A.H.C.: the most primitive spaceflight possible

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to send a human being over 100km above the surface of the Earth, and return them safely to the ground, before December 31, 1899.
 
A multistage gunpowder contraption sounds possible but it would take a billion-in-one odds to actually work successfully. It will also be far, far less controllable than OTL’s rocketry.
 
It would be very implausible to have someone go into space with pre 1900 technology, very implausible but probably not impossible. Returning them safely however is probably asb.
 
I mean, if any pre-December 31, 1899 POD is allowed, we could just have a POD that cancels out large eras of almost no technological development like the Middle Ages, and get the space technology that we have today way earlier tbh
 
I mean, if any pre-December 31, 1899 POD is allowed, we could just have a POD that cancels out large eras of almost no technological development like the Middle Ages, and get the space technology that we have today way earlier tbh
The Middle Ages saw significant technological development, arguably more so than under the Roman Empire.
 

Isaac Beach

Banned
I mean, if any pre-December 31, 1899 POD is allowed, we could just have a POD that cancels out large eras of almost no technological development like the Middle Ages, and get the space technology that we have today way earlier tbh

I agree with this sentiment. Presuming industrialization is the root of spaceflight (because no one's going to space on the back of a horse), and presuming our Industrial Revolution began in 1760, it only took us 201 years to get a man into space from that point. If we go with the ol' "hur dur the Romans industrialize in the First Century AD" POD, you could feasibly have a man in space by 500 AD. Only other things you have to contrive are the economics and politics of it. So y'know... go wild.
 
I mean, if any pre-December 31, 1899 POD is allowed, we could just have a POD that cancels out large eras of almost no technological development like the Middle Ages, and get the space technology that we have today way earlier tbh

If by middle ages you mean 1000-1500 AD then as @Falecius says the period saw significant technological development in Europe. However the period 500-1000 AD certainly did see stagnation or regression so butterfly that away (which means fixing both Europe and China) and you might be getting somewhere.
 
You could have an enlarged V2 rocket by 1910 easily, the British thought about shooting a man into space with one, Alan Shepard style.

Liquid oxygen/hydrogen had been made available, the de Laval rocket engine nozzle has been invented, and the V2 used no exotic materials. Reentry can be made survivable by using plenty of ablative material, though i dont know much about parachutes at that time...
 
However the period 500-1000 AD certainly did see stagnation or regression
While there was a certain stagnation, it tends to be really overestimated (and conflated to regression) due to lack of remaining contemporary sources and interest on the Early MA while materially-wise, we're rather in a period of structural continuation with slow adoption of new features, and eventually considering the really troubled late IXth and Xth as representative of the whole period, which they were not.
 
While there was a certain stagnation, it tends to be really overestimated (and conflated to regression) due to lack of remaining contemporary sources and interest on the Early MA while materially-wise, we're rather in a period of structural continuation with slow adoption of new features, and eventually considering the really troubled late IXth and Xth as representative of the whole period, which they were not.

There certainly was a retrogression in large parts of Western Europe between the 5th and 8th centuries, cattle became smaller, literacy declined, populations became more rural, architecture regressed even some agricultural techniques were lost in some areas. However from the Carolingian Renaissance on you saw renewed progress which really took off in the 11th century.
 
cattle became smaller
Which have nothing to do with technology and scientific conceptions, which we were arguing there. Let's not conflate a known social-economical decline, relatively to the late Imperial period, with "technological regression"

literacy declined
This is particularily debatable. First, most written sources weren't kept (I'm thinking, for exemple, of Merovingian administrative texts we know existed, but didn't found). Not only litteracy in Western Romania was essentially a upper and middle class thing, but if anything we know that monastic and episcopalian schools and teaching (for all limited they were compared to later medieval teachings) went beyond the traditional elites for their audience.

populations became more rural
Western Romania was essentially rural already : you did had some urban contraction (altough far from what was believed some decade ago, confusing use of different materials with agriculturisation of cities) but that's a IIIrd century thing that not only stabilized by the Vth, but even went the other direction in some areas in the VIIth.
Rural ratio of Western Romania essentially remained the same, except in Italy as a consequence of Gothic Wars and Britain as a consequence of a more systematical collapse.

architecture regressed
Not so much a regression than a use of non-monumental materials, or non-lasting material such as wood. Which, again, is a feature of Late Empire rather than Early medieval period strictly speaking. It's rather limited tough, the big problem being we have few remaining examples of early medieval monuments due to reuse or demolitions. Of course, the icing on the cake of most arguments there is about the roman concrete, even if it was barely used and essentially in Italy to begin with.

even some agricultural techniques were lost in some areas..
The changes from Carolingian era on this regard are now known to have been overblown, with significant examples of previous use in the VIIth century.

Again, the confusion between a poorer society and a society in regression should be avoided.
 
IIRC, the British Interplanetary Society designed a solid fuelled Lunar rocket in 1938. Crewed, return, navigation, space suits etc. etc.
Unaware of eg Goddard's c1926+ liquid fuelled tests, this used LOTS of little rockets, discarded when spent so 'high multiple' staged.

https://www.bis-space.com/what-we-do/projects/bis-lunar-spaceship
http://www.astronautix.com/b/bislunarlander.html
https://www.airspacemag.com/space/hms-moon-rocket-3143/

IIRC, the pre-1900s UK were familiar with solid rockets. They were used in Napoleonic and US wars for naval bombardment, and in the Himalayas as 'mountain guns'. A plowshared version threw the hauling line for 'breeches buoy' coastal rescues.

Okay, in 1939, the Moon was as 'Bridge Too Far' for the BIS as their later, wondrous Daedalus proposal but, if one of the Victorian engineering magmates, such as Brunel, had taken a mid-century interest, all bets are off.
 
A couple or three stage gunpowder rocket should be able to get to that height. But control probably isn't possible.

So you probably need to wait for liquid rockets. Maybe ethanol and fuming nitric acid?

Your biggest problem may well be the fuel pumps, or rather powering them.
Second problem is steering.

Assuming a latish PoD, the last decades of the 19th century is probably the earliest you could do it.

Orbital shots need to wait until after WWII (or equivalent).
 
iirc there was an early attempt in Ancient China (i can't remember any names or years, though) which involved strapping a guy to a chair and firing him into the sky with rockets/fireworks of the period. unfortunately, the guy came back down in about a million pieces.
 
I mean, if any pre-December 31, 1899 POD is allowed, we could just have a POD that cancels out large eras of almost no technological development like the Middle Ages, and get the space technology that we have today way earlier tbh
No middle ages outside europe.
Taikonauts a couple hundred years ahead of schedule?
 
However the period 500-1000 AD certainly did see stagnation or regression
It's more complicated than that, this is the era that saw two enormously influential technological innovations being adopted -the stirrup and the nailed horseshoe. Part of the reason for the deterioration of the Roman roads during the period is that this old technology was no longer militarily as necessary as hitherto. Just as a Victorian looking at our era might argue that we are a society in decline because we don't erect as solid stone and brick built buildings (we have developed stressed steel and wood frame construction), have got rid of our telegraphy networks (internet and cellphones instead) and have let our railroads decay (cars, trucks and aircraft)
 
Top