A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How long to space w/o ICBMs?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 7th 06, 08:28 PM posted to sci.space.history
Monte Davis Monte Davis is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Sep 2005
Posts: 466
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?

We all know the timeline from Peenemunde via White Sands, Kapustin Yar
etc. to Canaveral and Tyuratam, and then to space. If the German army
of the early 1930s hadn't wanted the long-range artillery denied it by
the Versailles treaty, no job for young Wernher von Braun, no major
effort leading to the V-2 in time for WWII. You'd still have GIRD in
the USSR, Goddard and GALCIT etc. here... parallel efforts in other
countries, JATO and surely some anti-aircraft missile work. But you
wouldn't have that stunning summer 1944 realization that the V-2,
however inaccurate and non-cost-effective, was an *unstoppable*
weapon.

Similarly, even *with* the V-2 but without the A-bomb, you might have
seen considerable work on military missiles... but with only
high-explosive warheads, the bang/buck payoff would have been much
less, and the progress much slower. It was the *combination* of
ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads -- especially the
fast-shrinking H-bomb, powerful enough that you could afford to be a
few miles off target -- that kicked off the big spending, and headlong
progress towards ICBMs, in the early 1950s.

OK -- assume that impetus hadn't existed. In 1952 the Lord writes in
letters of fire in the ionosphe "No ICBMs, OR ELSE!!!" and afflicts
von Braun, Korolyov et al with leprosy and boils just to get the point
across. Cold War, yes... Eisenhower and Khrushchev and Kennedy, yes...
but no ICBMs.

In that case, when do you think the first satellite would have reached
orbit? The first human? Where would we be today in space?

Or to put it another way: just how strong -- in terms of funding and
engineering effort -- would our desire to get into space have proved
*in the absence* of huge military missile programs?
  #2  
Old September 7th 06, 08:46 PM posted to sci.space.history
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?

On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 19:28:03 GMT, in a place far, far away, Monte
Davis made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

We all know the timeline from Peenemunde via White Sands, Kapustin Yar
etc. to Canaveral and Tyuratam, and then to space. If the German army
of the early 1930s hadn't wanted the long-range artillery denied it by
the Versailles treaty, no job for young Wernher von Braun, no major
effort leading to the V-2 in time for WWII. You'd still have GIRD in
the USSR, Goddard and GALCIT etc. here... parallel efforts in other
countries, JATO and surely some anti-aircraft missile work. But you
wouldn't have that stunning summer 1944 realization that the V-2,
however inaccurate and non-cost-effective, was an *unstoppable*
weapon.

Similarly, even *with* the V-2 but without the A-bomb, you might have
seen considerable work on military missiles... but with only
high-explosive warheads, the bang/buck payoff would have been much
less, and the progress much slower. It was the *combination* of
ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads -- especially the
fast-shrinking H-bomb, powerful enough that you could afford to be a
few miles off target -- that kicked off the big spending, and headlong
progress towards ICBMs, in the early 1950s.

OK -- assume that impetus hadn't existed. In 1952 the Lord writes in
letters of fire in the ionosphe "No ICBMs, OR ELSE!!!" and afflicts
von Braun, Korolyov et al with leprosy and boils just to get the point
across. Cold War, yes... Eisenhower and Khrushchev and Kennedy, yes...
but no ICBMs.

In that case, when do you think the first satellite would have reached
orbit? The first human? Where would we be today in space?

Or to put it another way: just how strong -- in terms of funding and
engineering effort -- would our desire to get into space have proved
*in the absence* of huge military missile programs?


An interesting notion for an alternate history, but there are, of
course, multiple versions. Short answer, probably much later, and it
may have been done privately first.
  #4  
Old September 7th 06, 09:24 PM posted to sci.space.history
Rand Simberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,311
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?

On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 20:20:28 GMT, in a place far, far away, Monte
Davis made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:

(Rand Simberg) wrote:

Short answer, probably much later, and it
may have been done privately first.


Maybe communications satellites as the driver?


Yeah, that's what I was thinking, though that wouldn't give low costs.


Boy, would *that* have
made Arthur C. Clarke proud.

Or possibly spy satellites first anyway? Even without missile-gap
worries, the Cold War powers would have wanted to keep an eye on each
other's airfields and naval bases.


That, too, but it still wouldn't have provided low costs. On the
other hand, it might not have occurred to anyone to throw the launch
vehicle away if they didn't have the ICBM model to work from...
  #5  
Old September 7th 06, 10:05 PM posted to sci.space.history
Jim Oberg[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 440
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?


Well, the Vanguard rocket used a Navy 'Viking'
missile, but it certainly also was buoyed up by
rocket science from parallel projects. 'Scout'
rockets also were big stacks of solids that
could have come along as sounding rockets,
then orbital vehicles.





  #6  
Old September 8th 06, 12:07 AM posted to sci.space.history
Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,865
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?


"Monte Davis" wrote in message
news

About 8-12 minutes.




  #7  
Old September 8th 06, 12:39 AM posted to sci.space.history
Rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 617
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?


Jim Oberg wrote:
Well, the Vanguard rocket used a Navy 'Viking'
missile, but it certainly also was buoyed up by
rocket science from parallel projects. 'Scout'
rockets also were big stacks of solids that
could have come along as sounding rockets,
then orbital vehicles.


Maybe we would have gone the X-15 route to orbit building on
aircraft/rocket plane technology.

Rusty

  #8  
Old September 8th 06, 04:23 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?



Monte Davis wrote:


Maybe communications satellites as the driver? Boy, would *that* have
made Arthur C. Clarke proud.

Or possibly spy satellites first anyway? Even without missile-gap
worries, the Cold War powers would have wanted to keep an eye on each
other's airfields and naval bases.



Vanguard was developed from civilian rockets (Aerobee and Viking) and so one can picture space exploration coming about even in a ICBM-free world.

Pat
  #9  
Old September 8th 06, 04:32 AM posted to sci.space.history
Rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 617
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?


Pat Flannery wrote:
Monte Davis wrote:


Maybe communications satellites as the driver? Boy, would *that* have
made Arthur C. Clarke proud.

Or possibly spy satellites first anyway? Even without missile-gap
worries, the Cold War powers would have wanted to keep an eye on each
other's airfields and naval bases.



Vanguard was developed from civilian rockets (Aerobee and Viking) and so one can picture space exploration coming about even in a ICBM-free world.

Pat



Wasn't the Viking design based on V-2 technology in the beginning?

Rusty

  #10  
Old September 8th 06, 04:58 AM posted to sci.space.history
hop
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 90
Default How long to space w/o ICBMs?

Rusty wrote:

Maybe we would have gone the X-15 route to orbit building on
aircraft/rocket plane technology.

Rusty

Also, without ICBMs, it seems fair to suppose that much of the money
would have gone into the development of supersonic/hypersonic bombers
and cruise missiles.

Having the first stage available makes things like blackstar or spiral
50/50 a bit more attractive.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Early NASA PDFs Rusty History 48 June 13th 06 05:51 AM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 December 2nd 05 06:07 AM
Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide Steven S. Pietrobon Space Shuttle 0 October 3rd 05 05:36 AM
Gravity as Falling Space Henry Haapalainen Science 1 September 4th 04 04:08 PM
European high technology for the International Space Station Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 May 10th 04 02:40 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.