Children of Apollo: From the Earth, to the Heavens

Chapter 1: An Accident, a Tragedy, a Triumph.
"For all our failings, despite our limitations and fallibilities, we humans are capable of greatness. What new wonders undreamt of in our time, will we have wrought in another generation, and another? How far will our nomadic species have wandered, by the end of the next century, and the next millennium?"

Chapter 1: An Accident, a Tragedy, a Triumph.



It seems NASA is ready to start this evenings press briefing, here is a statement from Associate Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, James Webb

It is with deep sorrow that I address you here this afternoon. As many of you know, at 9:55 this morning the Gemini VI-A spacecraft suffered an anomaly, and the space program experienced a national tragedy with the loss of the Gemini VI-A spacecraft and her crew. Two dedicated, well trained and experienced pilots were on board that spacecraft, and sadly neither survived.

Approximately eight seconds into its flight, a dramatic loss of thrust was observed in the Titan booster-rocket. Following protocol, command pilot Walter Schirra pulled the ejection ring in an attempt to get himself, and his fellow crewmate Thomas Strafford safely out of the capsule. It is with a heavy heart that I say the protocol failed them both. We here at NASA have failed them both.

All data reported indicates the startup sequence was performed normally and without error, and we are still looking at the potential causes of failure in the booster’s first stage. However, if this were the only problem, the astronauts would still be with us today; Something prevented their parachutes from deploying fully upon ejection, leading them to impact the ground roughly a mile from the launchpad. Recovery teams were sent immediately to begin the recovery of the astronauts, however without a parachute, a fall from that altitude is nearly certain to be a fatal one.

I’m aware of the media broadcasting footage of the ejection, and I appreciate them cutting the cameras shortly after. We are not here to speculate, neither to the cause of the booster failure, nor the parachute failure. It will take all the data we have, extensive testing and investigation to draw any conclusion, and to provide a sense of closure to the families, and to the nation.


A formal board looking into today's accident will be established this evening, and all subsequent reports as to the cause and our agency's findings will be published by this review board. Data collection has begun, as has the analysis of the conditions of the launch pad, ground support systems, and even the notes made by members of our pad staff and launch teams here at the cape. We will get to the bottom of this incident, so that nothing like it can ever happen again. We thank you for your patience, and we ask that you give the families the space and time needed for them to grieve.

As Webb promised, the investigation into the causes of the Gemini 6A failure did begin that evening, however to the public it was known simply as The December 12th Committee. Their findings would shape NASA safety culture, launch schedules, and nearly all subsequent programs for decades to come. The weight of the entire space program, and by extension the space race, was resting on their shoulders.

Changes to the Gemini would be somewhat hard to see, but that didn’t make them any less important; The improved safety offered was considered by many to be well worth the wait caused by retrofitting the remaining five Gemini spacecraft. While not the largest change, easily the most impactful was that of the nitrogen purge. Prior to liftoff, when the cabin’s pressure was at its highest, the capsule would be filled with a mixture of gaseous oxygen and nitrogen to prevent another violent fire. This atmospheric mixture would bleed out of the capsule as it ascended, being replaced with pure oxygen, albeit at a much lower and safer pressure. This yielded an equally safe, and well proven environment of pure oxygen held at a low pressure.

Another hard to spot change would be the Astronaut Tethering Points (ATP) added to the base of the Gemini’s Docking Adapter. These points were mere metal hoops, meant to allow the astronaut to attach his carabiner to while wearing one of the two life support packs included in the Gemini Program. This would, if functional, allow the astronauts to separate themselves from the nose of the craft by up to 75 feet (23 meters) achieving unmatched distances and flexibility during EVA.

Lastly, the capsules would see a complete overhaul in their launch abort capabilities, with their ejection seats traded for a more traditional couch-style seat. NASA would instead opt for a more traditional, thus proven system, the launch abort tower. The tower weighed more than the seats, however due to staging off of the spacecraft 15 seconds after second-stage ignition, this actually resulted in a trivial, yet measurable payload increase. However, the trading of the bulky launch abort seats did have further benefits. First and foremost was astronaut comfort, as the astronauts had substantially more legroom without the ejection mechanism. This legroom could, and would be utilized in upcoming flights to stow tools, house sample containers, and carry additional life support as needed.

The final change would come to the Titan-II. The rocket would receive a small payload containment ring which the Gemini spacecraft would sit atop. This 10 inch tall ring would allow for small payloads to be mounted alongside the Gemini, for use in orbit. Umbilical cables connecting spacecraft to rocket would be routed through this ring, with stringers lining the insides. Ultimately, this modification would see minimal use, however it would be the first demonstration of a concept that had been around as long as man had dreamed of spaceflight. It would demonstrate the prospect of man riding alongside cargo into space.

This capsule, with all of her substantial safety improvements was dubbed Gemini Block IB, and was given a new coat of paint, distinguishing her from her sisters. The changes resulting from the December 12th Committee would ripple outwards into other programs. Of these, the most impacted was NASA’s upcoming Project Apollo. North American had suggested a nitrox cabin environment in their original bid, but was shot down by NASA management who claimed “It wasn’t a problem, and it hadn’t caused issues on Mercury” words which would later come back to bite them, hard.

Rather begrudgingly, NASA agreed to allow the redesign of the Apollo CSM and LM to allow for a mixed gas environment and a reduction in flammable materials, in both the spacecraft and the suits. The agency accepted that this meant yet another delay to Project Apollo, and that it likely meant the first manned flight couldn’t happen any sooner than the third quarter of 1967. Many at NASA’s manned spaceflight center objected to this decision; However ultimately it was considered less of a risk to schedules to wait for a redesign, than to push forward with a flawed one.

And with that, Apollo Block IIA and III were born, and the Gemini program was on track for a return-to-flight in June of ‘66. The Committee had closed its final meeting, after 5 long months.
 
Interesting. I'm guessing the pure oxygen environment caused the ejection motors to torch the chutes while they were still stowed? Or was it just a pure dumb luck malfunction in the chutes, with the nitrogen purge just being introduced as a "just in case" measure? The other changes seem pretty sensible, although I could see someone having proposed a pusher abort system (like the one used by Calvin Maclure in his RP-1 series) fitted into the empty space inside the retro-rocket housing.
 
Personally,I would have had them survive but can’t fly again due to injury. The timeline name seems to imply that it‘ll be ambitious.
 
Interesting. I'm guessing the pure oxygen environment caused the ejection motors to torch the chutes while they were still stowed? Or was it just a pure dumb luck malfunction in the chutes, with the nitrogen purge just being introduced as a "just in case" measure? The other changes seem pretty sensible, although I could see someone having proposed a pusher abort system (like the one used by Calvin Maclure in his RP-1 series) fitted into the empty space inside the retro-rocket housing.
That's the thing... I wanted to leave it ambiguous and imply that the investigation never found the answer (not unlike finding the exact wire that caused Apollo 1 to catch fire iotl) but instead aimed to fix as much as possible to best mitigate the danger. It's meant to be left up to the reader in that sense, mostly because the ejection seat question is still hotly debated when discussing Gemini.
 
Notes:

Imma assume the first lunar landing will be later than July 69 - perhaps November (OTL Apollo 12)? Or perhaps with no Apollo 1 fire it may be closer to OTL date
However,a sustained program may be more possible in this universe
With improvements to Gemini,it is possible that MOL may exist and be successful here
Not sure how USSR is affected - assume Korolyov still dies on time (January 1966)
How can remaining Gemini’s fit into planning (end of Gemini by February 67)? Perhaps end of Gemini delayed to summer 67? Might allow for end of Gemini and beginning of Apollo to overlap
NASA would be well advised to pursue a wet workshop space station here
 
it is possible that MOL may exist and be successful here
MOL's failure wasn't really anything to do with Gemini itself. It was more to do with the fact that spy satellite technology was improving rapidly and that astronauts really didn't provide any noticable benefits over the film-recovery satellites. However there is a possibility that it could become a NASA program and just be purely for testing longer duration spaceflight instead as a USAF reconnaissance program.
 
Notes:

Imma assume the first lunar landing will be later than July 69 - perhaps November (OTL Apollo 12)? Or perhaps with no Apollo 1 fire it may be closer to OTL date
However,a sustained program may be more possible in this universe
With improvements to Gemini,it is possible that MOL may exist and be successful here
Not sure how USSR is affected - assume Korolyov still dies on time (January 1966)
How can remaining Gemini’s fit into planning (end of Gemini by February 67)? Perhaps end of Gemini delayed to summer 67? Might allow for end of Gemini and beginning of Apollo to overlap
NASA would be well advised to pursue a wet workshop space station here
You're welcome to assume what you will but we will cover this in future chapters
 
Notes:
Imma assume the first lunar landing will be later than July 69 - perhaps November (OTL Apollo 12)? Or perhaps with no Apollo 1 fire it may be closer to OTL date

The Lunar Module not the Command Module was he main pacing item for the landing. I'm not sure TTL will change that exact item. Then again "changes to Gemini" could mean a more Gemini-centric time line which could be interesting :)

However, a sustained program may be more possible in this universe

We've all ready had the Lunar goal set and Apollo made the priority program so it's unlikely to be any more 'sustainable' than OTL with those priorities in place.

With improvements to Gemini, it is possible that MOL may exist and be successful here

None of this really address' the Air Force "Blue Gemini" requirements which were going to be a significant set of changes for that program anyway. MOL was as noted a technology and political issue not anything that likely is impacted (so far) by any of the changes. MOL was in fact pitched to NASA (as the MORL or Manned Orbital Research Laboratory) but much like Dynasoar the 'cooperation' and coordination between the Air Force and NASA was often seriously lacking from the Air Force side until far to late.

Not sure how USSR is affected - assume Korolyov still dies on time (January 1966)

If they quickly scrap the N1 and begin hard (and fast) work on a dual-launch architecture based on the Proton, (and of course get THAT working sooner :) ) R7 and Soyuz they've likely got a better shot at staying 'even' in the Lunar race. It's still doubtful they 'win' per-se but they could still 'shock' the Americans a few more times.

How can remaining Gemini’s fit into planning (end of Gemini by February 67)? Perhaps end of Gemini delayed to summer 67? Might allow for end of Gemini and beginning of Apollo to overlap
NASA would be well advised to pursue a wet workshop space station here

NASA's 'focus' was on getting Apollo to the Moon by the "end of the decade" with a 'backup' plan of getting a Man on the Moon by the same time if there were significant problems with Apollo. Unfortunately that meant that anything that was NOT "Apollo" was tossed aside in that rush and there's not a lot of room to examine or build on alternates. Gemini ended for one main reason because they ran out of contracted Titan launchers and the Air Force refused to consider offering more for NASA's use. (The Air Force after all was going to need them for MOL :) ) As long as NASA paid for the 'required' changes (and it didn't effect Titan production for AF use) the Air Force was willing to 'set aside' some Titans for NASA use but they were not what the Air Force was going to use for MOL nor for their own launches. But they were very clear it would be only a limited supply and once used up no more would be given to NASA for manned launches.

And frankly NASA had a 'better' launcher with the Saturn 1/1B if it came to that anyway. But again as the 'focus' was on Apollo and the Moon the Saturn V was envisioned as the main vehicle for the Apollo program from the start and that meant a 'dry' workshop, (when and "if" at that point) was planned for the post-Lunar program BECAUSE they had the excess capacity. It wasn't till it was clear that there would be no second production run of Saturn V's that they began cutting back on Lunar landings to save Saturn V's for 'future' missions.

Watched and followed :)

Randy
 
The Lunar Module not the Command Module was he main pacing item for the landing. I'm not sure TTL will change that exact item. Then again "changes to Gemini" could mean a more Gemini-centric time line which could be interesting :)



We've all ready had the Lunar goal set and Apollo made the priority program so it's unlikely to be any more 'sustainable' than OTL with those priorities in place.



None of this really address' the Air Force "Blue Gemini" requirements which were going to be a significant set of changes for that program anyway. MOL was as noted a technology and political issue not anything that likely is impacted (so far) by any of the changes. MOL was in fact pitched to NASA (as the MORL or Manned Orbital Research Laboratory) but much like Dynasoar the 'cooperation' and coordination between the Air Force and NASA was often seriously lacking from the Air Force side until far to late.



If they quickly scrap the N1 and begin hard (and fast) work on a dual-launch architecture based on the Proton, (and of course get THAT working sooner :) ) R7 and Soyuz they've likely got a better shot at staying 'even' in the Lunar race. It's still doubtful they 'win' per-se but they could still 'shock' the Americans a few more times.



NASA's 'focus' was on getting Apollo to the Moon by the "end of the decade" with a 'backup' plan of getting a Man on the Moon by the same time if there were significant problems with Apollo. Unfortunately that meant that anything that was NOT "Apollo" was tossed aside in that rush and there's not a lot of room to examine or build on alternates. Gemini ended for one main reason because they ran out of contracted Titan launchers and the Air Force refused to consider offering more for NASA's use. (The Air Force after all was going to need them for MOL :) ) As long as NASA paid for the 'required' changes (and it didn't effect Titan production for AF use) the Air Force was willing to 'set aside' some Titans for NASA use but they were not what the Air Force was going to use for MOL nor for their own launches. But they were very clear it would be only a limited supply and once used up no more would be given to NASA for manned launches.

And frankly NASA had a 'better' launcher with the Saturn 1/1B if it came to that anyway. But again as the 'focus' was on Apollo and the Moon the Saturn V was envisioned as the main vehicle for the Apollo program from the start and that meant a 'dry' workshop, (when and "if" at that point) was planned for the post-Lunar program BECAUSE they had the excess capacity. It wasn't till it was clear that there would be no second production run of Saturn V's that they began cutting back on Lunar landings to save Saturn V's for 'future' missions.

Watched and followed :)

Randy
This will be an Apollo-landing timeline. I'm not planning on doing any Gemini lunar/station stuff (that said, we have some cool ass missions coming soon) That said, Apollo is still part of the Exposition to the main storyline, which will focus on post-Apollo goodness. Stay tuned 🤙 @LordandsaviorKloka tagging you as you mentioned some of this. That said, me and another alternate historian did come up with an amazing idea for Gemini in the process of this, and He will likely make a timeline on that some day (hopefully I can help him out, as I am extremely fond of the idea, it just doesn't fit here)

-L

P.S. You got a lot of shit right on the nose Randy, not gonna say what though
 
Some notes:
Gemini had one overlooked problem
ignition of solid rocket motor in a pure oxygen atmosphere during eject
Original McDonnell wanted to put escape tower on Gemini, program director James Chamberlin went for ejections Seats as Titan II was selected
USAF Blue Gemini (MOL) solve that problem by installing 6 Solid Retro booster who function also escape booster during launch
MOL had two problem it slow Development was overrun by technical progress, next to that were program goals too ambitious for it time.
McDonnell try to sell MOL (with out spy Camera equipment) to NASA as low cost space Station but they go already the Skylab program ..
 
Last edited:
This will be an Apollo-landing timeline. I'm not planning on doing any Gemini lunar/station stuff (that said, we have some cool ass missions coming soon) That said, Apollo is still part of the Exposition to the main storyline, which will focus on post-Apollo goodness. Stay tuned 🤙 @LordandsaviorKloka tagging you as you mentioned some of this. That said, me and another alternate historian did come up with an amazing idea for Gemini in the process of this, and He will likely make a timeline on that some day (hopefully I can help him out, as I am extremely fond of the idea, it just doesn't fit here)

-L

Promises, promises... And we WILL hold you to em! ;)

Gemini had a lot of potential that was never fully explored, (a good number of 'problems' as well of course, see below) due to the 'rush' to the Moon and the short timeline for Apollo operations.

P.S. You got a lot of shit right on the nose Randy, not gonna say what though

Well everything of course... I am after all "me" so therefore 'right' is all I can ever be... ::::sigh::: It's such a burden sometimes...
Ok, couldn't keep a straight face on that one :)
Looking forward to more.

Some notes:
Gemini had one overlooked problem
ignition of solid rocket motor in a pure oxygen atmosphere during eject
Original McDonnell wanted to put escape tower on Gemini, program director James Chamberlin went for ejections Seats as Titan II was selected
USAF Blue Gemini (MOL) solve that problem by installing 6 Solid Retro booster who function also escape booster during launch
MOL had two problem it slow Development was overrun by technical progress, next to that were program goals too ambitious for it time.
McDonnell try to sell MOL (with out spy Camera equipment) to NASA as low cost space Station but they go already the Skylab program ..

Gemini also had another major 'problem' that had serious down-stream affects in that problems with ITS hatches solidified the decision for the original Apollo in-ward opening hatch. Due to numerous issues with getting the Gemini hatches to close and lock after opening on-orbit and along with the Mercury accidental hatch blow it was seen as a clear need to have a hatch that was kept shut by internal pressure and 'safe' from accidental activation.

Great idea as long as there's no actual need to access the capsule quickly say in an emergency....

I'll note that while the Air Force tested the Blue Gemini abort system in wind tunnels they never (as far as I can find) actually tested an abort which left some questions if the 'pusher' arrangement would have actually worked as advertised. We of course know they can be made to work, (see modern examples) but Gemini was (as noted) originally supposed to have a tractor escape system and wasn't designed to be pushed. I gather the main support was that Gemini had an 'over-abundance' of RCS which was supposed to keep it in line.

MOL suffered from the biggest problem of it simply being entirely 'justified' as a means of keeping the Air Force in the "space race" with it's own manned space program rather than any actual defensible military justification.. Much like the Dynasoar the Air Force with MOL refused to seek or accept NASA cooperation until it was too late and the program was no longer compatible with NASA goals or missions. The Air Force simply considered NASA to be another 'service' that was a direct rival in a "mission" that they felt was theirs and theirs alone.

Randy
 
I'll note that while the Air Force tested the Blue Gemini abort system in wind tunnels they never (as far as I can find) actually tested an abort which left some questions if the 'pusher' arrangement would have actually worked as advertised. We of course know they can be made to work, (see modern examples) but Gemini was (as noted) originally supposed to have a tractor escape system and wasn't designed to be pushed. I gather the main support was that Gemini had an 'over-abundance' of RCS which was supposed to keep it in line.

USAF took allot efforts to increase the safety:
Went for a oxygen-helium mixture for cabin and lab of MOL
Installed 6 solid retro rockets as Escape system
With the ejections seats as backup, this time try hard shell suits, the Litton RX-3

They build RX-3 suit and tested it inside Gemini B mock up to open the hatch to MOL lab.
the astronauts were unable turn there back back or reach hatch with hand in those RX-3 suits.
So USAF went for backup Suit by Hamilton Standard, the MH-8...
 
USAF took allot efforts to increase the safety:
Went for a oxygen-helium mixture for cabin and lab of MOL

Ya the idea was to keep a lower pressure without using a pure oxygen atmosphere on the other hand the Air Force had not learned the lesson that the Navy had learned from the SeaLab experiment with heli-ox mix which was how difficult the mix made vocal communications :) The mix also caused over-heating issues IIRC.

With the ejections seats as backup, this time try hard shell suits, the Litton RX-3

They build RX-3 suit and tested it inside Gemini B mock up to open the hatch to MOL lab.
the astronauts were unable turn there back back or reach hatch with hand in those RX-3 suits.
So USAF went for backup Suit by Hamilton Standard, the MH-8...

The hatch in the heat shield was a pretty genius move actually :) But it was also based on the issues with getting the Gemini hatches to close and lock properly which McD was unable to 'fix' without a major redesign effort which NASA wouldn't pay for and the Air Force felt they couldn't afford with all the changes already needed to go from NASA Gemini to Blue Gemini.

Gemini was a great interim vehicle but it was just to damn small to really get the most out of the design.

Randy
 
Gemini was a great interim vehicle but it was just to damn small to really get the most out of the design.
That was reason NRO look into option to Use Apollo Hardware for MOL (around 1965-1966 i think)
Some design was study with North America Aviation on that. but MOL stay on Gemini B hardware.
I guess that, NASA was piss off on that proposal, because it would branch off needed Hardware of the Apollo program.
Like wise USAF that not wanted to use expensive Saturn Rockets to launch MOL (next issue to launch that in Polar orbit from KSC)
They go the cheaper Titan IIIC and Gemini hardware for "free" from NASA
 
Top