Soviet & American Space Programs if the Soviet Union lasts until the present day

[fasquardon]

So, let's assume that the USSR survives the 80s and 90s. There are reforms, there are hardships (though the economy never tanks as bad as Russia's did in OTL's 90s) and the rivalry with the US continues (though changing as circumstances evolve).

What might the Soviets do with their space program (assume the space program continues to receive similar levels of funding as our USSR did pre-collapse)? And how might the US space program change if there is a rival doing stuff in space in the 90s and 00s?

I've always been particularly curious what the USSR would end up using the Energia rocket for - would it fall by the wayside as being too big to be used efficiently? If it were used, what is it likely to be used for? I would assume it would be used to launch space stations and Mars missions - possibly Lunar missions, though I am not aware of any pre-collapse discussions of Lunar missions for Energia. I would also assume that the reason Energia was designed - to support the Soviet answer to Star Wars - would never come to pass for the same reasons that the US never made Star Wars come to pass - i.e., that space weapons platforms were simply impractical and too expensive for either superpower to support.

And I am curious what the US program would look like with continuing "competition" - OTL NASA was at the forefront of the post-cold war efforts to reach an accommodation with Russia (and efforts to keep former Soviet scientists from going and working for Iran and North Korea by keeping them employed at home). Would the lack of such a drive for international cooperation significantly change the direction of the US space program? Would the Soviets launching Energia-sized space stations, Lunar missions or Mars missions stimulate Congress into giving NASA more ambitious goals (and funding)?

What do people think?

fasquardon

 

[Pangur]

Buran would have seen service. I don't know if the Sovs would have had the issues the US Space Shuttle had. The direction of Space flight was very much towards Space stations in the 80`s so its very possible that it would have stayed that way through out the 90`s as well

 

[Archibald]

No ISS for sure. Mir 2 replace Mir 1. Buran would be used for assembly of Mir 2. I really don't know what would happen to Space Station Freedom, which was in very serious trouble by 1993 when the Russians "rescued" the project.

The sad thing is that space programs on both sides are still spoiled by the damn space shuttles.

 

[Pangur]

No ISS for sure. Mir 2 replace Mir 1. Buran would be used for assembly of Mir 2. I really don't know what would happen to Space Station Freedom, which was in very serious trouble by 1993 when the Russians "rescued" the project.

The sad thing is that space programs on both sides are still spoiled by the damn space shuttles.

Re SS Freedom, if the Sovs had kep going with a Mir 2 then the US would have had to launch a space station of some shape or form

 

[Archibald]

I agree, but NASA designs were so silly and overambitious that on June 23, 1993 Freedom come only one vote to be cancelled in the House of Representatives.
Six months later the Russians rescued the program through "international cooperation" so we will never known for sure what would have happened to the project had it stayed a hundred percent american.

 

[Vonar Roberts]

The Soviet's would have had a unique advantage because the carrier rocket for Buran the Energia was not just the booster for the Space Shuttle like what the US had, but a actual dedicated heavy lift rocket that was even considered by some to be a viable candidate for a future manned Mars mission and Energia could have enabled considerable lunar exploration had the funding been available for the Soviet space program in the 1990's-2000's.

 

[fasquardon]

Buran would have seen service. I don't know if the Sovs would have had the issues the US Space Shuttle had. The direction of Space flight was very much towards Space stations in the 80`s so its very possible that it would have stayed that way through out the 90`s as well

Buran, from what I've read about it, always struck me as being far superior to the US shuttle. However, many Soviet systems looked better on paper - Buran being used might reveal unforeseen bugs, just as the Shuttle's use revealed unforeseen (at least unforeseen by most) bugs.

Buran would be used for assembly of Mir 2.

Would the Buran be useful for space station construction and servicing? Or would the Soviets be able to do more with capsule space craft?

fasquardon

 

[Michel Van]

On Freedom, it was death horse in 1988 as NASA planed over 37 Shuttle launches to build it.
some of mission would feature record braking EVA to assembly the Trust frame piece by piece in orbit
around 2,300-3,300 hours of 'spacewalks' a year to build that station.
NASA hope to make station Temporary usable for Shuttle crews from Mission 17 on.

after 1991 NASA replaced Freedom by Space Station "Fred" with only 250-300 hours of annual EVA by launch prefabricated truss
then came the Space Station Options in 1993
Option A was a "Fred" cut in half with 'compromise option' to expand to Fred
Option B was updated "Fred"
Option C was "Tin can" a Shuttle C launch a single large 28m long, 7m diameter pressurized 'can' core module

Clinton was eager for Option A-1

That would gave USA a minimal Space station with four assembly flights, that shuttle visit for 20 day manned Mission, for rest is station unmanned.
but left Japan and ESA left alone, last could taken Hermes Shuttle and the Man-Tended Free Flyer as European space station.
But it sure that USA would build a Space station most likely A-1 if Soviet build Mir-2 station in Earth orbit

Energia/Buran would be perfect for Job to launch Mir-2
while Energia would launch the Mir-2 like the Polyus.

While Buran would bring the assembly crew to Mir-2 container in orbit

what look like that if finally complete.

again USA space station

 

[Archibald]

Wow, never realized that option A1 was such a piece of crap. Quite a long way from the 1986 "Power tower" or "dual keel" designs. Bah.

As for the soviets, each Energiya launch would have cost them an arm and a leg. And they disliked Buran - it was neither a replacement for Soyuz or the Proton. It was in fact a very expensive reusable payload shroud !
In fact they were desesperately seeking payloads for Energiya - pie-in-the-sky, crazy projects.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/energia.htm

Had the Soviet Union not fallen and the Energia booster gone into production, huge projects were planned to take advantage of its capabilities to realize Soviet military and international space goals. These included:

• Restoration of the earth's ozone layer
• Disposal of nuclear waste outside of the solar system
• Illumination of polar cities by reflection of the sun's light
• Large-area space energy reflectors
• Solar sails for interplanetary flights
• Exploitation of lunar resources for fusion reactors on the earth
• Space control system to assure ecological compliance and guarantee strategic stability
• International global information communications system
• Removal of space debris in geostationary orbit
• Large space radio telescope to study galaxies

 

[fasquardon]

That is a very small Space Station Freedom. How did the ISS grow so large in OTL? Did international cooperation really push NASA & the US congress to be more ambitious, or is it more that the long duration of the ISS program has allowed it to slowly grow to its current respectable size? And would Space Station Freedom get a similarly long time to grow absent the Russian-American cooperation of OTL?

As for the soviets, each Energiya launch would have cost them an arm and a leg. And they disliked Buran - it was neither a replacement for Soyuz or the Proton. It was in fact a very expensive reusable payload shroud !
In fact they were desesperately seeking payloads for Energiya - pie-in-the-sky, crazy projects.

Reading up on this stuff again, I am reminded of two things:

*Energia was a modular system - so even if the Soviets can't use the biggest versions, the medium and small lift versions are likely to replace the proton and R-7 launchers. I do wonder how dependent the components for the heaviest launches were on a decent volume of orders/year - if the USSR only decides to make one full sized Energia launch a year - or even as low as one or two a decade - is that something they can realistically do, or will Energia end up only spanning the weight classes from Zenit to Energia-M.

*The Buran orbiter had a number of issues with it (for example, it only had enough power to operate for one day in orbit), and in OTL, it only made an single automated journey into space. Would the Soviets stick with the orbiter if it became clear that the US had abandoned Star Wars? I tend to think they would, since doing so would provide important bragging points (they can say "so America has a shiny shuttle - so do we, big whoop Comrade"), however, I doubt that they would use it very much. Have capsules or unmanned cargo rockets do most of the work and only launch the Buran once a year as essentially a propaganda effort (though there may well be certain missions that a Buran might be best for, that wouldn't be the main point of keeping it around I think).

Illumination of polar cities by reflection of the sun's light

I've always wondered how practical that would have been, and how useful it would have turned out to be had the USSR (or Canada, say) launched some soletta mirrors for that purpose.

fasquardon

 

[Edward_Elric]

What about the space programs of other countries?

Assuming the Freedom space station is still somehow pursued, would NASA still try and attain the cooperation of ESA and other close US allies in building the station?

Meanwhile, the USSR had a history of including cosmonauts from its allies/satellites on missions in the 70's and 80's. Depending on how said nations evolve with the USSR still around and kicking, maybe they can start taking a more active approach to space flight, and increase their collaboration.

How would the Chinese and Indian space programs develop? I'd imagine it depends largely on how those two countries and other aspiring space powers are affected by the continued Cold War. Assuming that China develops as it does IOTL with de facto restoring capitalism, they probably wouldn't want to collaborate all that much with the Soviets. Perhaps India is more likely to collaborate with the Eastern Bloc, but will still seek to build up their own independent program.

 

[fasquardon]

Assuming the Freedom space station is still somehow pursued, would NASA still try and attain the cooperation of ESA and other close US allies in building the station?

Early proposals for Freedom do seem to have envisioned the space station as very much an American project, which perhaps astronauts from other countries might be able to visit. However, ever since the Nixon administration, the value of NASA as a means of showcasing international cooperation was high on the agenda, and I just don't see that ever going away completely, even if the US program is less international than OTL's.

Meanwhile, the USSR had a history of including cosmonauts from its allies/satellites on missions in the 70's and 80's. Depending on how said nations evolve with the USSR still around and kicking, maybe they can start taking a more active approach to space flight, and increase their collaboration.

Hmmm. Maybe this can allow Poland to have a space program? (I am thinking something similar in scale to the Canadian space program here.)

Poland CAN into space!

How would the Chinese and Indian space programs develop? I'd imagine it depends largely on how those two countries and other aspiring space powers are affected by the continued Cold War. Assuming that China develops as it does IOTL with de facto restoring capitalism, they probably wouldn't want to collaborate all that much with the Soviets. Perhaps India is more likely to collaborate with the Eastern Bloc, but will still seek to build up their own independent program.

Hmm. There are a number of pressures that would encourage China and the Soviets to come to an accommodation - particularly as the Soviet Union remaining more powerful and China's inevitable rise will make the costs of not settling things between them rather high.

It does depend on exactly how the Soviet Union evolves though. If the Soviets get more hardline, cooperation with China is more difficult, if the Soviets adopt a "many paths to Socialism" ideology, then I think relations with China could turn out quite warm.

fasquardon

 

[Vonar Roberts]

Poland CAN into space!

fasquardon[/QUOTE]


No, no, no, no, no. We've all ready established this. Polen cannot into space..

 

[e of pi]

That is a very small Space Station Freedom. How did the ISS grow so large in OTL? Did international cooperation really push NASA & the US congress to be more ambitious, or is it more that the long duration of the ISS program has allowed it to slowly grow to its current respectable size? And would Space Station Freedom get a similarly long time to grow absent the Russian-American cooperation of OTL?

Freedom was huge. IOTL, as the Soviet program imploded and the US was looking to trim expenditures, Freedom was cut down, first in 1991 to "Space Station Fred," which was basically the OTL ISS US Orbital Section (Destiny, two nodes, European and Japanese labs, and a hab module), then (as further cuts were being explored) other options wee examined--A1 was the most radical cutting of these. In a TL where there's still a Soviet Union and a Soviet program that's headed towards Mir-2, then the minimum you'd likely see would be Fred.

Ironically, space programs don't exist in a vacuum. What one nation does effects others, particularly if that action they take is "continue or fail to continue to exist".

 

[fasquardon]

Ironically, space programs don't exist in a vacuum. What one nation does effects others, particularly if that action they take is "continue or fail to continue to exist".

Undoubtedly. I'm somewhat cynical about the official narrative about how countries' space programs are supposed to have effected each other though. For example, I had always thought that there was a real moon race going on between the US and the Soviets from the day Kennedy set it as a goal. As I've read more deeply, that narrative has fallen apart. While the moon race happened the way it did because of the competition between the Soviets and Americans, the competition was doing different things than I had thought.

Which is why I am so interested in how people think a surviving USSR will affect American space plans. It is not a question with a clear and easy answer and I am curious how people interpret the organizational psychologies of the period.

fasquardon

 

[Drunken_Soviet]

What about Armed Space Stations?

I mean, the Soviet's did this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_3#On-board_gun I wonder what else they would have done in terms of armed Space Stations

 

[nixonshead]

I've always wondered how practical that would have been, and how useful it would have turned out to be had the USSR (or Canada, say) launched some soletta mirrors for that purpose.

fasquardon

Th Russians did launch a small test satellite in 1992 and had plans for bigger ones. In an alternate, no-Soviet-collapse timeline (assuming the surviving USSR is less of an economic basket case than OTL's Russia) might well have gone on to launch bigger versions. Maybe that could have sparked interest in the US and elsewhere, perhaps to use mirrors to enhance the energy from ground based solar farms (by far the most practical version of space-based solar power I've come across).

 

[fasquardon]

Th Russians did launch a small test satellite in 1992 and had plans for bigger ones. In an alternate, no-Soviet-collapse timeline (assuming the surviving USSR is less of an economic basket case than OTL's Russia) might well have gone on to launch bigger versions. Maybe that could have sparked interest in the US and elsewhere, perhaps to use mirrors to enhance the energy from ground based solar farms (by far the most practical version of space-based solar power I've come across).

Very interesting link! I never knew they got this far with the idea.

Has anyone ever crunched the numbers and looked at the cost of such an orbital mirror and weighed it against the profit it could make by boosting a solar farm?

fasquardon

 

[Dayton Kitchens]

At the end of the Cold War the Soviets were building a nuclear propulsion system for a planned manned Mars mission at one of their facilities.

Don't remember where I read it but American intel had thought it was a military related program.

 

[CarribeanViking]

Encyclopaedia Astronautica gives three generations of Russian nuclear engine; the initial Korolev/Bondaryuk YaRD series, some of which were revived in the eighties under Energiya,
Glushko's RD-410 and 610, which seemed to have been on the back burner for thirty years,
and Kosberg's confusingly numbered RD-0410 and -0411, one of which was the only one actually built.

The YaRD series seem to have been practical but primitive and largely killed by efficiency margins, Glushko's were pure avantura- the 610 was supposed to be a closed cycle gas core, and they have never made it off the drawing board in any meaningful way.

Now Russian mirror expertise growing into solar sails, there's an interesting idea.