman on the Moon they might consider doing so.
6 females applied to Astronaut Group 5 in 1966, so if we have one of them get in, maybe as a political stunt or something, the Soviets would probably respond. So basically the exact opposite of what happened in For All Mankind.
Unfortunately, I cannot find the names of the women who applied, so if I ever mention them it will have to be using a random name generator.
Actually Astronautix says they left from LEO in both missions. The only reason to go to HEO was they could use less propellant to break free of Earth to do the TMI burn. The crew would likely go up second so that you could save mass in the Launch Escape System and some other 'crew-only' requirments that you can add to the mass of the complex or save propellant, and to avoid long exposure to the Van Allen belts.
Okay, so launch one is the flyby spacecraft, and launch two is the crew, and they would depart from LEO. Got it.
The "one-launch" was if the TMK-1 went up manned or not and predicated on the assumed (at the time of around 1959/1961) N1 capabilities. The problem with it being a "Lunar" station is the same in that there weren't very many, (or good) Lunar orbits to put them in. Add in you've got a booster with over 45 tonnes (metric) of propellant and it's likely not going to the Moon no matter what they say
The Venus swing-by reduced your total trip time, (which in turn reduces your on-board supply requirements) somewhat going from a bit over 37 months (three years, one month, two days) to a little under a year and a half IIRC my figures correctly. Normally that would be about half you consumables but the TMK had an bio-regenerative life support system so the mass was somewhat fixed. (Though lower than an non-regenerative LSS to start with)
How would they know how much of the spacecraft is fuel or structure? And even if they could, reaching Lunar orbit takes 3950 m/s, while getting to mars takes about 4270 m/s. The excess propellant could be to compensate for the mascons.
"Hard, you say? Hold my beer there son..."
I will admit that the US could just strap 50 boosters to their ship and call it a day, but I dought in reality they would actually do that. Then again they are Americans, they don't exactly know the meaning of overkill.
Ion has delta-v to spare AND a huge ISP, the downside is the enemic thrust ratio. Still propulsive trip times can range from 777 days to a little under a year depending on the power and drive type. (See:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19870014259.pdf) Your biggest issue is you can't put the crew on-board until you're almost out of Earth's influance due to those pesky Van Allen belts again as the ship has to spiral out of LEO or be boosted by a high thrust booster of some kind. (NERVA/Ion Hybrid can be found here:
https://www.wired.com/2012/04/ernsts-ions-week-concludes-nerva-ion-mars-mission-1966/, and other nuclear ion concepts here:
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns3.php#stuhlingerion,
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns3.php#lrcion,
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns3.php#marsnep, and the classic;
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns3.php#umbrella, "In Thrust We Trust" even if it's only ounces for forever
)
Interesting, I didn't know that. Thanks.
Happy Endings... It's a thing you know
Yes, it is. In fact, I did consider many alternatives to the way I wrote it in that draft. For instance;
- The US and Soviet landers land next to each other safely and do Apollo-Soyuz but on Mars
- The Soviets crash and use an emergency ascent vehicle to get back into orbit (aka some fuel tanks and engines strapped together with duct tape)
- The Soviets crash and the Americans rescue them
- The Soviets half-crash and the Americans help with the repairs
I might change it in the next version of the story, whenever I get around to writing it.
I would also like to write some sort of sequence where they find life. I'm not entirely sure if that counts as ASB though...