red moon

What if the USSR reaches the moon first? How would it effect history, would space exploration become more advanced then OTL or less? Would it spark WW3?
 
I'm quite sure It would not spark WWIII. Cold War powers were ridiculous, but not that crazy. For the Soviets to even beat the US to the moon would require quite a lot of work, as they never really worked on getting to the moon. Everything NASA did was a stepping stone to landing on the moon while the Soviets where more trying to simply move as fast as possible for prestige's sake. However, if the Soviets say do try and land on the moon seriously, say perhaps Korolev lives long enough, then you'd see a much tighter space race. Both sides might push the one-up-manship further with Moon bases or other programs of the like.
 
We've had this topic before, but I guess it's too interesting for people to not think about it again and again; anyways:

1: No, it would not lead to World War III. Why on Earth (or off of it) would it? The Soviet Union did not launch a war over the United States reaching the Moon first, why would a reversal change things? Furthermore, many important leaders on both sides (correctly) viewed the entire thing as essentially a propaganda stunt, differing mainly in scale and cost from (say) their Olympics team. It would obviously be silly to launch a nuclear war over the US team winning fewer medals than the Soviet team, and the same objections apply to launching a nuclear war over the Soviets reaching the Moon first.

2: In any case, the Soviets reaching the Moon first is only barely possible. It requires everything going right for them and nothing going right for NASA. You realize that the Soviets never even partially duplicated a mission as simple as Apollo 8, let alone one as complex as Apollo 11, thanks to the extreme unreliability of their launch vehicles?

3: The effects on space exploration would be unpredictable. Since the Russians could not really sustain a lunar exploration effort with their OTL architecture, I doubt you would see anything more than a slightly expanded and prolonged NASA lunar exploration and a more interesting post-Apollo program (perhaps as far as Saturn V-launched, Shuttle-serviced stations as originally planned, but that's a bit speculative). Certainly you won't see missions to Mars or lunar bases or other similar very expensive things.
 
Well you need some big Butterflies ( with capitals ) ... First Korolev has to survive because he was the only one in the program who had a serious idea of what he wanted and what he needed to accomplish ( maybe he did not had those "holidays" in the Gulag ) ... and even then you need them to have no single thing going wrong ... difficult ...
 
We've had this topic before, but I guess it's too interesting for people to not think about it again and again; anyways:

1: No, it would not lead to World War III. Why on Earth (or off of it) would it? The Soviet Union did not launch a war over the United States reaching the Moon first, why would a reversal change things? Furthermore, many important leaders on both sides (correctly) viewed the entire thing as essentially a propaganda stunt, differing mainly in scale and cost from (say) their Olympics team. It would obviously be silly to launch a nuclear war over the US team winning fewer medals than the Soviet team, and the same objections apply to launching a nuclear war over the Soviets reaching the Moon first.

Agreed. I think it would spur a more awesome Space Race.

As a fun aside, in my annual Sputniks game, 'round about 1967, both sides were actively pushing plans for orbital nuke platforms. The sabre rattling got so bad that I started rolling percentile dice between semi-annual turns.

At one point, the Director of the NRO player asked me what I was rolling for. I told him I was rolling for accidental nuclear exchange (I gave it a 10% chance.) He immediately ran out of the room to his team and said, "Guys, we need to calm down..."

The augmented Outer Space Treaty of 1968 (supplementing the one of 1966) was the result. :)

2: In any case, the Soviets reaching the Moon first is only barely possible. It requires everything going right for them and nothing going right for NASA. You realize that the Soviets never even partially duplicated a mission as simple as Apollo 8, let alone one as complex as Apollo 11, thanks to the extreme unreliability of their launch vehicles?
An extra 6 months would have given them an Apollo 8. POD for a lunar landing is a taller order but not insane. In the Sputniks game, Korolev and Glushko had an earlier falling out (Korolev wrongly accused Glushko of sabotaging his rockets in 1960) and Kuznetzov was on the N1 project earlier. He also rolled really well. The result was a Soviet lunar landing in October 1969. The American landing happened in July 1969 (there was no Apollo 1 fire, but the Apollo 8-equivalent burned up on reentry with a similar delay in development)

3: The effects on space exploration would be unpredictable. Since the Russians could not really sustain a lunar exploration effort with their OTL architecture, I doubt you would see anything more than a slightly expanded and prolonged NASA lunar exploration and a more interesting post-Apollo program (perhaps as far as Saturn V-launched, Shuttle-serviced stations as originally planned, but that's a bit speculative). Certainly you won't see missions to Mars or lunar bases or other similar very expensive things.
This. In Sputniks, the Soviets, even in triumph, canceled their lunar program to focus on near Earth stuff. But it could be a cool bargaining chip to joint lunar operations, sort of a grander, earlier ASTP.
 
An extra 6 months would have given them an Apollo 8. POD for a lunar landing is a taller order but not insane. In the Sputniks game, Korolev and Glushko had an earlier falling out (Korolev wrongly accused Glushko of sabotaging his rockets in 1960) and Kuznetzov was on the N1 project earlier. He also rolled really well. The result was a Soviet lunar landing in October 1969. The American landing happened in July 1969 (there was no Apollo 1 fire, but the Apollo 8-equivalent burned up on reentry with a similar delay in development)

Well, this isn't a game...

The difficulty is that the Proton was extremely unreliable at this time (about 50% of the launches over the timeframe we're looking at for an L-1 flight before Apollo 8 failed, and the rocket itself wasn't strictly speaking operational until 1974 or 1976, somewhere thereabouts), and of course the N1 never flew successfully, even after several more years of R&D than it would have to have to beat the US. While the N1 failure might be blamed to a certain extent on the Korolev-Glushko conflict and Korolev's untimely death, the Proton's failures really can't (it was a Chelomei project). You might blame them on Brezhnev indirectly (Chelomei was aligned towards Khruschev, and unsurprisingly ran into problems after he was replaced), but getting rid of him would be strong medicine.
 
Well, this isn't a game...

The difficulty is that the Proton was extremely unreliable at this time (about 50% of the launches over the timeframe we're looking at for an L-1 flight before Apollo 8 failed, and the rocket itself wasn't strictly speaking operational until 1974 or 1976, somewhere thereabouts), and of course the N1 never flew successfully, even after several more years of R&D than it would have to have to beat the US. While the N1 failure might be blamed to a certain extent on the Korolev-Glushko conflict and Korolev's untimely death, the Proton's failures really can't (it was a Chelomei project). You might blame them on Brezhnev indirectly (Chelomei was aligned towards Khruschev, and unsurprisingly ran into problems after he was replaced), but getting rid of him would be strong medicine.

Yeah, the Proton was dicey, and the N1 had its problems. The former is actually harder to fix than the latter, in my opinion. Still, the Soviets could have done it, had they rolled well.
 
How about this:

By early 1969, the Soviets manage to successfully launch the N1. In a near suicidal attempt to beat the Americans they launch a manned mission to the moon with only a single cosmonaut in their version of the lunar module. He succussfully lands on the moon, only a few miles away from the intended american landing site on July 19th 1969 (in hope that the Americans and thus the rest of the world can see that the USSR was there first - there is no TV-equipment on the significantly smaller soviet LEM). He deploys a Soviet flag, takes some pictures with his east-german Praktica SLR-Camera and heads back to the LEM to return home. But then the launch sequence fails. He contacts soviet mission control, but after trying for several hours it becomes evident that there is no way to help him. Since the signal is uncoded the Americans learn about it. So what's going to happen next?

Will the Soviets ask the Americans for help or will they try to roswell their failure as they have done many times before. I think if the Americans would officially be asked to rescue the cosmonaut, they could hardly refuse. But how will they act if the Soviets do indeed try to roswell their failure and thus their entire manned mission to moon. Will they simply carry on as if nothing had happened and claim to be the first. Or will they save the cosmonaut and thus achnoledge, that they were only second the put a man on the moon, if only by one day, but on the other hand prove that unlike the Soviets they could put a man on the moon and return him back to the earth while the Soviets could not and to be compassionate enough to not leave the poor russian wretch on the moon, there to suffocate when he runs out of oxygen.
 
Last edited:
This is all very interesting, Sorry about saying that the USSR moon landing would start WW3, it just seemed sensable at the time:eek:
 
Since the signal is uncoded the Americans learn about it. So what's going to happen next?

Will the Soviets ask the Americans for help or will they try to roswell their failure as they have done many times before. I think if the Americans would officially be asked to rescue the cosmonaut, they could hardly refuse. But how will they act if the Soviets do indeed try to roswell their failure and thus their entire manned mission to moon. Will they simply carry on as if nothing had happened and claim to be the first. Or will they save the cosmonaut and thus achnoledge, that they were only second the put a man on the moon, if only by one day,
The only way the us could rescue the guy would be if it happened before the apollo launch. Theyd have to remove an astronaut and refigure the flight
 
Nah, they don't have to reconfigure the flight. They just have to accept that they can take home fewer moon rocks. Worst comes to worst, the guy gets picked up by the rover, or legs it from one lander to the other.

Armstrong lets him in the lander, and they toss all his equipment out the airlock. It will be a bit crowded, and the take off might be a bit rough on him, but I don't think the ascent vehicle had too many Gs for a "lie on the floor or anywhere else there's room" rescue.

Belushi TD
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
The Soviets getting to the Moon first means that the myth of the US winning the Space Race likely doesn't come about.
 
If the USSR did get to the moon first (and I think it's unlikely), the Soviets would have a bit more propaganda, and maybe the Americans would try to do something even more impressive. That's probably the extent of the effect.
 
Nah, they don't have to reconfigure the flight. They just have to accept that they can take home fewer moon rocks. Worst comes to worst, the guy gets picked up by the rover, or legs it from one lander to the other.

The rover wasn't carried until the last three missions. And, on Apollo 11, the LEM landed miles west of their target. How far could you get on the moon by walking? Could our lost cosmonaut navigate accurately?
 
Nah, they don't have to reconfigure the flight. They just have to accept that they can take home fewer moon rocks. Worst comes to worst, the guy gets picked up by the rover, or legs it from one lander to the other.

Armstrong lets him in the lander, and they toss all his equipment out the airlock. It will be a bit crowded, and the take off might be a bit rough on him, but I don't think the ascent vehicle had too many Gs for a "lie on the floor or anywhere else there's room" rescue.

Belushi TD

1) Apollo 11 had no rover (Asnys beat me to this)

2) The total weight of the moon rocks brought back by the first landing was far, far less than the weight of an astronaut

3) Even if the lander (which was extremely cramped, and engineered to very precise tolerances) could lift off/rendevous with three astronauts (I doubt this), where does the water and oxygen for the return trip home for the extra passenger come from?

4) Even if the consumables (see (3)) are available, just how does the extra passenger survive reentry with no couch?

Sorry, the Russian would be SOL in such a situation, and even trying to bring him back would seriously endanger the others. PR notwithstanding, I wonder whether NASA would even go along with trying to bring him back, even if it were considered remotely possible (I doubt that it is)....
 
Well, this isn't a game...

The difficulty is that the Proton was extremely unreliable at this time (about 50% of the launches over the timeframe we're looking at for an L-1 flight before Apollo 8 failed, and the rocket itself wasn't strictly speaking operational until 1974 or 1976, somewhere thereabouts), and of course the N1 never flew successfully, even after several more years of R&D than it would have to have to beat the US. While the N1 failure might be blamed to a certain extent on the Korolev-Glushko conflict and Korolev's untimely death, the Proton's failures really can't (it was a Chelomei project). You might blame them on Brezhnev indirectly (Chelomei was aligned towards Khruschev, and unsurprisingly ran into problems after he was replaced), but getting rid of him would be strong medicine.

Getting a Proton-launched Zond to fly around the moon before Apollo 8 would be easy. IF the soviets were prepared to take the risk. Of course, it might take two or three launches to get one guy up there successfully, and he wouldn't survive reentry, likely, but the USSR could beat Apollo 8 to the moon.

The fact that they can't ORBIT the moon like Apollo 8 did might not be clear to the man in the street.

Basically, a slightly more lucky Zond program, and a more callous leadership....
 
Last edited:
Top