Space Race Questions

[herkles]

Hello

So as I finish up my ck2 AAR, I am looking to doing a stellaris AAR, based loosely around the idea of a soviet victory in the cold war. So as I build up the background for the AAR, I did have questions about the Space Race.

1.) From what I understand the Soviet Rocketry was using a flawed design and they ended up playing catch up to the Apollo program. From what I know the fact that their rockets failed in their planned trips to the moon, lead them to cancel the program. The question then is what would be needed for the Soviet Space program to get to the moon?

2.) If the Soviets get to the Moon first, what would be the effects on American Culture and the Space program?

3.) Alternatively if the Soviets were able to land men on the moon after the Americans, how does that effect the Race, how do the Americans react if the Soviets keep up the pace?

4.) If the Space Race continued on to the 70s, 80s, and 90s; what would be some realistic goals for both the Soviets and the Americans to aim for? By this I mean not Mars, which I am not sold on as a realistic alternative; moreover for the narrative I am going for I want Mars to be something done during the 21st century not during the 70s and 80s.

5.) If Reagan began to seriously fund and support the SDI, more so then OTL. What would be the impacts upon the US Economy? Related how would the USSR respond to the SDI program, especially if the Space Race had been continuing up to that point?

 

[LouisTheGreyFox]

I can answer Question 2 and 3.

Basically if Soviets did got to the Moon first and managed to bring a human there before Americans did, basically the US wouldn't give up and accept defeat they would surely still end up getting a person onto the Moon and eventually most likely scenario is that US and USSR end up competing against each other on exploring the Moon via manned missions and eventually built lunar bases as well. Hell it wouldn't be surprising if you eventually saw other nations like China end up joining in.

I assume for Question 4 is that if the Space Race continued into the late 70's and 80's and 90's I think one of the realistic goals for USSR and Americans is to have established a self-sustaining lunar colony (either domed or underground) to house a handful of people along with able to grow food and such. Thus allowing the first human colonization on another celestial object. As for Mars I would assume Americans and Soviets would aim at trying to explore Mars by rovers and probes to see and learn more about the Red Planet and eventually learn the proper ways at human colonization of Mars by the 21st century. As for the rest of the Solar System I would see the Soviets having aims to send probes to explore Jupiter and Saturn's moons and even perhaps explore Uranus and Neptune and their moons in a similar way how Voyager 1 and 2 did. Perhaps it would be interesting to see Soviets and Americans make a race at who can send the first probe outside of the Solar System who knows.

 

[Loki-L]

If Soviets had managed to do a manned moon landing first, the USA would likely just have continued to move the goal posts for the space race.

Soviets managed so many firsts in the space race and only once the US had finally managed to beat them to a significant milestone, did they declare victory and basically stopped spending money one it as much.

If the Soviets managed one more first the US would either have to continue to spend even more resources to maybe get to Mars first or simply give up on space as a 'commie thing' and focus on other stuff like bombing South East Asia.

For neutral observers and third world countries it would look more and more like communism was the ideology that allowed for scientific progress while capitalism couldn't keep up.

Unless the politicians in the US were willing to spend much more time and money to beat the Russians at their game and go for Mars or similar, they would pretty much have to start a propaganda effort to declare the whole idea of wasting large amounts of ones tax-payer money on space exploration was a bad idea and that the soviets were winning the space race because it was not actually desirable for free people to be able to achieve this sort of thing.

This sour grapes reinvention of their own image could have terrible consequences down the road.

 

[1Big Rich]

5.) If Reagan began to seriously fund and support the SDI, more so then OTL. What would be the impacts upon the US Economy? Related how would the USSR respond to the SDI program, especially if the Space Race had been continuing up to that point?

SDI helped push computer development and miniaturization. When Reagan proposed the idea of a space-based missile defense, the computer needed to control it was a Cray, about the size of a refrigerator. By the time of the Bush 41 presidency, that computer power could fit inside a 12 oz. soda pop can. This is how the Bush administration went to the idea of Smart Rocks, later Brilliant Pebbles. ICBMs travel so fast outside the atmosphere that an object as small salt shaker could take one out if it could just get in the way. The Brilliant Pebbles idea was to put up small objects with maneuverability that could get in the way of inbound ICBMs.

With more funding, you might push Moore's Law into a steeper grade of increase.

My thoughts,

 

[herkles]

I can answer Question 2 and 3.

Basically if Soviets did got to the Moon first and managed to bring a human there before Americans did, basically the US wouldn't give up and accept defeat they would surely still end up getting a person onto the Moon and eventually most likely scenario is that US and USSR end up competing against each other on exploring the Moon via manned missions and eventually built lunar bases as well. Hell it wouldn't be surprising if you eventually saw other nations like China end up joining in.

Lunar bases sounds interesting. I am curious what would using the Moon as a jumping off point to Mars be a reasonable idea for helping to get to Mars easier?

I assume for Question 4 is that if the Space Race continued into the late 70's and 80's and 90's I think one of the realistic goals for USSR and Americans is to have established a self-sustaining lunar colony (either domed or underground) to house a handful of people along with able to grow food and such. Thus allowing the first human colonization on another celestial object. As for Mars I would assume Americans and Soviets would aim at trying to explore Mars by rovers and probes to see and learn more about the Red Planet and eventually learn the proper ways at human colonization of Mars by the 21st century. As for the rest of the Solar System I would see the Soviets having aims to send probes to explore Jupiter and Saturn's moons and even perhaps explore Uranus and Neptune and their moons in a similar way how Voyager 1 and 2 did. Perhaps it would be interesting to see Soviets and Americans make a race at who can send the first probe outside of the Solar System who knows.

Now that is giving me some ideas. This can also explain the fact that by the time the game starts in 2200 the Solar system has been fully explored with several research and mining stations already present there. so thanks

If Soviets had managed to do a manned moon landing first, the USA would likely just have continued to move the goal posts for the space race.

Soviets managed so many firsts in the space race and only once the US had finally managed to beat them to a significant milestone, did they declare victory and basically stopped spending money one it as much.

If the Soviets managed one more first the US would either have to continue to spend even more resources to maybe get to Mars first or simply give up on space as a 'commie thing' and focus on other stuff like bombing South East Asia.

For neutral observers and third world countries it would look more and more like communism was the ideology that allowed for scientific progress while capitalism couldn't keep up.

Unless the politicians in the US were willing to spend much more time and money to beat the Russians at their game and go for Mars or similar, they would pretty much have to start a propaganda effort to declare the whole idea of wasting large amounts of ones tax-payer money on space exploration was a bad idea and that the soviets were winning the space race because it was not actually desirable for free people to be able to achieve this sort of thing.

This sour grapes reinvention of their own image could have terrible consequences down the road.

Hmm, some food for thought. I

SDI helped push computer development and miniaturization. When Reagan proposed the idea of a space-based missile defense, the computer needed to control it was a Cray, about the size of a refrigerator. By the time of the Bush 41 presidency, that computer power could fit inside a 12 oz. soda pop can. This is how the Bush administration went to the idea of Smart Rocks, later Brilliant Pebbles. ICBMs travel so fast outside the atmosphere that an object as small salt shaker could take one out if it could just get in the way. The Brilliant Pebbles idea was to put up small objects with maneuverability that could get in the way of inbound ICBMs.

With more funding, you might push Moore's Law into a steeper grade of increase.

My thoughts,

Ooh, that I did not know, both about the miaturization and the smart rocks/brilliant pebbles concept. Interesting.

What I was wondering more though was how much of an impact this would have upon the Economy of the United States. Since as mentioned eventually in the background the Soviets will win the cold war(though since the game starts in 2200, we got plenty of time)

 

[1Big Rich]

Ooh, that I did not know, both about the miaturization and the smart rocks/brilliant pebbles concept. Interesting.

What I was wondering more though was how much of an impact this would have upon the Economy of the United States. Since as mentioned eventually in the background the Soviets will win the cold war(though since the game starts in 2200, we got plenty of time)

For any not familiar with Moore's Law:

http://www.mooreslaw.org/

I would think the economic impact of driving faster computer improvements would be the economy would become more reliant on computers sooner. That means more automation and efficiency on one hand, and more demand for skilled labor. Unskilled labor will likely suffer outside the service industries that require bodies....

My additional thoughts,

 

[marathag]

PoD you need is Korolev out of the picture before 1962, to make way for Chelomey and Glushko to get their 'Universal Rocket' series in production years sooner. A Proton based booster is the only chance to stay in the Moon Race, even with the UR-700 looking like a reject from Kerbal Space Program.

It would had a 50 ton payload for translunar injection, so almost 20 tons less than SaturnV

 

[Michel Van]

Point 1
The N1 and L3-complex had serious bad luck Chief designer Korolev died middle of the program, his successor was not able to finalize program with shoestring budget and Technical problems.

Point 2-3
It had continue the Space Race, one reason that USA abandon moon landings was no competitor on moon.

Point 4
one would be a low orbit space station or lunar outpost

Point 5
Oh Aerospace Industry will feast on SDI, bring allot of people work, if Reagan can push the program true Capitol Hill

 

[herkles]

PoD you need is Korolev out of the picture before 1962, to make way for Chelomey and Glushko to get their 'Universal Rocket' series in production years sooner. A Proton based booster is the only chance to stay in the Moon Race, even with the UR-700 looking like a reject from Kerbal Space Program.

It would had a 50 ton payload for translunar injection, so almost 20 tons less than SaturnV

Point 1
The N1 and L3-complex had serious bad luck Chief designer Korolev died middle of the program, his successor was not able to finalize program with shoestring budget and Technical problems.

So what is better for the getting to the moon, to have Korlev's program be completed while he was alive(perhaps by starting earlier) or have it rejected in favor of the Universal Rocket that Chelomey and Glushko proposed?

Point 1
Point 2-3
It had continue the Space Race, one reason that USA abandon moon landings was no competitor on moon.

Point 4
one would be a low orbit space station or lunar outpost

Moon bases seems to be the common thing from the replies here. This I can work with.

Point 1
Point 5
Oh Aerospace Industry will feast on SDI, bring allot of people work, if Reagan can push the program true Capitol Hill

So my thinking that SDI would hurt the American economy is wrong? I was thinking that it would worsen the effects of Reagonomics and the economy later on even if it might not be felt at first?

 

[Gunnarnz]

4.) If the Space Race continued on to the 70s, 80s, and 90s; what would be some realistic goals for both the Soviets and the Americans to aim for?

Other people have mentioned moonbases, orbital infrastructure, and probes to the outer planets. However, don't forget Venus. IOTL, the Soviets positively bombarded Venus with probes. They might easily decide Venus is an easier target than Mars for whatever they're doing, and one where they have a better chance of competing with the USA.

 

[Electric Monk]

With more funding, you might push Moore's Law into a steeper grade of increase.

Intel had unlimited money in the 1980s / everyone already was spending all out on fabs. A lousy DoD ten billion is not enough in any universe, think way more cash and even then all you’re buying is a few months here and there.

 

[Catsmate]

PoD you need is Korolev out of the picture before 1962, to make way for Chelomey and Glushko to get their 'Universal Rocket' series in production years sooner. A Proton based booster is the only chance to stay in the Moon Race, even with the UR-700 looking like a reject from Kerbal Space Program.

It would had a 50 ton payload for translunar injection, so almost 20 tons less than SaturnV

The Soviets might try for a Earth Orbit Rendezvous based Lunar mission.

 

[marathag]

The Soviets might try for a Earth Orbit Rendezvous based Lunar mission.

The LOK/LK craft planned for the N1

Two Man crew, single for the Lunar Lander.
This was approx 16 tons, vs 44 tons for the CM/SM and LEM, so was going to be not much more than a flag plant on the Moon's surface.

They were planning to use a Lunokhod rover for a landing beacon.

Now the bigger UR-700, that was to have been a direct shot, to avoid needing to dock with the LK section, and no cryonic fuels

This was Chelomey's preferred method, the LK-700

Followups would have had landed a lunar habitat and Rover

 

[Michel Van]

Moon bases seems to be the common thing from the replies here. This I can work with.

There was a proposal for proposed temporal Lunar outpost with Lunar orbital station based on Apollo Hardware.
North America Aviation Apollo "LM Adapter Surface Station" aka "LASSO configuration" from 1968
this include unmanned Saturn V launch to Moon to bring Outpost and Orbital station to Moon
Follow by Manned Saturn V with four man CSM and LM taxi 2 men goes to moon two other to Lunar orbital station.
The mission were design up to 100 days or multi usage of Lunar Orbital Station and Lunar Shelter with shorter stay.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

PoD you need is Korolev out of the picture before 1962, to make way for Chelomey and Glushko to get their 'Universal Rocket' series in production years sooner. A Proton based booster is the only chance to stay in the Moon Race, even with the UR-700 looking like a reject from Kerbal Space Program.

It would had a 50 ton payload for translunar injection, so almost 20 tons less than SaturnV

Heh, heh. No.

The Proton itself was really unreliable for some time - and you want to scale it up to N1 size???
Plus, the things going to blow up on the launch pad ad some point, and in addition to the sheer physical destruction that the N1 caused, you'd also have toxic fuel contaminating your whole launch area.

They should have gone with the N1, N11, N111 route. Making the N1 upperstages the Proton equivalent, and getting some technical maturity under their belt.

 

[marathag]

Heh, heh. No.

The Proton itself was really unreliable for some time - and you want to scale it up to N1 size???
Plus, the things going to blow up on the launch pad ad some point, and in addition to the sheer physical destruction that the N1 caused, you'd also have toxic fuel contaminating your whole launch area.

They should have gone with the N1, N11, N111 route. Making the N1 upperstages the Proton equivalent, and getting some technical maturity under their belt.

Proton was getting craft into orbit, something that the N1
failed
every
single
time

UR700 would have used 'just' 9 RD-270s, 6 in the first stage.The USSR's answer to the Rocketdyne F-1, work on the supersized RD-253 was begun, put on hold, then restated as the N-1 was going boom, then cancelled when the Sov Moon program ended.

Kuznetsov's NK engines in the N-1 were trash all thru the program, and even after rebuilding and 40 years worth of upgrades, were still sorta-trash in the O.S. Antares. Glushko was able to develop engines into being reliable in a decent amount of time. Kuznetsov, not so much

 

[Michel Van]

UR700 would have used 'just' 9 RD-270s, 6 in the first stage.The USSR's answer to the Rocketdyne F-1, work on the supersized RD-253 was begun, put on hold, then restated as the N-1 was going boom, then cancelled when the Sov Moon program ended.

Main problem of the RD-270 was it was a new Design of Rocket engine called "full-flow staged combustion cycle" and Glushko had problem with combustion instablty during test. never solved that als program got canceld
I wonder if the UR-700 could fly with 36 x RD-253 engines from Proton rocket ? current record is Falcon Heavy with 27 engines and Super Heavy would have 32 Raptors engines

 

[marathag]

Main problem of the RD-270 was it was a new Design of Rocket engine called "full-flow staged combustion cycle" and Glushko had problem with combustion instablty during test. never solved that als program got canceld
I wonder if the UR-700 could fly with 36 x RD-253 engines from Proton rocket ? current record is Falcon Heavy with 27 engines and Super Heavy would have 32 Raptors engines

I believe it was still being tested when all Moon related funding got cut in '73?. But without the hiatus and continued testing, should be worked out.
After all, Apollo 6 still had pogo problem with the F-1

 

[herkles]

Other people have mentioned moonbases, orbital infrastructure, and probes to the outer planets. However, don't forget Venus. IOTL, the Soviets positively bombarded Venus with probes. They might easily decide Venus is an easier target than Mars for whatever they're doing, and one where they have a better chance of competing with the USA.

Ah forgot about Venus. This works really good since with one of the mods I use Venus is a terra-forming candidate.

 

[Michel Van]

I believe it was still being tested when all Moon related funding got cut in '73?. But without the hiatus and continued testing, should be worked out.
After all, Apollo 6 still had pogo problem with the F-1

No, the RD-270 program ran from 1962 until 1970, Glushko made 27 engines test
and the engine show combustions instability, he could have solve that problem had program went on.

the F-1 had also combustions instability problems during test phase (from 1958 to 1967), so they made 2471 engines test until the bugs were out
they got problem under control but never figured out what cause it, Von Braun on that matter

"Lack of suitable design criteria has forced the industry to adopt almost a completely empirical approach to injector and combustor development. This approach is not only costly and time consuming, but also does not add to our understanding because a solution suitable for one engine system is usually not applicable to another."

On POGO it has little to do with combustions instability, more how multiple Rocket engines produce a violent oscillation on long axis of Rocket.
Saturn V had serious issues with that, It killed the N1 on most flights