More Brits in space (Oh stop whimpering, it's not like I didn't warn you about this)

The basic premis of the comic "Ministry of Space" is that a ruthlessly dedicated RAF officer organises the capture of the staff of Peenemunde to ensure that the British Empire will become the dominant space nation after the war.

So what if this really happened?

Someone at the Air Ministry decides that the future is rocket shaped and convinces Churchill to authorise a mission to capture as much of the German rocket program as possible.

How does Britain use it's new found lead in the space race?
 

Redbeard

Banned
An American radio network known for allways first reading the bad news and then the good news will one sunny morning broadcast like this:

"Good Morning, first the bad news: The British are in space! And now the good news: all of them!"

Regards :D

Steffen Redbeard
 
For Britain to be a serious contender in space you would need a much earlier POD, you need to keep the commonwealth more close nit at the very least, on its own Britain lacks the resources for a major space programme.
 
Leej said:
For Britain to be a serious contender in space you would need a much earlier POD, you need to keep the commonwealth more close nit at the very least, on its own Britain lacks the resources for a major space programme.

What "resources" are those, precisely? You need money, effort, science and engineering. Juding by their independent building of jet aircraft, their launching of a satellite (third nation to do so, in 1959), and their independent nuclear (weapons and energy) programme, the British had quite enough money, science and engineering to manage.

All they needed was the effort. And the response was, "why bother?" The Russians bothered because they wanted to impress the world with socialist science, and put the willies up the Americans. The Americans bothered because they wanted to match the Russians, and because such things help Presidents win elections. The British would bother because...?

So, really, you need a political PoD, or perhaps a strategic one. One which makes Britain feel more like a Great Power post-WWII, rather than a second-rate power like the French. Perhaps Arnhem actually works, and Monty takes Berlin in January 1945, while Patton et al linger about doing not much in Bavaria, staggering along like Pershing in the Ardennes in 1918.

This gives the British a larger section of Germany to occupy post-war, and a larger say in its governance. The Russians thus see them as more of a threat than they did historically. This encourages Britain in its industrial, military and scientific development, rather than being the junior partner to the USA.

Another PoD is the British Tube Alloys programme, their atomic bomb project. Historically, they had theirs long before the American one, with heavy water plants in Canada, etc. They rolled theirs into the US one, sending their European refugee scientists over to the US.

Let's suppose that the scientists' appeal to Roosevelt fails, he gets some bad advice that the programme won't work. So the British press on with theirs alone. This means of course it's not developed until 1947 or so, too late to affect the war.

This leads to Japan falling in invasion rather than simply surrendering, and Japan divided as Germany and Korea were.

With the British the first to acquire nuclear weapons, the Soviets second, and the Americans a distant third (since they'd return to their programme once they realised it was possible), if you couple this with Monty taking Berlin, this places Britain as the Russians' primary adversary in Europe, with the US their primary adversary in Asia.

This entices greater technological effort from Britain. Of course, this means less prosperity for the common Briton as the years go on, with aspects of the wartime command-economy continuing.

So when the Commies send up their sputnik and their Gagarin, it's the British who respond.
 
I don't think Britain could turn into a dictatorship style nation so it can concentrate on big nations. Britain is the capital of freedom and all that especially after defeating the nazis and liberating Europe.

We will need more of a empire for a decent space programme, Britain is too far north to be a cost effective launch site and we don't have that much free and empty (i.e. nothing to catch fire) land. Our regular space place on the isle of wite wouldn't work.
Britain was too busy concentrating on rebuilding after the war, our economy had been destroyed in the two world wars, we needed a total change of the way things were done.
 
Chef Kyle said:
What "resources" are those, precisely? You need money, effort, science and engineering. Juding by their independent building of jet aircraft, their launching of a satellite (third nation to do so, in 1959), and their independent nuclear (weapons and energy) programme, the British had quite enough money, science and engineering to manage.
Well, considering the British finances after WW2, I really (REALLY) doubt the Brits had the means, Chef. being a major player in space is great fun (and rewarding in tis own), but expensive (with a capital E). The British, eventough I'm a bit of a anglophile and therefore would have loved MoS to be real, just couldn't afford it!

Best regards!

-Bluenote.
 
In the Ministry of Space series, states that the money that England used to reach space was captured by the British from the Germans who had, in turn, taken it from concentration camp victims. The quoted value is 2 billion pounds and is kept as a black budget project. So Britain never used its own money in the series, at least to begin with.

Torqumada
 
An interesting idea, but probably not feasible. IIRC, Britain spent a large part of the postwar period essentially in hock to the United States, and shorn of her colonies, acquiring the physical resources for a major space program would be tricky. (Launching them wouldn't be a problem; after all, doesn't Britain own a bunch of small equatorial that could fit the bill?) Also, swiping the German rocket staff before the Americans can liberate them is fairly sure to piss off Washington, and some suitably childish means could be found to respond to this.

An interesting possibility could see Britain getting the scientists, then negotiating with the USA for something of a joint space program: Britain gives the brains, America gives the stuff. Over time, other European nations could join in, until we have a North Atlantic Space Organization or something.
 
Leej said:
We will need more of a empire for a decent space programme, Britain is too far north to be a cost effective launch site and we don't have that much free and empty (i.e. nothing to catch fire) land. Our regular space place on the isle of wite wouldn't work.

Singapore and Malaysia were still part of the Empire until 1959 and Britain maintained military bases in Singapore into the late '60s. If a British Space Programme were to be based in Malaysia or Singapore, the investment and industrial opportunities might swing public opinion in those countries towards Britain (at least to the extent where they might agree to become a dominion- the Dominion of Malaya). There's quite a lot of empty land in Malaysia and it's near enough the Equator to provide an excellent launch location.
 
Why all the wondering about location? What's wrong with the location the British really used? Woomera, Australia, 1959 - third nation to launch a satellite into space.

As to money, you're looking at debt with a 2004 perspective. "Debt, bad, cripples country." This wasn't the view of the time. Britain had the money for vast social welfare programmes, and Keynesian investment in infrastructure. Why not for rockets, etc?

They did build rockets, they did build nuclear weapons, they did build huge computers, theydid develop radar, so on and so forth. If you want to do something badly enough, you find the money and resources.

Consider: China is putting men into space for less than one-tenth the cost of the US space programme. It's taking much longer, of course... but the USSR never had more than a quarter the US's funds for space research, and yet was their superior or equal until 1966 or so.

Space travel is like cars. You can do it cheap, or you can do it really, really expensively. The latter isn't necessarily more reliable or useful. Consider: space shuttle, $2 billion each, $400 million per flight, 88 flights, 2 complete constructive losses. Energiya rocket + soyuz capsule, $100 million each, $20 million per flight, 165 flights, zero constructive losses.

You guys are just looking at the price list of the American space programme. But it ain't necessarily so.

If the British govt had money for Concorde, or the Tornado, or the Hermes aircraft carriers, or the National Coal Board, they certainly could have found money for a stronger space programme. What was lacking wasn't the money, it was the will.
 
Chef Kyle said:
If the British govt had money for Concorde, or the Tornado, or the Hermes aircraft carriers, or the National Coal Board, they certainly could have found money for a stronger space programme. What was lacking wasn't the money, it was the will.
Please read up on the British economy in the late 40' and the 50's! The war had ruined the British economy and subsequently the occupation and rebuilding of Germany (and the rest of world) was draining the coffers fast! The British in the post-war periode were perhaps not exactly poor, but definitely not wealthy enough to finance a major a space program! Jesus, they could barely afford to develop the next generation of post-war jet fighters. Several German scientists working for the British after the war went to the US because of lack of funds for their research!

Another POD might be a high prestige lets-teach-the-French/Germans-a-lesson space program under Thatcher in the 80's...

Best regards!

Mr.Bluenote.
 
Mr.Bluenote said:
Please read up on the British economy in the late 40' and the 50's!

Already did, mate. "You disagree with me, and I know everything, so you must know nothing." Cute assumption, but wrong.

The 1940s is irrelevant; no-one was doing space research seriously in the 1940s. Zapping off a few old V-2s, and floating a few high-altitude weather balloons, barely counts. If it counts, even Nigeria has done space research.

As to the 1950s: The British economy of the 1950s produced: the third country to put a satellite into space, nuclear weapons, and a domestically-produced fighter jet. If you can do all those, you can put a guy in space. It's extra work and expense, but it's doable.

I'm really puzzled by this attitude that they couldn't do what they did, in fact, do. "Where would they put the launchpad?" How about Woomera, where they put the launch pad. "They couldn't manage it!" Yet they did - 1959.

It's like saying, "he can't afford a swimming pool, he's poor!"
"But he's got a mansion, and a Porsche outside. Sure, some of the interior of the mansion is a bit rough, and he's in debt for a lot of this, but..."
"No, he's in debt! So he's really poor!"

Note that many of the richest nations in history have been in great debt. The United States today has the largest national debt, private and public combined, than any in world history. Yet it still has a space programme, and a huge military, and social programmes, and subsidies to business and industry and agriculture, and gives foreign aid, etc etc. What? No! Impossible! Debt and a space programme cannot co-exist! Yet, amazingly, they do.
 
Why there was no will?

Chef Kyle said:
... s and industry and agriculture, and gives foreign aid, etc etc. What? No! Impossible! Debt and a space programme cannot co-exist! Yet, amazingly, they do.

So it seesm it was a problem of will. Then, why was there no will to do it?


As somebody suggested - UK could develope a man-in-space program under
Tatcher in the 80's. A possible PoD: earlier (say 70's) French test are much more
successful and ESA sends man in space. Woudl this fuel a save-the-national-pride
response in UK to carry out the Tatcher space program?
But again - this is an external reason to do it. It would be nicer to come up with an
internal one.
 
Chef Kyle said:
Already did, mate. "You disagree with me, and I know everything, so you must know nothing." Cute assumption, but wrong..
I never said I knew everything, neither did I try to belittle you, Kyle! It's just sometimes a bit problematic to discus with people who, eh, seems to have a strange take on things. I just wanted to know if you were arguing on behalf of what you just think is right or if you actually knew someting about the subject! That's only faire, is it not? Do you actually disagree with me that Britain was in economic troubles in the 40's and 50's? Atlee's desperate fight to keep Britain afloat did succeed to a certain degree, but it was an uphill struggle and largely financed by the Americans...
And debt is bad if your economy is either frail or small. A country like the US with its huge economy can be indebted form here to Judgement day, but very few other countries can take such a view on national debt. Being from Denmark, I know how a huge public debt can mess with the Public finances!

Chef Kyle said:
The 1940s is irrelevant; no-one was doing space research seriously in the 1940s. (...)
Well, no, not if you want to keep you pet German scientists around! Besides that a lot of the pre-space engineering and troubleshooting and what not were done by von Braun's team in the USA. I believe that some of the earlier rockets were based on the V2. That alone makes the later 40's very essential to a space program!

There's a reason why the British did not expand their space program, and it was probably based on a cost/benefit analysis. What do we gain? Is it absolutely vital? Can we afford it? The answer would be; nothing the next God knows how many years, no and no again! They were hard pressed to develop new Fighters as it was, you know. Civilian companies actually did most of the research, so it was not as such a goverment sponsored program. Regarding nukes; the Brits felt that they were essential for the continued security of the Kingdom, so the funds were allocated. If you're in doubt of how hard pressed the Uk were, then look at the Royal Navy! It got downscaled on a size barely imagined, and that's the pride of Britain we are talking about...

I still think that a space program under Thatcher would be more plausible, but even she didn't see any economic sense in it... unfortunately!

Best regards!

- Bluenote.
 
Launching a satalite and having a full programme from Australia are different things. It brings me back to that we need closer ties with the commonwealth.
If you've seen me about this board you'll know wherever it is possible I hype up Britain as the best thing ever (which we are) however serious competition with the USA and USSR in space with a POD at the very end of WW2 is pretty out there.

You can't compare a space programme to Concord, concord was originally designed as a big money spinner though it flopped rather badly due to concerns about it damaging human health in areas it flew over.
 
Just found this rather good article on British Space History. It's called What Went Wrong With Dan Dare? - the failure of England's space program.

http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1373/is_7_49/ai_55175598/pg_1

There are quite a few references to the economic problems of sustaining af full scall, or even small scale, space program, but also to missed opportunities, bad timing and lack of cooperation, either between the Commonwealth nations as Leej suggest, or between the European states.

A second interessting link is this:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/6133/timeline.html

It's a timeline for Britain in not quite in space. :)

It seems to me that the best opportunity for the British to get out there and stay there would be the Black Prince project and an united Commonwealth effort. But again, it would take money and political will/vision.

Oh, btw, valio_98, besides the destructive desire to put bloody big bombs on rockets, prestige and national pride fueled the space race. I can't see the US push into space without the Soviet threat looming in the background. Neither would the British rockets have lifted of if not for the need to be able to lob nukes at the USSR. But it could be fun to see a TL where somebody just wanted to go into space for no other motives than to do it! Or perhaps have a Clive Sinclaire having a space related epiphany and thus wanting to exploite space for its ressources...

Best regards!

- Bluenote.
 
MoS TL

Ministry of Space TL
The Brits go into space…

Part I
“All rightâ€, the critics said, “let's build the super V2 if we must...but let's have less of this worship of things German. The Germans didn't win the War!†It was a danger signal, a denial of science. The man who builds a swing doesn't plant a tree and wait for it to grow. He selects an established tree and secures his ropes to the stoutest branch.
- Ivan Southall, Woomera, 1962.

Even to this day many British subjects and their brothers in the Commonwealth refuse the fact that most of the advances that made long-range ballistic missiles and thus space travel possible were German-made either before or during the War. While Germany's Wernher von Braun and his colleagues at Peenemünde had their research funded by the military, post-war British rocket enthusiasts initially travelled by another more civilian route. Both the British and the Germans, however, had their visons and dreams of space travel…

The British Interplanetary Society (BIS) formed in Liverpool in 1933, and, due to a British law prohibiting the building of rockets by private individuals, concentrated on theoretical work in astronautics. In 1937 a study of a Lunar landing mission began. The BIS hoped to prove that that such missions were possible. The BIS had nonetheless done remarkably well with the little or no funding they recieved before the War. Their advocacy of using rockets to explore space made many view them as cranks. Still, BIS brought together a brilliant group of visionaries. Among the best known are Arthur C. Clarke and the popular sci-fi writer, John Wyndham. The group also included Val Cleaver, an engineer who would play a leading role in the Blue Streak Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) project and other similar projects.

The technology needed to place a satellite in orbit is very similar to that required to send a nuclear warhead intercontinental distances. And the ability to launch nuclear weapons at the Soviets would by far be the main British incentive for building rockets in the early 50’s. But many who worked on the military weapons saw their initial efforts to build a weapon as part of a more unspoken long-term mission to get into and ultimately explore space. One man’s Herculean effort brought German and British know-how and shared dreams together in what was to become the British Ministry of Space. As we all know, that man was Solly Zuckerman.

Unable to raise the funds to build large pieces of hardware in the 1930s, the BIS tackled the theoretical problems of space travel. However, after the first V2-missile attacks on Britain, some members of the BIS gained prominence. Not for their, at the time, somewhat loony space ideas, but for their knowledge of rockets and balistics. The BIS-experts got an unecpected friend in RAF’s inhouse technical expert, the ingenius South African, Solly Zuckerman. Zuckerman, eventhough he never publicly admitted it, saw the possibilities in space travel and exploration. Some time in late 1944, Zuckerman arranged for a meeting between some members of BIS, himself, naturally, primeminister Churchill, Lord Tizard, the govermenst technological advisor, Fieldmarshal Alanbrook, the head the Imperial General Staff, and Airmarshal Tedder. Tizard was very direct in his dismissal of rockets, missiles and other little boy’s. It was his firm impression that the Germans were getting increasingly desperate and thus needed those fantasy weapons. Tedder however cleverly noted that the RAF’s was unable to stop the V2’s in flight and that they on impact killed British citizens and destroyed property, which, in Tedders book, meant that they were a very real and relevant threat. BIS-member Val Cleaver noted that not only could rockets be made to transport bombs as the Germans did, they could take you into space. In space the possibilities were infinite. Cleaver is said to have sketched out the very first spy sattelite at the meeting. Alanbrook, an avid birdwathcher, and the always adventure inclined Primeminister seemed to warm to the idea of a concentrated British effort toward designing and building funktioning rockets. The RAF’s Department of Rocketry was thus born. After the war the DoR took a leading role in pressing the case for space exploration and research, both in Britain and in the Commonwealth, and got moved from RAF to the Ministry of Aviation. Later it would emerge in its own right as the Ministry of Space.

I decided to give the idea of a MoS a try... Have outlined the TL up until the 60's. The POD is the meeting that Zuckerman arranges in late 1944.

Best regards!

- Mr.B.
 
cultural reasons to go to space

Mr.Bluenote said:
Oh, btw, valio_98, besides the destructive desire to put bloody big bombs on rockets, prestige and national pride fueled the space race. I can't see the US push into space without the Soviet threat looming in the background. Neither would the British rockets have lifted of if not for the need to be able to lob nukes at the USSR. But it could be fun to see a TL where somebody just wanted to go into space for no other motives than to do it! Or perhaps have a Clive Sinclaire having a space related epiphany and thus wanting to exploite space for its ressources...
- Bluenote.

Thanks for the links!

Very interesting thought.
Could the humanity have gone to space for cultural reasons?
Alas, I can not offer a PoD but I will think.
It seems this PoD will have to affect the philosophy or may be
religion... in pretty uncient times.
 
MoS TL

Part II
If Britain had rejected satellites it would have been easier to reject the next major advance, and the next, and the next. There would have been no end to it. Yes, there would have been an end. Britain would have become a Switzerland with a few specialised skills - an admirable little Switzerland, but not a Britain.
- Ivan Southall, Woomera, 1962.

As the Allied invasion finally got moving and the Germans fell back, it bevame obvious that the War was about to be won. The Allies and the Soviet Union were beginning to play political games to ensure influence and dominance in the post-war world. Having a energetic and highly intelligent man like Solly Zucker leading the DoR fueled Churchill’s always quite capable imagination to a point were Hastings Ismay, his personal chef of staff, laconically said that; “Winnie talks about nothing but space planes and rockets these days!†That was of course untrue, but the British PM seemed to have seen the larger implications af space exploration and control. He once said to Alanbrook: “He who control the high ground is destined to win any given battle. Space is the ultimate high ground!†Politically the situation was worsening for Britain. The USA seemed oblivious to the threath posed by Stalin and Soviet Russia. The French under deGaulle was already making all kinds of troubles as had they actually won the war by themselves. And the Soviest seemed hell-bent on taking all they could both in Eastern Europe and Asia. Churchill did not have an excellent personal relationship with President Truman of the USA as he once had with FDR, and the more anti-British forces within the US administration had begun to manist their new found strength. Information and data from the joint nuclear programme in were at times withheld or edited. Churchill began to feel isolated and alone. The British government then too began to plan for the post-war periode; A time were the Empire and Commonwealth had to stand perhaps alone in an increasingly hostile world.

Churchill then gave his favorite trouble-shooter Lord Mounbatten a crucial task. Track down the German scientist involved in the German rocket programme and get them to Britain when the fighting stops. Sieze all relevant materiel as well. Mountbatten sat to the task with great vigour. Men like Ian Flemming, Maxwell Knight and the Sterling-brothers will forever be names remembered foundly by the British Ministry of Space and space enthusiats in the Commonwealth for their perticipation in Operation Backfire.

At the end of the war von Braun and most of his V-2 team were taken to Britain, while both the US and the Soviets scrambled to gain as many experts as they could. It is rumored, but still classified, that Backfire-commandos under David Sterling actually engaged the Soviets in several firefights at the time. Even if the story is only that, a story, it do tell us how seriously the British took the matter. The German missile assembly centre at Nordhausen in the Harz mountains of central Germany was captured by an operation under Mountbatten’s personal supervison. British Paras were dropped near by and rushed to the giant facility mere hours in advance of the Americans. Nordhausen ultimately ended up in the Soviet sector, but not until the British Backfire-teams had stripped the place of al that was not bolted down..

Nearly all of the very large number of Germans appropriated by Britain in Operation Backfire were sent to the Department of Rocketry’s Propulsion Study Center at Westcott near Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire. The German scientists were from a variety of different backgrounds, not all of them had any specific relation to the V2-team who had developed the V-2 at Peenemünde, but were deemed usefull nonetheless and put to work for their new masters. As DoR was integrated into RAF and therefore under military control the German scientist were at first considered PoW’s and were kept in a prison-like enviroment with a barbed wire compound and armed guards. It, however, soon became obvious that the Germans were no threat, nor uncooperative. Despite some initial apprehension, the barbed wire and armed guards soon focused more on intruders and general security than to keep an eye on the resident Germans. At the end of the 40’s all the scientists were fully integrated into the British society.
 
Leej said:
Launching a satalite and having a full programme from Australia are different things. It brings me back to that we need closer ties with the commonwealth.
Australia let Britain explode nuclear weapons on its territory. The CSIRO had a nuclear research division.

How "close" do the ties have to be? They used Aussie lands, and scientists, and uranium, and money...

serious [UK] competition with the USA and USSR in space with a POD at the very end of WW2 is pretty out there.
Of course it's "out there." The only question is, can we come up with a plausible scenario? If I say, "imagine X happened..." it always seems crazy. If I say, "imagine Y happened, which led to Z, and then X happened," then it doesn't seem so crazy. The plausibility of scenarios must be assessed on a combination of their end results, and their PoDs - not just on their end results.

You can't compare a space programme to Concord, concord was originally designed as a big money spinner though it flopped rather badly...

True, there's no comparison: Concorde was more expensive and less profitable than a space programme could have been.

So, what we'd need is a PoD where people are somehow convinced that space travel will be wildly profitable. Then, as they realise it won't be, they keep spending money on it anyway.
"Why are we spending another 4 billion pounds on it?"
"Because we already spent two billion pounds, and if we stop now, we'll have nothing to show for it."
"Whereas if we spend six billion we'll have almost nothing to show for it?"
"Yes."
 
Top