AH: US reaction to a country other than the USSR launching the 1st satellite

[Citycat]

IOTL, the Soviet Union launched the world's first artificial space satellite, causing the "Sputnik Crisis" in the US, and triggering the space race and a wave of space exploration that still cannot be matched to this day.

What would be the implications to space exploration (especially from a US perspective), if a different country (it can be anyone), other than the USSR or the US were the first to launch a satellite into space?

Options:

• Similar to OTL Soviet Sputnik Crisis - it spurs the US on to space exploration. The US wants to maintain its grip on world power.
• Slower than OTL - space exploration is purely scientific, without the Cold War politics, there is only limited motivation to fund costly space exploration.
  
• Indifference - if a country other than the threatening USSR launches a satellite first, it would be seen as an expensive gimmick with few benefits, no change or reason for the US to increase funding for space exploration.
• Other - please explain.

 

[James Ricker]

Do United States was actually ready to launch Explorer 1 in 1956 , only the air Force wouldn't give up a booster to launch it.
That was one of the driving factors behind Eisenhower creating NASA. That still would have happened and Eisenhower would have reacted in a similar manner.

 

[sprite]

The only country who would've been able come anywhere near was Britain.

Highly improbable, but probably would've meant not UK nuke, no NHS, no anything else to get there.

If they did manage, the US would shrug it's shoulders.

 

[Killer in]

I think the Brits were capable of launching a very basic satellite on a modified V2 very early on

 

[Cryhavoc101]

The only country who would've been able come anywhere near was Britain.

Highly improbable, but probably would've meant not UK nuke, no NHS, no anything else to get there.

If they did manage, the US would shrug it's shoulders.

The British Spent £11.5 Billion on the NHS in 1948 alone (2010/11 this was £121 billion)

Had they instead spent that on a Space program we would have a permanent space base on Mars

 

[RanulfC]

IOTL, the Soviet Union launched the world's first artificial space satellite, causing the "Sputnik Crisis" in the US, and triggering the space race and a wave of space exploration that still cannot be matched to this day.

What would be the implications to space exploration (especially from a US perspective), if a different country (it can be anyone), other than the USSR or the US were the first to launch a satellite into space?

Options:

• Similar to OTL Soviet Sputnik Crisis - it spurs the US on to space exploration. The US wants to maintain its grip on world power.
• Slower than OTL - space exploration is purely scientific, without the Cold War politics, there is only limited motivation to fund costly space exploration.
  
• Indifference - if a country other than the threatening USSR launches a satellite first, it would be seen as an expensive gimmick with few benefits, no change or reason for the US to increase funding for space exploration.
• Other - please explain.

A key note is no one else had announced they'd "take the challenge" for the IGY so it was pretty much the US or USSR. Second the US in general down to the "man-in-the-street" didn't consider the USSR to be anywhere near as technically competent as the US so Sputnik was very much a shock. Likely it would have been a similar but lesser shock if someone say like Brazil had launched a satellite, worse if it was someone like China, (which even the USSR considered backwards) better is say Canada does it.

Do United States was actually ready to launch Explorer 1 in 1956 , only the air Force wouldn't give up a booster to launch it.
That was one of the driving factors behind Eisenhower creating NASA. That still would have happened and Eisenhower would have reacted in a similar manner.

Explorer wasn't an Air Force project but an Army one. What you may be thinking of is that Von Braun's group had some possible planning to 'oops' a satellite into orbit using the same Redstone/Jupiter-C combination but were prevented by "inspectors" from Washington showing up to monitor the launch. (Eisenhower had already made it clear that the "Army" plan was not going to put anything into orbit)

Randy

 

[James Ricker]

A key note is no one else had announced they'd "take the challenge" for the IGY so it was pretty much the US or USSR. Second the US in general down to the "man-in-the-street" didn't consider the USSR to be anywhere near as technically competent as the US so Sputnik was very much a shock. Likely it would have been a similar but lesser shock if someone say like Brazil had launched a satellite, worse if it was someone like China, (which even the USSR considered backwards) better is say Canada does it.



Explorer wasn't an Air Force project but an Army one. What you may be thinking of is that Von Braun's group had some possible planning to 'oops' a satellite into orbit using the same Redstone/Jupiter-C combination but were prevented by "inspectors" from Washington showing up to monitor the launch. (Eisenhower had already made it clear that the "Army" plan was not going to put anything into orbit)

Randy

They were forbidden to even work on a satellite when the inspectors came one of the engineers hid Explorer 1 in the trunk of his car.
NASA was formed to eliminate interservice rivalry and the waste of time and resources that caused.

 

[Bad@logic]

Wouldn't say that Britain is necessarily the only one, France was the first nation other than the US or USSR to launch a satellite on its own, doing so before the UK did, in 1965 - other nations had launched satellites before it, but using American rockets. There were also some French scientists with some ambitious ideas in the immediate post-war era. If one changed around French politics early on enough to have a Gaullist regime in power (I suppose it might be possible with the 4th Republic but I am unsure about whether they would be focused enough on a project with limited immediate practicality), defused Indochina (not impossible, there were a number of missed opportunities there), delayed or mitigated Algeria, maybe add some additional captured some German rocket scientists (although I am doubtful about just how necessary this is, after all the Soviet program saw them only have a limited role, and the French had captured some historically), and additional captured V-2s, there can be a lot more done with it. One could also have more esoteric ideas of a pan-European project, like the proposed pan-European nuclear forces, to get more resources, but this seems likely to diffuse momentum even if it does have on a technical level more resources.

I could see the French rocket launch being sped up by quite a few years with concentrated focus on a high tech rocket program and resources freed up without the lack of wars and no distractions from them. However, there would definitely have to be a significant delay in the American and Soviet programs to get the French project within shooting distance.

 

[Analytical Engine]

It depends on who launches it.

Assuming it was a country that was friendly to the US, they might pout and send up their own.

 

[RanulfC]

They were forbidden to even work on a satellite when the inspectors came one of the engineers hid Explorer 1 in the trunk of his car.
NASA was formed to eliminate interservice rivalry and the waste of time and resources that caused.

Just to be clear it wasn't "Explorer 1" but a "standard" nose cone with a radio transmitter and a battery. Supposedly "just for tracking purposes" but there was no one in the group qualified or confident enough to put actual 'science' stuff in there which is why for Explorer 1 they contacted James Van Allen

Wouldn't say that Britain is necessarily the only one, France was the first nation other than the US or USSR to launch a satellite on its own, doing so before the UK did, in 1965 - other nations had launched satellites before it, but using American rockets. There were also some French scientists with some ambitious ideas in the immediate post-war era. If one changed around French politics early on enough to have a Gaullist regime in power (I suppose it might be possible with the 4th Republic but I am unsure about whether they would be focused enough on a project with limited immediate practicality), defused Indochina (not impossible, there were a number of missed opportunities there), delayed or mitigated Algeria, maybe add some additional captured some German rocket scientists (although I am doubtful about just how necessary this is, after all the Soviet program saw them only have a limited role, and the French had captured some historically), and additional captured V-2s, there can be a lot more done with it. One could also have more esoteric ideas of a pan-European project, like the proposed pan-European nuclear forces, to get more resources, but this seems likely to diffuse momentum even if it does have on a technical level more resources.

I could see the French rocket launch being sped up by quite a few years with concentrated focus on a high tech rocket program and resources freed up without the lack of wars and no distractions from them. However, there would definitely have to be a significant delay in the American and Soviet programs to get the French project within shooting distance.

I'd really love to see a Franco-British project but ya, post-WWII they both were a LOT more concerned with repairing their nations AND trying to maintain their Empires. Keep in mind as well that post-war none of the nations that actually captured the German scientist actually USED them to any extent at least not initially. The US kept Von Braun and company isolated in the desert for years while the Soviets only used them to 'cross-check' the Russian work. The US plan was to milk them for what they could and hold them till their knowledge got stale, (about 5 or so years figuratively) and then release them. But Von Braun wasn't going to sit still and he kept them together till the US came around.

The other thing was that while the V2 had made a bit of an impression on the English, Russian's and Americans it didn't really impress the French who were more enamored with jet propelled aircraft technology. Still once America and the Soviets went after missiles France leaped after them while the British were heavily into bombers. France didn't want to depend on anyone else for missiles while the British frankly didn't have much of anywhere to PUT missiles unlike everyone else. Still I'd like to have seen France and Britain come together to invest in a separate missile and rocket development program. There's some interesting "what-ifs" I'd like to see played with in an AH setting.

It depends on who launches it.

Assuming it was a country that was friendly to the US, they might pout and send up their own.

Really no matter WHO did it before the US we'd be more than a little 'peeved' over the implied insult. Look how we treated the British efforts on the atomic bomb and we'd been 'partners' in development on that program.

Randy

 

[new statesman]

Job done. And winkie brown as the firs man in space.

 

[Mr_Fanboy]

When can the POD be? Any point after 1900?

It is not impossible to imagine a scenario where the Axis wins World War II in Europe, leading Germany to launch the first satellite. The American reaction would be roughly similar to Sputnik in our timeline.

It is also possible to imagine a scenario where Germany wins World War I before launching a satellite decades down the line. Outside of the scientific community and maybe some corners of the military, the average American reaction would probably boil down to “huh, neat” before switching back to the football game.

 

[Citycat]

When can the POD be? Any point after 1900?

POD after the Allied victory in WWII as per OTL after 1945. But good scenarios there.

 

[M79]

Britain might pull it off using modified V2s as early as 1946. US responds in kind with an MX-774 launched satellite the next year. Russia keeps Gotleib as a designer and goes for broke in 1949. Things get interesting.

 

[marathag]

NASA was formed to eliminate interservice rivalry and the waste of time and resources that caused.

In hindsight, it replaced Army-Navy-Air Force rivalry with NASA and Air Force being Frenimies.

In 1955, Arleigh Burke was running things at the Navy, and unlike his predecessor wanted to get away from subsonic cruise missiles for submarine deterrent, so had Army develop one of their planned IRBM for shipboard use. This would be known as Jupiter, built by Chrysler. In time, the tanks and engines from this program would be clustered together as the Super Juno, better known as Saturn I, while the Navy was never keen on liquid fuel(RP-1) and cryonic oxidizer(LOX) the side project of Jupiter-S became Polaris with Thiokol solids

Ike didn't want a Military IGY entry(even though only Redstone was, the others built by Civilian companies for the Military), so the platforms that could have put a small Sat in Orbit were forbidden from doing so, and so got the ClusterF that was Vanguard, a cobble of existing sounding rockets mashed together by Martin, under nominal Navy control.

Having both Thor and Jupiter was wasteful, but since the Air Force used both, nothing was really saved in any case.

Competition is actually good.

 

[marathag]

Britain might pull it off using modified V2s as early as 1946.

Say v.B actually cut metal for the A9/A10, and the Brits capture those bits, and more important, some of v.B's team who were working on that, with documentation

 

[Simon]

In a slight modification of the original question how do people think the US would react if two other countries launched the first and second artificial satellites into orbit? My general idea was that Britain, without any knowledge of Soviet efforts, launches theirs in mid-September 1957 followed by the USSR launching theirs in early October as in our timeline. On the one hand having an ally be first might take some of the sting out of things, on the other the Soviets following less than a fortnight later still allows the media to whip up some controversy and effectively pushes the US into–at best–third place.

 

[AJE]

Say v.B actually cut metal for the A9/A10, and the Brits capture those bits, and more important, some of v.B's team who were working on that, with documentation

It was still not large enough to reach orbit. That required adding an even larger A11 1st stage to the A9/A10, and that with an added kick stage or significantly lightened A9 stage could put ~300 kg into orbit.

 

[RanulfC]

In hindsight, it replaced Army-Navy-Air Force rivalry with NASA and Air Force being Frenimies.

It's ok you can call them what they were which is enemies straight up Actually ARPA was 'supposed' to be the coordinating agency for military space but it had an obvious Air Force bent from early on. NASA was supposed to take ALL the military (manned specifically) space programs away and cut the military out of manned space flight. The Air Force didn't like that and only got around to grudgingly accepting things when the Shuttle was getting ready to fly. Amusingly enough NASA before the Lunar goal was very much accepting of just about everyone's space plans but once they got so focused they adopted the Air Force methodology and stole most of their personnel. So in essence the Air Force actually had a good reason to be peeved

In 1955, Arleigh Burke was running things at the Navy, and unlike his predecessor wanted to get away from subsonic cruise missiles for submarine deterrent, so had Army develop one of their planned IRBM for shipboard use. This would be known as Jupiter, built by Chrysler. In time, the tanks and engines from this program would be clustered together as the Super Juno, better known as Saturn I, while the Navy was never keen on liquid fuel(RP-1) and cryonic oxidizer(LOX) the side project of Jupiter-S became Polaris with Thiokol solids

I've got a few ideas for a Navy-in-space timeline but finding a good Admiral to push it through is tough.

Ike didn't want a Military IGY entry(even though only Redstone was, the others built by Civilian companies for the Military), so the platforms that could have put a small Sat in Orbit were forbidden from doing so, and so got the ClusterF that was Vanguard, a cobble of existing sounding rockets mashed together by Martin, under nominal Navy control.

Ike had issues with the military in space but he also had issues with understanding the technology and risk/benefits from it as well. While everyone was surprised at the PR fallout of being first he never really wrapped his mind around it and kept underestimating public and government reaction. Vanguard would have done better had it been given a proper budget and support but as Ike didn't believe that anyone was going to get there by the end of the IGY why bother? Fun fact is that he was the one who likely pushed the DoD to issue a gag-order on senior military officials from espousing or even mentioning "space" or "space activities" a few days before Sputnik flew.

Having both Thor and Jupiter was wasteful, but since the Air Force used both, nothing was really saved in any case.

Ike was actually opposed to the development and/or deployment of IRBM missiles as un-needed and destabilizing. He was all for the development of ICBMs and satellite launchers, (eventually) as he saw these to have more utility. Most of the Air Force brass agreed with him but Congressional and public pressure forced them into development despite that. Oddly, Von Braun and ABMA offered to design and build the Jupiter and then give it to the Air Force to operate which AF General Schriever rejected. (He didn't believe the Army would do that but as they were desperate to keep the Von Braun team together they were actually serious about the offer) Schriever had been strongly opposed to the Air Force development of an IRBM let alone operating one but when it became clear that they were going to be ordered to do so he organized the Thor development program which utilized Jupiter components and manufacturing. (And in the continuing war of words between the Army and Air Force then commissioned a nice "hit-piece" for Air Force Magazine where the editor proceeds to bemoan how much the Army has stolen from the Air Force Thor program to build their 'inferior' Jupiter. Despite Jupiter predating the Air Force effort! )

I'd like to think that had Ike been aware of that little interplay he might have 'suggested' the Air Force take the Army up on the deal instead of building two unwanted IRBM systems.

Competition is actually good.

Quite often yes but the 'competition' between the US military branches was very much cut-throat and deadly and in no way at all 'helpful' to anyone. Ike was turning off the taps that had opened during Korea and everyone was rightly fearing that the services were probably in more danger than they had been under Truman. And they weren't wrong considering how hostile Ike was to the Navy and Army, it looked very much like the Air Force was again going to be the main US military service and the others starving beggar's at the table. The Navy managed to get part of the nuclear mission with the SLBM and the Army with some battlefield missiles but Ike wanted to balance the budget not get into a new arms race. Had the competition and rivalry between the services been more what the press and public thought it was rather than what it was then the competition would have been a good thing.

Randy

 

[RanulfC]

Say v.B actually cut metal for the A9/A10, and the Brits capture those bits, and more important, some of v.B's team who were working on that, with documentation

Actually get some more or better war-time support for the BIS, (and a repeal or reduction of the law on explosives) and the Brits might have gone to shooting back at Germany with their own missiles

And I think those drawings are off a bit, the "Early Concept A9" is actually the later concept as the A4b as flown didn't work and they had figured out it wouldn't and the more 'delta' winged A4 design would have worked better. Now had they gotten to test fly the A4 with the "A9-ish" wing they'd have gotten better results though guidance was going to be an issue.

In the case of Britain earlier and more supported work on the Black Prince and Blue Streak would have been a game changer but that would require someone to reduce the V-bomber development in favor of long range missile work and I'm torn on that concept. It conflicts with my concept idea where the Brits get lucky with the V Force and find the have:
A) An effective low-level, high speed penetrator bomber with the A2 Valiant
B) A supersonic dash capable high altitude bomber with the Victor
C) An early 'stealth' bomber with the Vulcan

Which was all possible if they get some breaks, but the money and support situation pretty much says it has to be one way or the other so rocketry requires the V-Force loses out somewhere

It was still not large enough to reach orbit. That required adding an even larger A11 1st stage to the A9/A10, and that with an added kick stage or significantly lightened A9 stage could put ~300 kg into orbit.

No not by itself it wasn't powerful enough but everyone assumed you'd need at least one more stage, probably two in order to make it to orbit. Adding some clusters of solid rockets, (aka Jupiter-C) would have done it with a first stage on the order of the A10.

Randy