Since the space race IOTL is so deeply connected to the cold war, in a TL without world wars, how do you think a space race would develop? Would a Tsarist Russia be able to compete? Would Germany without the massive brain drain be favorites to reach the moon first or would it still be the US?
What would a space race in a no world wars TL look like?
- Thread starter sirjackalot
- Start date
-
- Tags
- space race
BiasHangover
Banned
Well assuming Russia's industrialisation is completed, which could've occurred more smoothly without the shenanigans, its position would be much stronger and wealthy.
I'd say you have three blocks:
Anglo-American
Germany & AH
Russia.
I honestly don't know what the French would do. Without WWs, pride and prestige are essential pillars, that get in the way of cooperation.
I'd see the space race being less about military supremacy but another bout of prestige chasing like the scramble of Africa. Everyone wants to show off.
I also think the brain drain element of Germany in mid-20th century is overestimated. At the end of the day the US is far more wealthy and industrial than Germany was, that is intrinsic advantage America has.
I'd say you have three blocks:
Anglo-American
Germany & AH
Russia.
I honestly don't know what the French would do. Without WWs, pride and prestige are essential pillars, that get in the way of cooperation.
I'd see the space race being less about military supremacy but another bout of prestige chasing like the scramble of Africa. Everyone wants to show off.
I also think the brain drain element of Germany in mid-20th century is overestimated. At the end of the day the US is far more wealthy and industrial than Germany was, that is intrinsic advantage America has.
A lot would depend on the trajectories the different countries take in the absence of the world wars and that is very difficult to predict without some more details about the envisioned POD and timeline. Austria-Hungary or the Ottoman for example might very well collapse even in the abscense of wars while Russia could get into serious internal trouble as well. The significant changes to the timeline required would also likely result in very different people beeing involved in the whole race, as von Braun or similiar well known IOTL rocket pioneers might not be born or at least not rise to prominence.
A lot also depends on the reason for the space race in the first place.
That said we can see a few things based on IOTL trends from before the war: Germany is nearly assuredly a contender for most powerfull and most prosperous european nation without the extreme damage of the world wars, a lot might depend on the political system they end up with, but they are very likely to be in a position to compete if they want to nevertheless. Russia could also be a prime candidate, they already had some very promising and successfull pioneers of rocketry IOTL and could also end up a serious economic power if they manage to stay on the trajectory they started to take before ww1. They only have to prevent collapsing totally, as even the OTL Sovjetunion managed to basically win nearly all stages of the space race after all the devastation they went trough.
Another contender might be the UK, depending on the state of the empire and the situation of the domestic economy. If they still have ambitions as a global power they might try to compete even if they otherwise would be a somewhat less powerfull nation. The situation for france is similiar.
For other nations its way more difficult to predict, but I for example dont think Japans development is fast enough to catch up in time and China is very difficult to unfuck during the relevant period and even then they are unlikely to be economically powerfull enough in time for a space race that happens in a similiar timeframe than IOTL.
I think you might very well end up with a race between the US (basically guaranteed to still be the premier economic power of the world), Germany and Russia with the UK and France also competing (any maaaaaybe Japan) as second tier space powers.
A lot also depends on the reason for the space race in the first place.
That said we can see a few things based on IOTL trends from before the war: Germany is nearly assuredly a contender for most powerfull and most prosperous european nation without the extreme damage of the world wars, a lot might depend on the political system they end up with, but they are very likely to be in a position to compete if they want to nevertheless. Russia could also be a prime candidate, they already had some very promising and successfull pioneers of rocketry IOTL and could also end up a serious economic power if they manage to stay on the trajectory they started to take before ww1. They only have to prevent collapsing totally, as even the OTL Sovjetunion managed to basically win nearly all stages of the space race after all the devastation they went trough.
Another contender might be the UK, depending on the state of the empire and the situation of the domestic economy. If they still have ambitions as a global power they might try to compete even if they otherwise would be a somewhat less powerfull nation. The situation for france is similiar.
For other nations its way more difficult to predict, but I for example dont think Japans development is fast enough to catch up in time and China is very difficult to unfuck during the relevant period and even then they are unlikely to be economically powerfull enough in time for a space race that happens in a similiar timeframe than IOTL.
I think you might very well end up with a race between the US (basically guaranteed to still be the premier economic power of the world), Germany and Russia with the UK and France also competing (any maaaaaybe Japan) as second tier space powers.
Last edited:
Garrison
Donor
I'm not sure one would develop without the pressures of WW2 and the Cold War. Rocketry and spaceflight were largely seen as the preserve of science fiction before WW2, the likes of Goddard struggled to have his work taken seriously and von Braun's work is unlikely to be regarded any more highly in an Imperial/Weimar Germany. I suspect we would be lucky to see a moon landing before the end of the 20th Century.
Germany has very good chances on space race since no world wars and no nazis mean prominent scientists not flee to USA and it is much more wealthier.
Britain and USA are too possible. Russia depends highly what inside the country will happen and how it develops.
But I don't think that it is such space race as OTL was. Many nations are in good terms and they ratherly are intrested to get some influence in space and perhaps it is more scientic thing not so much "we must get to space/Moon before these others" thing.
I partially disagree. Rocketry science might develope bit slower but I don't think that it would be really dramatically behind of us. There would be more scientists and millions more people living mean more resources everywhere and better economy. Moon landing would happen later than in OTL but I think that it still would happen before 1980 or even before 1975.
Britain and USA are too possible. Russia depends highly what inside the country will happen and how it develops.
But I don't think that it is such space race as OTL was. Many nations are in good terms and they ratherly are intrested to get some influence in space and perhaps it is more scientic thing not so much "we must get to space/Moon before these others" thing.
I partially disagree. Rocketry science might develope bit slower but I don't think that it would be really dramatically behind of us. There would be more scientists and millions more people living mean more resources everywhere and better economy. Moon landing would happen later than in OTL but I think that it still would happen before 1980 or even before 1975.
Garrison
Donor
Well I am going off the pre-war attitudes to rocketry, there just isn't the impetus to put real resources into the technology without the drive of military need. Rocketry would continue to be seen as fringe science pursued by a few eccentrics.
Well, one of those few eccentrics could very well be Wilhelm II given his interest and support for new technology and science, not unlikely for him to task the Wilhelm Institute to research rockets and how to take a man into space. While this flight of fancy and interest would pass like usual, it would set the start of Rocketry and Space Research, after all, if he boasts to everyone he can, especially his English family, they will too start their own programs not to get outdone by the Germans. (Though I doubt they will take it seriously until they actually manage a successful rocket test - A-2 analogue?)
Rocketry science would develope slower than in OTL but I can't see that being radically slower or even non-existence. Even if governments are not very intreested some private companies would are and they might even lobby Reichtag/Parliament/Congress/Duma.
This assumes there even is a space race. Scientific development might go very differently and we might see a greater emphasis on Earth side exploration and exploitation. A larger emphasis on extracting resources from the earth itself and then better ways of refining them.
Lots of untapped regions for human settlement such as Siberia, the American midwest, Australia, Canada and so might see a lot more settlement since there might be more people at an earlier date than OTL.
Lots of untapped regions for human settlement such as Siberia, the American midwest, Australia, Canada and so might see a lot more settlement since there might be more people at an earlier date than OTL.
Rockets would be developed. They were being worked on for decades before WW2 (and actually centuries). But they were at a point that modern technology and manufacturing meant they were becoming practical from a technological point of view.
The question is when. The military application of short and long range rockets is obvious. So at some point they will become a military weapon that will see use and spread to multiple armies. The limiting factor is the budget. WW2 and the run up to it increased the military budgets of a number of counties, chief amongst them the US. The cold war with the USSR kept them reasonably high for at least the US and the USSR.
The issue with a “space race” is that you need very large rockets. And thie are of very little use unless you have a WMD of some sort. The cost of the V2 was never justified by its results and that is to small a rocket for a space race. The ability to lob a nuke on the other hand juatifies the coat yo develop a large rocket. So you need to find a way to keep up the budgets of the military to develop WMD and Rockets both.
And the final part you need to develop rivalries between two wealthy countries. And they have to be significant enough that the propaganda value of out doing the other in space is worth the cost.
Combining all of this together and in a world without WW2 is going to be hard to pull off. Do not get me wrong. Nukes will be developed as well as short and intermediate range missiles. And once you get to that point ICBMs will be developed. But i suspect that in a more peacfull world without the world wars this will take a lot longer probably into the 50s for nuckes and shorter range missles and into the late 60s for ICBMs. Say about 15 or so years of delay vs our timeline.
The question is when. The military application of short and long range rockets is obvious. So at some point they will become a military weapon that will see use and spread to multiple armies. The limiting factor is the budget. WW2 and the run up to it increased the military budgets of a number of counties, chief amongst them the US. The cold war with the USSR kept them reasonably high for at least the US and the USSR.
The issue with a “space race” is that you need very large rockets. And thie are of very little use unless you have a WMD of some sort. The cost of the V2 was never justified by its results and that is to small a rocket for a space race. The ability to lob a nuke on the other hand juatifies the coat yo develop a large rocket. So you need to find a way to keep up the budgets of the military to develop WMD and Rockets both.
And the final part you need to develop rivalries between two wealthy countries. And they have to be significant enough that the propaganda value of out doing the other in space is worth the cost.
Combining all of this together and in a world without WW2 is going to be hard to pull off. Do not get me wrong. Nukes will be developed as well as short and intermediate range missiles. And once you get to that point ICBMs will be developed. But i suspect that in a more peacfull world without the world wars this will take a lot longer probably into the 50s for nuckes and shorter range missles and into the late 60s for ICBMs. Say about 15 or so years of delay vs our timeline.
BiasHangover
Banned
I don't think you'd get UK and France cooperating as they had differing measurements and languages. Whereas Anglo-American cooperation is already the status quo like in Shanghai municipal council. Russia would only work with Germany if it was lagging massively.
Oh sorry I think I was not clear there: I would expect all of these nations going at it alone. Without the bridge building during the wars its likely that you will have competition in this field rather than cooperation. This of course may vary widely depending on how your timeline actually looks like of course.
Multiple powers able/willing to do US-USSR levels of space race. My guess is we get to the point of a man on mars+one or two of the bigger powers maintaining a 5-man base on the moon before they call it quits.
Well, yes and no. Remember, the first Japanese satellite was launched with this:
That's basically an overgrown sounding rocket, not actually a whole long ways beyond what Goddard was playing around with. It didn't even have guidance! They just figured out what direction they needed to point it and...pointed it that way. For that matter, the Vanguard wasn't too much more than that, either. Sure, they had tiny payloads, but they demonstrated the principle, and it became pretty quickly obvious that satellites would be terribly useful if you could only get them into space--that would rapidly induce a lot of effort to build larger launch vehicles to provide more useful payload masses and volumes (as indeed it did IOTL, even if converted IRBMs and ICBMs and derived vehicles dominated for a long while).
Germany has the Money, Science and support for new Technology
UK has the Money, Science but is hit or miss for new Technology
US has the Money, Science but has some problems with personalities and are hit or miss for the technology
France has the Science , and support for New technology, but will be lacking money
Russian has Science, Technology and Money but has internal problems that might make problems for it.
Italy has the Science but little else.
AH empire has the some of the Science but lacks in everything else unless they see it as a prestige tech.
Japan has the Science but will have to bring the rest in as a National pride subject.
UK has the Money, Science but is hit or miss for new Technology
US has the Money, Science but has some problems with personalities and are hit or miss for the technology
France has the Science , and support for New technology, but will be lacking money
Russian has Science, Technology and Money but has internal problems that might make problems for it.
Italy has the Science but little else.
AH empire has the some of the Science but lacks in everything else unless they see it as a prestige tech.
Japan has the Science but will have to bring the rest in as a National pride subject.
BiasHangover
Banned
The idea of Japan catching up with a bear minimum mentality is funny and fantastic.Well, yes and no. Remember, the first Japanese satellite was launched with this:
That's basically an overgrown sounding rocket, not actually a whole long ways beyond what Goddard was playing around with. It didn't even have guidance! They just figured out what direction they needed to point it and...pointed it that way. For that matter, the Vanguard wasn't too much more than that, either. Sure, they had tiny payloads, but they demonstrated the principle, and it became pretty quickly obvious that satellites would be terribly useful if you could only get them into space--that would rapidly induce a lot of effort to build larger launch vehicles to provide more useful payload masses and volumes (as indeed it did IOTL, even if converted IRBMs and ICBMs and derived vehicles dominated for a long while).
BiasHangover
Banned
What would India's place be in this race? Still under British stewardship or independent by the 60s?
Garrison
Donor
I think you are looking at things from the modern perspective where the usefulness of rocketry and spaceflight is obvious. Also without government, by which I mean military money rocketry is not going anywhere in the 20s or 30s.