No shuttle in 1971; space station 1980-2000

[Archibald]

That's an alt history I want to publish sooner or later; it is not achieved yet.

Let's suppose "freedom in 1980" instead of shuttle.
Like Mir, the space station has a life duration of 15-20 years. So it is desorbited around 1995.
Obviously, no ISS.

The question is, what happens to the Mir space stations ? More exactly, to the DOS-7 (Mir 1) and DOS-8 (OTL part of ISS) ?

The USSR obviously doesn't build Buran nor Energia. However Mir schedule doesn' move
- program started February 1976
- DOS-7 core launch 1985-1986
- Kvant-1 1987
- Kvant 2
- Kristall

OTL, Spektr and Priroda were funded by NASA and the space shuttle went to Mir in June 1995.

Here, NASA already has its own space station, bigger than Mir thanks to Skylab heritage.

So obviously Spektr, Priroda and Mir 2 have different destiny.

Timeline of US presidents doesn't change at all (Kennedy to Obama). So, around 1993 the situation is as follow
- Mir 1 lacks Spektr and Priroda
- Mir 2 on the ground. Won't be part of a non-existing ISS
- Indeed NASA already has a space station in orbit, however it reach the end of its useful life.

What would you do if you were Bill Clinton ?

- dock Mir 2 to the old NASA station ?
- dock Mir 2 to its old sibling, Mir 1 ?
- dock Spektr and Priroda to Mir 1 and complete it ?
- dock Spektr and Priroda to Mir 2, itself docked to NASA old space station ?

 

[KyleB]

I'd pick the second one. Dock Mir 1 to Mir 2. Of course, if I'm Pres. Clinton, I can't make that choice, the Russians can. The biggest problem with the International Space Station is in its name: international. Because the ISS had to be reached from spaceports in Kazakhstan and Florida, it had to be put in a special orbit that makes it useless as a base to Moon missions. Docking U.S. and Russian stations together creates the same problem. They will be useful for science and as a testbed for space systems, but as a base to be used for later projects, it will be useless.

 

[Michel Van]

it was this international. who save Space Station.

around 1993-95 were a strong oppsition by republicans against ALPHA-ISS
and only the international contracts NASA had with RSA, ESA, JAXA save it.

so if MIR-2 not dock with US freedom
the U.S. Congress and Senat can cancel a new US Space Station
even shot down the U.S. Manned space flight !

proposal
Mir-2 forms new Core of international. Space Station
and US builds a Space Shuttle called Venture Star !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VentureStar

 

[MarkWhittington]

it was this international. who save Space Station.

around 1993-95 were a strong oppsition by republicans against ALPHA-ISS
and only the international contracts NASA had with RSA, ESA, JAXA save it.

so if MIR-2 not dock with US freedom
the U.S. Congress and Senat can cancel a new US Space Station
even shot down the U.S. Manned space flight !

proposal
Mir-2 forms new Core of international. Space Station
and US builds a Space Shuttle called Venture Star !
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VentureStar

Actually, the first bit is wrong. Opposition to the space station project came from Democrats. Bob Traxler tried to kill it in 1991. Tim Roemer in the House and Dale Bumpers in the Senate were offering amendments to kill the project throughout the 1990s, almost succeeding in 1993 after the Russian deal was announced.

The interesting part of this scenario is that one suspects that sans space station, we're still using Apollos on Saturn 1Bs to access the station, unless one imagines a space shuttle project happening in the 1980s-90s.

 

[Archibald]

Tim Roemer in the House /// almost succeeding in 1993 after the Russian deal was announced.

A 215-216 vote, the tightest of the year !

The interesting part of this scenario is that one suspects that sans space station, we're still using Apollos on Saturn 1Bs to access the station, unless one imagines a space shuttle project happening in the 1980s-90s.

Exact. Apollos on Saturn IB AND an ongoing SSTO program.

So Mark, what option would you pick up ?

- dock Mir 2 to the old NASA station ?
OR
- dock Mir 2 to its old sibling, Mir 1 ?

 

[MarkWhittington]

A 215-216 vote, the tightest of the year !



Exact. Apollos on Saturn IB AND an ongoing SSTO program.

So Mark, what option would you pick up ?

- dock Mir 2 to the old NASA station ?
OR
- dock Mir 2 to its old sibling, Mir 1 ?

Likely two. One of the reasons for the Russian partnership in OTL was to provide a diplomatic reason for the space station to help overcome Congressional opposition. Post 1993 it worked brilliantly. No need in the ATL.

On the other hand, Skylab in OTL was at 50 degree orbit which would have made it convenient for access from Baikanour. Guest Cosmonauts could access an expanded Skylab without much difficulty in their own Soyuz.

 

[MarkWhittington]

One other twist possible. Though one expects that an Apollo/Saturn 1B system would have been refined over the years, there would still be a call for cheaper ways to get to Super Skylab. Perhaps there would be an early COTS, during Reagan? Also, a successful, early space station might lead to an earlier back to the Moon program. Reagan himself considered this, but the plan got shelved when Iran-Contra arose.

 

[Michel Van]

Democrats.? not republicans, upps wrong again

Apollos on Saturn IB

aah i don't wana spoil the fun
but in 1967 NASA take the Decision to shut down the Saturn IB production
because high building and launch cost

already in 1967 Apollo constuctor NAA made proposal to use cheaper Titan IIIC

on the other hand were proposal to replace Saturn IB firststage with Solid booster

 

[Archibald]

Likely two. One of the reasons for the Russian partnership in OTL was to provide a diplomatic reason for the space station to help overcome Congressional opposition. Post 1993 it worked brilliantly. No need in the ATL.

The official reason was: "we must keep the russian scientists at work on civil space - Soyuz, Mir, Proton - otherwise they will left and build ICBM for North Korea, Iran or others."

What do you think about that ?

The question is, does Russia have enough money to launch the Mir 2 core after 1992 ?
OTL Spektr and Priroda launches were delayed for years, then funded by NASA...
Can ESA help ? Or the private sector ? Orphans of Apollo come to mind.

I really need Mir 1 or 2 to push NASA beyond LEO after 1995.
Something like
"What, another space station ? But we build Super Skylab 20 years ago, and the russians still have Mir in orbit... let's go back to the Moon instead !"

I just agree there are more economic way for Skylab logistics. Let's call this medium-lift logistics. Something like a FGB tug + a MPLM launched by a Delta 7000, an Atlas IIAS or an Ariane 44L.

 

[Archibald]

Darn, too much threads there. Little "up".