Space Exploration: 1986 - beyond | Different Approach

Hi, everyone. I'm new here, this community seems unusually intelligent and pleasant, unlike much of the rest of the Internet. I have a website that is somewhat similar in style to your wonderful forum, but I only speculate on the future there, not the past. It's interesting for a change to speculate retrospectively. Hope you enjoy.

My alternative timeline begins with the aftermath of the Challenger disaster that forces change in NASA's management and long term strategy.

Space Exploration: 1986 - beyond
Different Approach.

October 1, 1986

Acting NASA Administrator William Robert Graham leaves his post following the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. Reagan Administration, faced with public disillusionment with the space program, recognizes need for radical change and reform. In order to restore both confidence and public enthusiasm that NASA has been steadily losing during the last 10 years, President Reagan nominates Carl Sagan for the post of NASA Administrator. He is an astrophysicist closely involved with many of the NASA scientific missions and a famous science popularizer, as well as a critic of Reagan's Star Wars space defense proposal.


1986-sagan.jpg


October 8, 1986

NASA Administrator Carl Sagan announces that the entire direction of the space program is being reviewed and will consequently be drastically altered. It will, according to Carl Sagan, focus on unmanned scientific space exploration aimed at expanding our understanding of the reality that surrounds us. "At the present moment we have only scratched the surface of what awaits us even next door, cosmically speaking, in the Solar System. We will take the American public on journeys that will broaden our horizons on an unprecedented scale and more importantly, won't cost a single more life." Critics are alarmed that Sagan may scrap the Shuttle Program which has been strenuously developed over the course of a decade. Sagan has been a critic of the Space Shuttle program since the early 70s, because of the extraordinary expenses it required and had virtually no potential for advancing space exploration.


December 28, 1986

NASA Administration unveils its plans for the future. It explains to the public that Space Shuttle was a successful endeavour in that it generated a great number of useful spin-off technological advancements, but that it is also a dangerous and a very costly program. More so, the cost of the Space Shuttle, is incomparable to robotic space probes. Manned space mission in the current state is unjustified, according to the new administration, it jeopardizes space exploration of the Solar System and beyond. "Time will come for mankind to settle and colonize worlds beyond our little blue planet, but now the time is to learn and discover. With the funding available to us, we cannot accomplish both to an acceptable end. Manned space program will be preserved, but not in a capacity that hinders our progress in exploration."

The new plan, dubbed Reaching Out, includes:

- Limiting the number of Space Shuttle launches to not more than one per year. Conducting, instead, micro-gravity experiments on much cheaper vomit comets (aircraft that briefly provides a nearly weightless environment)
- In-situ exploration of every planet in the Solar System within 20 years, via either orbiters or landers.
- Conducting a sample return mission from Mars no later than by 1995.
- Developing new propulsion systems that go beyond the conventional chemical rocket constraints.
- Prioritizing funding for the Hubble Space telescope.
- Establishing permanent robotic presence on the Moon by early 1990s.

1986-reaching-out.jpg
 
Last edited:
please continue!!!
but even Sagan can't ignore manned missions once the Chinese or Russians start making moon landing plans
 
please continue!!!
but even Sagan can't ignore manned missions once the Chinese or Russians start making moon landing plans

The Russians haven't had serious plans for moon landing since the fall of the Soviet Union. If that happens on schedule, that threat is gone. China, as far as we know, has never had serious moon landing plans.

I think Carl Sagan might be rather friendly to a plan like Mars Direct once the 1990s come around. He was, IOTL, favorable toward it. Now he's got power...
 
The Russians haven't had serious plans for moon landing since the fall of the Soviet Union. If that happens on schedule, that threat is gone. China, as far as we know, has never had serious moon landing plans.

I think Carl Sagan might be rather friendly to a plan like Mars Direct once the 1990s come around. He was, IOTL, favorable toward it. Now he's got power...

yeah!!! go zubrin!!!
 
Thanks for your comments.

April 2, 1987

Criticism mounts for the direction that NASA is taking, as the worlds eyes are focused on the Soviet space station's MIR second module Kvant-1 docking. Others point out the technical difficulties being experienced by the Soviet cosmonauts with the failure of first docking attempt with the MIR space station as further evidence of the dangers associated with manned spaceflight. Still, critical editorials across the nation are voicing their concern that we are retreating from superior positions and are allowing the Soviets to take the lead. One comment in the New York Times reads "The Space Shuttle offered hope of affordable access to orbital space and instead the new Administration is fixed on keeping American astronauts on the ground"




July 5, 1987

With reinforced funding, Magellan space probe is completed right on earlier schedule and launched with an Atlas G expendable rocket to Venus. Its goal is to conduct radar mapping of the planet's surface and collect planetary gravity data. Orbit insertion is planned for October 1988.

NASA press release emphasizes the importance of Venus to the exploration of the Solar System and that the processes under which it was formed are still not understood. Data from Megallan orbiter will determine the course of future exploration of this neighbourly world. As of now, scientists point out, we lack very basic understanding of the geologic processes on the surface of Venus. Future missions may include mappings on more frequencies.

p32876.gif
 
Last edited:
...
April 2, 1987

Criticism mounts for the direction that NASA is taking, as the worlds eyes are focused on the Soviet space station's MIR second module Kvant-1 docking. Others point out the technical difficulties being experienced by the Soviet cosmonauts with the failure of first docking attempt with the MIR space station as further evidence of the dangers associated with manned spaceflight. Still, critical editorials across the nation are voicing their concern that we are retreating from superior positions and are allowing the Soviets to take the lead. One comment in the New York Times reads "The Space Shuttle offered hope of affordable access to orbital space and instead the new Administration is fixed on keeping American astronauts on the ground"
...

Hee hee hee!

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence!
-----
Seriously, could the Reagan administration--even in its later years, when on the whole it seems to have mellowed--have been expected to pick Sagan and to accept a low-key program of unmanned scientific exploration?

Dr. Sagan was, among other things, known at the time for warnings against nuclear winter (and taking a very dim view of plans to actually wage and "win" nuclear war, which was associated with at least some major figures in the Reagan admin) and IIRC an early outspoken critic of SDI, also a major Reagan keystone.

In distant retrospect, after the way Reagan handled Gorbachev especially, it is just barely possible to visualize the President offering Sagan the job--but I assure you, as someone who was a young adult and news junkie at the time, it would have been a head-spinning shock!

I'm not meaning to gainsay here, I'm wondering if you can share OTL evidence that makes this unlikely scenario seem less arbitrary and more like a real possible alternative.
 
All I can say is WOW! Keep it coming!

Intresting. Subscribed.

Thanks.

Hee hee hee!

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence!
-----
Seriously, could the Reagan administration--even in its later years, when on the whole it seems to have mellowed--have been expected to pick Sagan and to accept a low-key program of unmanned scientific exploration?

Dr. Sagan was, among other things, known at the time for warnings against nuclear winter (and taking a very dim view of plans to actually wage and "win" nuclear war, which was associated with at least some major figures in the Reagan admin) and IIRC an early outspoken critic of SDI, also a major Reagan keystone.

In distant retrospect, after the way Reagan handled Gorbachev especially, it is just barely possible to visualize the President offering Sagan the job--but I assure you, as someone who was a young adult and news junkie at the time, it would have been a head-spinning shock!

I'm not meaning to gainsay here, I'm wondering if you can share OTL evidence that makes this unlikely scenario seem less arbitrary and more like a real possible alternative.

You're absolutely right, this is an unlikely scenario. My timeline is based on the premise that the Reagan Administration chose to take the heat off itself by appointing a NASA Administrator that is a popular, positive public figure that would be well received by the population as a whole. Space program was not giving the President a boost, the Space Race had no clear objectives at this point. Meanwhile Star Wars idea was drawing its share of criticism.

The Challenger direction serves as a catalyst for a gamble on Reagan's part to drastically alter the space program in an attempt to boost the support and enthusiasm of the nation that was recuperating from the Challenger shock. Beginning with the end of the Apollo program, the general feeling in the country was that NASA was spending too much money (misdirected criticism, in retrospect) and turning from a manned to an unmanned space program would partially address this issue as well.

It's not the likeliest of scenarios, considering that Sagan was a critic of much of what the President was doing, but let's remember that Reagan was also capable of unlikely bold decisions. His thought process in this timeline, is that U.S. is no longer competing with the changing Soviet Union, it's above it by focusing on more result driven endeavors, with concern for the lives of the astronauts in mind as well. I can add in support of your well deserved objections to this scenario that Carl Sagan was appalled by the fact that Reagan had relied on services of an astrologer at some point.

I suppose it's possible to generate a specific physical additional event that would push Reagan to come to this decision, but it is not what I am interested in. If anyone wants to contribute to this end, I will happily add it to the timeline. It could, for instance, be an additional disaster involving astronauts or related equipment.
 
Last edited:
July 25, 1987

Carl Sagon, NASA Administrator, was interviewed regarding NASA's future plans. Excerpt of the interview is provided for your enjoyment:

Journalist: Dr.Sagan, it's been over 9 months since your appointment to head NASA. What direction is the agency taking under your leadership?

Sagan: The new Reaching Out program, that we announced last year, has now evolved from a visionary phase into a program with its specific objectives. As part of the program, we are working on the 1990 Mars Initiative; a mission to place a planetary rover on the surface of Mars. It will mark a beginning of a series of scientific missions to learn the geology of the planet and to choose a site for the sample return mission we plan for somewhere in the middle of the next decade. Another aspect of the Reaching Out program is our commitment to establish permanent scientific station on the Moon, no later than the early 90s.

Journalist: An unmanned station?

Sagan: Yes, precisely so. The working title of the station is Armstrong One. Under our Reaching Out program we will establish a permanent presence on the Moon, conducting solid science and paving the way to a more sustainable human visitation in the more distant future.

Journalist: Many fear that your policies are holding American Astronauts back, allowing the Soviets to take the lead. What do you say to them?

Sagan: We are in no way cancelling all manned spaceflight. In fact, we will be launching the long overdue space observatory on a Shuttle with Astronaut assistance next year. This space observatory is poised to revolutionize the entire field of Astronomy and requires human maintenance in the long term. The difference of this administration's approach is in priorities. We can do more exploration with less manned spaceflight missions. That, however, does not mean that we will stop training our Astronauts for future, more outwardly, human enterprises in space.

Journalist: The Soviet Union is building a space station that experts claim is already surpassing our achievements with the Skylab space station in the last decade. Three years ago President Reagan announced plans for the ambitious Freedom space station, a permanent base for our astronauts in orbit. What happens to the Freedom space station now?

Sagan: It is still being reviewed and considered, however, the scientific benefits are just not there. Many of the planned principal Freedom space station experiments involving microgravity can be conducted at a fraction of the cost in either simulated conditions on Earth or in a substantially scaled down space station, a new generation Skylab, if you will. Instead, this will free up funds and personnel to pursue deep space missions to the Jovian and the Saturnian systems.

Journalist: In retrospect, if it was up to you, would you have approved the Space Shuttle program?

Sagan: The Space Shuttle is the most sophisticated equipment ever designed and built by the human race. It has allowed for technological breakthroughs that we otherwise wouldn't have had. From an exploration point of view, however, there are better alternatives that we intend to pursue. Thank you for coming.
 
Last edited:
October 1, 1987

NASA reveals a prototype remote-controlled planetary rover that is intended for us on both the Moon and Mars. Series of such rovers will conduct long-term in-situ exploration while being piloted from Earth. NASA press center points out that this is not the the final design, but that principal parameters and capabilities have been worked out. The prototype planetary rover has been named The Seeker. It is a cost-effective solution to conducting geologic experimentation on extraterrestrial surfaces. The main remaining issue that the engineers are working on, is the insufficient battery power to operate for prolonged periods of time. Solar panels alternative isn't viable to power all rover's systems at all.

roverreachingout1990.jpg
 
October 18, 1987

Delegation of Aerospace Industry lobbyists appealed to Vice President Bush to find a replacement for Carl Sagan. Bush, as one of the advocates of the Freedom space station, has opposed Reagan's choice for the head of NASA. Aerospace industry is losing lucrative contracts with the U.S. government and is actively engaged in seeking support for their cause in Washington.

The President doesn't want to appear weak by changing NASA's leadership only a year after its nomination. In a private conversation with Vice President he remarked that he's committed to giving Dr.Sagan a chance.

November 5, 1988

Series of studies are carried out to find a much less costly way to build a permanent space station for the experiments that were intended for the Freedom space station. Some voiced opinions include using the Space Shuttle for such experiments or constructing a 90s generation Skylab. The latter project, however, is still too expensive, even hypothetically, within the fiscal constraints placed on the manned spaceflight in lieu of ambitious armada-scale interplanetary missions planned for the near future.

October 1, 1988

STS-26 Space Shuttle mission, first after the Challenger disaster, has successfully launched the Hubble Telescope into its planned orbit. The space telescope is expected to extensively advance the field of Astronomy. This launch is marked by very positive feedback across all media.

p108.jpg

Some of the outspoken critics speculate that had the current NASA leadership been in place for a longer period of time, the Hubble Space Telescope would never have been built. Meanwhile there are rumors that the Aerospace Industry is funding such criticism via third-party involvement. These rumors are supported by the fact that Hubble has in fact been given a priority status under Carl Sagan and the engineers were rushed to prepare it for a launch as soon as Space Shuttle operations could be resumed in limited capacity.
 
The SF conundrum of MSF

The central problem MSF confronts, outside the Cold war era where no expense need be spared for national prestige, is that it seems very cost-ineffective to mail people back and forth to Luna, Mars,etc. with 1960's heavy-lift tech.

Unmanned explorations's more effective if you're trying to actually do scientific work and so forth, but it ain't sexy to taxpayers.

SF raises the consciousness of a world outside our own, but IMO, raises expectations too high for the baby steps we were ready to take 1980-2000, barring a goal close enough for the public to feel within reach and worth doing.

Could Carl "Cosmos" Sagan make that case? I think so, but exactly what to do and the technical nuts-and-bolts R&D projects and political logrolling on the private and public sector to make that happen were way beyond his capabilities. Who could/would handle those responsibilities?
 
If you wanted a safer Shuttle, it would be better to increase Shuttle flights to three per year, since there will still be a need for manned space missions. I imagine that the U.S space station would be based on what NASA had planned for OTL with Option-C from Space Station Freedom ( V ) with launching everything in one go with Shuttle-C. I also think that Sagan would start development of a Shuttle-derived heavy-lift launcher like the Ares V, but with the lifting power of something more like what DIRECT proposes ( what NASA is doing in OTL with the HLV), and assemble interplanetary missions in LEO.

EDIT: Also, Sagan proposed U.S-Russian cooperation in OTL by using the Engeria as a replacement for the shuttle. You could have that happen. Sagan also liked he idea of manned missions to asteroids, which would be a very nice way to build up deep-space experience without too much risk and also a good way to test any Shuttle-derived boosters...
 
If you wanted a safer Shuttle, it would be better to increase Shuttle flights to three per year, since there will still be a need for manned space missions. I imagine that the U.S space station would be based on what NASA had planned for OTL with Option-C from Space Station Freedom ( V ) with launching everything in one go with Shuttle-C. I also think that Sagan would start development of a Shuttle-derived heavy-lift launcher like the Ares V, but with the lifting power of something more like what DIRECT proposes ( what NASA is doing in OTL with the HLV), and assemble interplanetary missions in LEO.

I'd imagine that Sagan would find a ready set of engineers who'd been planning things like that since the 1970s. In-line SDHLVs have been proposed since before STS flew. By the late 1980s, there was Shuttle-C, and David Baker's Shuttle-Z design (something that resembled the recent "Not Shuttle-C," but with 130 tonnes of payload to LEO), which he then developed into the "Ares" rocket that Zubrin spent a decade and a half promoting. The National Launch System, a bit closer in design to what is now known as the SLS, was also proposed in this general time period.

The Heavy Lift Rocket that ends up being built, I think, will depend on whether Sagan wants to continue regular STS operations through the 1990s. If the Shuttle is to fly to 2000 or longer, then the Shuttle-C->Shuttle-Z->Ares(?) family is most likely, as they use mostly existing infrastructure at the Cape and at Michoud, or infrastructure with minimal alterations.
 
I'm liking how this timeline is going, an alternate history of NASA after the Challenger disaster. I would definitely like to read more, so keep it coming.
 
A few random thoughts

Now manned missions to asteroids would be tasty.

Sure, a manned mission to check out Halley's Comet would be a little out of the time-frame but imagine one to Hale-Bopp or something like that in the 1990's once we feel comfortable doing so after a couple of missions to trojans approaching earth.
Plus, for us, the asteroids are low-hanging fruit we could harvest with nuke-powered ion tugs or mass drivers, though again IMO, one of those 2 1/2 steps to fruition projects.
The commercial and political perceptions it's not worth doing are the key obstacles.
The tech isn't the main problem though SDI didn't yield nearly the spinoff benefits Apollo did despite an open R&D funding spigot. I guess it goes to show pursuing Wunderwaffen tends to completely screw more practical R&D in most cases.
I wonder if Russian-American cooperation could have yielded the physics breakthroughs necessary to make the above drives/mass drivers happen.

At any rate, really love the TL. Would love to see a robust NASA doing more neat stuff than the small ball we've played since Challenger.
Sure, IOTL we've helped build ISS, floated some amazing space telescopes that have given us the ability to see planets in our interstellar neighborhood and a better idea what's gone on since the Big Bang.

All really cool things, but the SF fan in me wants some humans off this mudball to increase the odds of survival in case another KT or PT "event" scrambles the biosphere for millions of years. More immediately, we need more resources as human population continues to grow both in numbers and demand.
We could have a lively debate about whether more intensive exploitation of undersea resources vs asteroid harvesting is more commercially-viable. From an environmental perspective, I'd rather screw up something in vacuum without an ecology to obtain the raw materials and make the goodies we want. For me, that's what NASA should be making possible.

Plenty of planetary science work in surveying the Jovian, Saturnine, and Uranian moon systems, Oort cloud, and so forth for goodies and opportunities, not to mention a lot better warning of incoming planetoids.
 
I love this TL! It's so original! I'm curious, what's your website so I can go there and read stuff? :D

EDIT: Nevermind, found it on your Profile.:eek:
 
The Heavy Lift Rocket that ends up being built, I think, will depend on whether Sagan wants to continue regular STS operations through the 1990s.

Bear in mind though that the post of NASA Administrator is a political one, and the heir apparent to Reagan's throne doesn't approve of Sagan's plans. Sagan has until January 20, 1989 to secure as much of his Reaching Out program as possible, and hopefully wow the public enough that the new guy doesn't demand his resignation.
 
Top