What sort of POD and requirements are needed for the shuttle, or some other form of re-usable spacecraft, to be deployed at the earliest possible date? How would the space race need to look like for this to happen, and how would it continue to develop? In fact, to make it interesting, would it somehow be possible for the Soviets to accomplish this, perhaps with some sort of quasi-Buran?
Earlier shuttle?
- Thread starter BlackWave
- Start date
if we take USAF Program and use Dyna-Soar (X-20X) as Shuttle, can be launch in 1968
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/dynasoar.htm
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/dynasoar.htm
IIRC, the X-20 was cancelled because it was an Air Force project and all manned spaceflight was moved to the civilian NASA...and the Dynasoar did not fit in with the current NASA priority - which as a manned lunar landing.
How about a PoD in the late 1950's (1) No lunar race - but instead a more militarized competition between the USSR and USA to dominate near earth orbit space with manned space stations, spy satellites, and sub orbital or orbital bombers.
How about a PoD in the late 1950's (1) No lunar race - but instead a more militarized competition between the USSR and USA to dominate near earth orbit space with manned space stations, spy satellites, and sub orbital or orbital bombers.
Have McNamara get fired. Then the X-20 would have more of a chance. Either that or give the X-20 more of a reason to exist then as a tech demonstrator. Say the soviets have a more active spy satellite program, or has something similar.
All I know is I hope one of those retired shuttles finds its home in Dayton Ohio, not in Florida or Texas. Cause without us, those cities don't have the space bases. 
I suspect that 1 shuttle might just land up outside the U.S, abeit minus the engines...All I know is I hope one of those retired shuttles finds its home in Dayton Ohio, not in Florida or Texas. Cause without us, those cities don't have the space bases.
(A shuttle in New York Harbour...? Never...).
I, for one, support the placement of a Shuttle in NYC. I'd prefer to put them in the Cradle of Aviation Museum in Long Island, but that museum has no money. My reasoning? The Shuttle's wings and rudder were built by Grumman and Republic, on Long Island.
Re: Soviet Proto-Buran. I believe they had an orbital/suborbital spaceplane program. Mig-105 I believe it was. But it never flew.
As for other designs besides X-20, there's Big Gemini, which would have resupplied an Air Force or NASA Space Station and landed on skids and parachutes on American soil.
All I know is I hope one of those retired shuttles finds its home in Dayton Ohio, not in Florida or Texas. Cause without us, those cities don't have the space bases.
Dayton... isn't that the Ohian city with the really big Aerospace Museum. Ack! I can't remember what it was called-- Wright-Patterson or something like that.
Does everyone not KNOW about WPAFB?
I've heard of it, mostly due to a Mars Society convention in Dayton in a few days.
Also, it would be better if the ATL Shuttle has liquid rocket boosters. More safe than SRBs.
Looks like I need to start up my thread again, under a new name though.
A link will be coming shortly.
Quite, though I don't know whether that would have worked all that well. The X-20 is definitely the thing to go for.
Not necessary. All you really need is a Defense Secretary less opposed to military crewed space. It'll probably end up with NASA anyways, since human space has always proven impractical for military purposes (not that that keeps people from trying). Also, the Dyna-soar's cancellation had nothing really to do with moving all spaceflight to NASA--that took place under Eisenhower (note that MOL was announced the same day that Dyna-soar was canceled!). It had everything to do with McNamara being hostile to the idea of military space.
Indeed. McNamara was implacably opposed to military human spaceflight, so keeping him out would do a lot.
All I know is I hope one of those retired shuttles finds its home in Dayton Ohio, not in Florida or Texas. Cause without us, those cities don't have the space bases.
Not true. The development of Kennedy and Johnson had nothing to do with Wright-Patterson's little paperclips. Heck, almost none of that activity took place with or had more than a tenuous link with Wright-Patterson, either. In any event, the Shuttle had less than nothing to do with WP--because everything the Air Force did with the Shuttle was negative for that program's long-term development.
Sanger's ideas wouldn't have worked, they didn't have the materials tech for it (we don't today, either).
NYC shouldn't get one because they already have one in Washington. NASM is much closer to New York than it is to any other proposed site, so New Yorkers can just go there if they want to see a Shuttle so bad. They can fly, drive, or take the halfway-decent trains, so there isn't any problem with travel. IMHO, it ought to be NASM-some Western site (west of the Rockies--perhaps Seattle?)-Johnson-Kennedy. That way the main US aerospace museum plus the two main involved NASA centers get one, and there's one reasonably close to most people.
Wright-Patterson can forget about it because the Air Force screwed up the Shuttle pretty badly (them and the NRO). Without their "help" the Shuttle would either have been canceled or at the very least would have had a better design.
It did (sort of). They flew some spaceplanes as test vehicles for the Buran program.
Anyways, the best way to speed up the development of spaceplanes and other reusable spacecraft would be for Nixon to win the 1960 elections. At that time, what NASA envisioned for Apollo was building up a space station and perhaps flying a couple men around the Moon by 1970, which didn't change until Kennedy's speech. Nixon probably continues those same policies, his Defense Secretary probably doesn't cancel Dyna-Soar, either, and the nation probably doesn't go into Vietnam or start the Great Society, though either not being in Vietnam or not having Great Society programs is good news for the space program. That means that by the early 1970s both the Air Force and NASA are probably starting to work on larger space shuttles--the Air Force because they want to increase capability, NASA because they want a reusable supply vessel (that was the main reason for Space Shuttle, to resupply space stations). However, these will be very different beasts from OTL's shuttles, as most likely they will be designed for launch on top of existing medium-sized vehicles--the Saturn I or Titan III (or variants thereof)--and will use different construction methods and technology. So they will likely prove more practical when introduced in the mid-to-late '70s.
Last edited:
I wasn't refereing to the base here. I was refereing to the Wright brothers and my hometown and State being the origin of air travel.
Forget SC claiming "first in flight" BS. Dayton is First in Flight, First to SPACE! Link to my thread about the base as well. https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?p=3494392#post3494392
I wasn't refereing to the base here. I was refereing to the Wright brothers and my hometown and State being the origin of air travel.
Link to my thread about the base as well. https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?p=3494392#post3494392
Bah, the Wrights were ahead of their time in a lot of ways, and they may have flown first, but them being "absent" wouldn't have changed anything, you would still have had Brazilians flying within 5 years.
Some Ohioans are very proud of the brothers and our contribution to Space exploration with Glenn and Armstrong.
And they should be! But Wright-Patterson did not have very much to do with the Shuttle program and shouldn't get one of the remaining OVs.
Orville_third
Banned
Uh, that's NC...(I ought to know...I'm from SC...)I wasn't refereing to the base here. I was refereing to the Wright brothers and my hometown and State being the origin of air travel.
Link to my thread about the base as well. https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?p=3494392#post3494392
there is a Alternative to X-20
during 1957-1964 the USAF ordered a Study called "Aerospaceplane" ASP
in April 1961 Boeing, Convair, Douglas, Lockheed, Martin and Republic
presendet there Design:
were Boeing and Convair presend Two stage spaceplane
show Lockheed, Martin: Singel stage to Orbit (SSTO) with Air breathing rocket engine LACE
while Douglas presend a SSTO spaceplane look like the Spaceark from Movie "When Worlds Collide"
and Republic SSTO with Turbojets/Ram/screamjets up to speed of mach 25
Boeing Modell 879-33 is very intriguing Two stage spaceplane
first stage with rocket engine and a Dyna-Soar as cockpit
second stage is a rocket or smaller manned shuttle
like later german Sanger II concept of 1980s
if this has taken by USAF or NASA as Space Shuttle, it have launch around 1970-1973
during 1957-1964 the USAF ordered a Study called "Aerospaceplane" ASP
in April 1961 Boeing, Convair, Douglas, Lockheed, Martin and Republic
presendet there Design:
were Boeing and Convair presend Two stage spaceplane
show Lockheed, Martin: Singel stage to Orbit (SSTO) with Air breathing rocket engine LACE
while Douglas presend a SSTO spaceplane look like the Spaceark from Movie "When Worlds Collide"
and Republic SSTO with Turbojets/Ram/screamjets up to speed of mach 25
Boeing Modell 879-33 is very intriguing Two stage spaceplane
first stage with rocket engine and a Dyna-Soar as cockpit
second stage is a rocket or smaller manned shuttle
like later german Sanger II concept of 1980s
if this has taken by USAF or NASA as Space Shuttle, it have launch around 1970-1973