What if Wernher Von Braun Given First Try To Launch First Satellite?

Suppose if the task was not given to the U.S. navy to launch the first
satellite with the Vanguard program but to
Wernher Von Braun with his Explorer program? The result is pretty
obvious. The U.S. would have beat the Russians. Explorer would have
gone up before Sputnik. A more interesting question is why the U.S.
chose the
Vanguard program? After all the Army Redstone program was more ahead.
In fact Vanguard failed several times
while Explorer was sucessful in its first try. I have the theory that
they did not want to give Von Braun the credit because of his V2
program which attacked London and also the mistreatment of the slave
workers who worked on Nazi Germany's rocket program. What is your
opinion of this? Is there any evidence of this in documents from
that time?

At the time it seemed that Washington didn't want our space program
connected to the military booster but desired a new design specifically
designed as a satellite launcher by NASA and Navy. But Vanguard was such an
embarassment they fianlly had to let von Braun do the job with the redstone.
Ike had some funny ideas about a space race once started would be bad for
business and the stock market (taxes would have invreased to fund it), so I
doubt we would have gone first. Remember ot was one of Ike's appointees that
coined the phrase "what's good for General Motors is good for the nation."
Johnson was pushing NASA as a non-military organization at the time also. It
was a frustrating time. They'd break in on TV programing to show live
coverage of a Vanguard, then after a while it would either be postponed or
blow up on the pad. I remember one where it seemed all the stages lit off at
once. I don't remember a lot of discussions about von Braun's past - this
was the 50s - the nuclear menace - duck and cover drills in the schools, air
raid drills, home bomb shelters - we we're concentrating on the Rusians. It
was also the time of "The Ugly American" and the US and Russia trying to win
over the rest of the world - the better system, capitalism or communism,
would be judged on the accomplishments of things like the space race. There
was also a perceived "Bomber Gap" along with a military "Missile Gap" which
again can be traced to tight purse string thinking, and helped Kennedy win
in 1960.



"heich1" wrote in message
...
Suppose if the task was not given to the U.S. navy to launch the first
satellite with the Vanguard program but to
Wernher Von Braun with his Explorer program? The result is pretty
obvious. The U.S. would have beat the Russians. Explorer would have
gone up before Sputnik. A more interesting question is why the U.S.
chose the
Vanguard program? After all the Army Redstone program was more ahead.
In fact Vanguard failed several times
while Explorer was sucessful in its first try. I have the theory that
they did not want to give Von Braun the credit because of his V2
program which attacked London and also the mistreatment of the slave
workers who worked on Nazi Germany's rocket program. What is your
opinion of this? Is there any evidence of this in documents from
that time?

heich1 wrote:

A more interesting question is why the U.S. chose the Vanguard
program? After all the Army Redstone program was more ahead.

Before proposing an ATL, it pays to actually do basic research on OTL.


As Val Kraut briefly mentions, Ike did not want the space race to be
seen as a military race.

I have the theory that they did not want to give Von Braun the
credit because of his V2 program which attacked London and also the
mistreatment of the slave workers who worked on Nazi Germany's
rocket program. What is your opinion of this?

It's so much fertilizer.

Is there any evidence of this in documents from that time?

Of your theory? Precisely none. Of that outlined by Val Kraut and
myself? Abundant.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Val Kraut, 13:04, martedì 1 maggio 2012:

At the time it seemed that Washington didn't want our space
program connected to the military booster but desired a new
design specifically designed as a satellite launcher by NASA
and Navy. But Vanguard was such an embarassment they fianlly
had to let von Braun do the job with the redstone. Ike had
some funny ideas about a space race once started would be bad
for business and the stock market (taxes would have invreased
to fund it), so I doubt we would have gone first. Remember ot
was one of Ike's appointees that coined the phrase "what's
good for General Motors is good for the nation." Johnson was
pushing NASA as a non-military organization at the time also.
It was a frustrating time. They'd break in on TV programing to
show live coverage of a Vanguard, then after a while it would
either be postponed or blow up on the pad. I remember one
where it seemed all the stages lit off at once. I don't
remember a lot of discussions about von Braun's past - this
was the 50s - the nuclear menace - duck and cover drills in
the schools, air raid drills, home bomb shelters - we we're
concentrating on the Rusians. It was also the time of "The
Ugly American" and the US and Russia trying to win over the
rest of the world - the better system, capitalism or
communism, would be judged on the accomplishments of things
like the space race. There was also a perceived "Bomber Gap"
along with a military "Missile Gap" which again can be traced
to tight purse string thinking, and helped Kennedy win in
1960.


"There is just one thing I can promise you about the outer-space
program - your tax-dollar will go further."
-- Wernher von Braun


"heich1" wrote in message

...
Suppose if the task was not given to the U.S. navy to launch
the first satellite with the Vanguard program but to
Wernher Von Braun with his Explorer program? The result is
pretty obvious. The U.S. would have beat the Russians.
Explorer would have gone up before Sputnik. A more
interesting question is why the U.S. chose the
Vanguard program? After all the Army Redstone program was
more ahead. In fact Vanguard failed several times
while Explorer was sucessful in its first try. I have the
theory that they did not want to give Von Braun the credit
because of his V2 program which attacked London and also the
mistreatment of the slave workers who worked on Nazi
Germany's rocket program. What is your opinion of this? Is
there any evidence of this in documents from that time?

--
o o

In sci.space.history Val Kraut wrote:
At the time it seemed that Washington didn't want our space program
connected to the military booster but desired a new design
specifically designed as a satellite launcher by NASA and Navy. But
Vanguard was such an embarassment they fianlly had to let von Braun
do the job with the redstone. Ike had some funny ideas about a
space race once started would be bad for business and the stock
market (taxes would have invreased to fund it), so I doubt we would
have gone first.

Wasn't there also something about wanting the Russians to go first to
set the "It is OK to overfly with a satellite" precedent?

rick jones
--
a wide gulf separates "what if" from "if only"
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

On May 1, 7:04*am, "Val Kraut" wrote:
At the time it seemed that Washington didn't want our space program
connected to the military booster but desired a new design specifically
designed as a satellite launcher by NASA and Navy. But Vanguard was such an
embarassment they fianlly had to let von Braun do the job with the redstone.
Ike had some funny ideas about a space race once started would be bad for
business and the stock market (taxes would have invreased to fund it), so I
doubt we would have gone first. Remember ot was one of Ike's appointees that
coined the phrase "what's good for General Motors is good for the nation."
Johnson was pushing NASA as a non-military organization at the time also. It
was a frustrating time. They'd break in on TV programing to show live
coverage of a Vanguard, then after a while it would either be postponed or
blow up on the pad. I remember one where it seemed all the stages lit off at
once. I don't remember a lot of discussions about von Braun's past - this
was the 50s - the nuclear menace - duck and cover drills in the schools, air
raid drills, home bomb shelters - we we're concentrating on the Rusians. It
was also the time of "The Ugly American" and the US and Russia trying to win
over the rest of the world - the better system, capitalism or communism,
would be judged on the accomplishments of things like the space race. There
was also a perceived "Bomber Gap" along with a military "Missile Gap" which
again can be traced to tight purse string thinking, and helped Kennedy win
in 1960.

"heich1" wrote in message

...



Suppose if the task was not given to the U.S. navy to launch the first
satellite with the Vanguard program but to
Wernher Von Braun with his Explorer program? The result is pretty
obvious. The U.S. would have beat the Russians. Explorer would have
gone up before Sputnik. A more interesting question is why the U.S.
chose the
Vanguard program? After all the Army Redstone program was more ahead.
In fact Vanguard failed several times
while Explorer was sucessful in its first try. I have the theory that
they did not want to give Von Braun the credit because of his V2
program which attacked London and also the mistreatment of the slave
workers who worked on Nazi Germany's rocket program. What is your
opinion of this? Is there any evidence of this in documents from
that time?

I am aware of your reasons as they are the offical reasons why they
failed
to give Von Braun the initial go ahead. While the American people were
not
fully aware of Von Braun's past surely Eisenhower and his
administration were. Maybe
they did not want to give their true reasons publically and even did
not tell
their subordinates. If they did it might leak out and Von Braun could
not be used
even for military research. After all Eisenhower was the commander of
Allied forces
in World War 2. I realize what I am writing is speculation.

On Monday 30 April 2012 21:55, heich1 ) opined:

Suppose if the task was not given to the U.S. navy to launch the first
satellite with the Vanguard program but to
Wernher Von Braun with his Explorer program? The result is pretty
obvious. The U.S. would have beat the Russians. Explorer would have
gone up before Sputnik. A more interesting question is why the U.S.
chose the
Vanguard program? After all the Army Redstone program was more ahead.
In fact Vanguard failed several times
while Explorer was sucessful in its first try. I have the theory that
they did not want to give Von Braun the credit because of his V2
program which attacked London and also the mistreatment of the slave
workers who worked on Nazi Germany's rocket program. What is your
opinion of this? Is there any evidence of this in documents from
that time?

It has virtually nothing to do with the topic, but I'm reminded of a bit of
doggerel that was popular with the folks at Redstone Arsenal (and
elsewhere in the Army) at the time and, of course, related to the Vanguard
failures:

We shot a satellite into the air.
It's orbiting, we know not where.
Its radio signal, so loud and clear,
Is lost somewhere in the atmosphere.

Von Braun and his team were first brought to El Paso and White Sands
Missile Range to continue work with the captured V-2s, work which
ultimately resulted in the WAC Corporal, the Redstone and most of
the "first generation" Army "artillery" rockets, as well as the Sergeant
and the Pershing. Somewhere in this period, the political decision was
made that the Army would be responsible for tactical, short range rockets,
while the Air Force was assigned the responsibility for strategic rockets,
the ICBMs. The Navy successfully argued for their own strategic missile
development program, the end result of which was the Trident armed nuclear
missile subs.

The inter-service battle over who was to do what never really was
completely resolved - the Army, in particular, kept pushing for longer and
longer range tactical weapons, with the Pershing system as its crowning
achievement. Here you had a missile with an official range of somewhere
around 150 miles but which, in actuality, could be "extended" to IRBM
ranges (on the order of 1000-2000 miles). The Army also retained the
responsibility for developing air defense missiles, resulting in such
successful programs as the Nike Hercules, the HAWK, several generations of
man-portable, shoulder fired systems (the RedEye/Stinger among them), and
the Patriot and the still-under-development THAAD, which descends from the
Nike Zeus via the Patriot.

Swell Ol' Bob

--
Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
-----
The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated
in the name of the noblest causes -- Thomas Paine

heich1 wrote:

I am aware of your reasons as they are the offical reasons why they
failed to give Von Braun the initial go ahead.

They didn't "failed to give Von Braun the initial go ahead", they
specifically and deliberately shut him down.

While the American people were not fully aware of Von Braun's past surely
Eisenhower and his administration were.

I don't believe that the American people were not aware, especially
since Von Braun was a *very* public figure with regards to space
exploration and space travel by that point and IIRC his history with
the V2 (though not with slave labor) well known. It's not clear
AFAICT, when the allegations about the camps became widely known.

Not widely known or understood today is just how fast the "Nazis and
Nips" were publicly rehabilitated from the bloodthirsty and implacable
Enemies Of Democracy they were portrayed as in WWII into Stalwart
Allies Against Communism.

Maybe they did not want to give their true reasons publically and even did
not tell their subordinates. If they did it might leak out and Von Braun
could not be used even for military research. After all Eisenhower was the
commander of Allied forces in World War 2. I realize what I am writing is
speculation.

Speculation not supported by the evidence known to have been available
to the participants AFAIK.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

The Stewart Committee evaluating satellite proposals agreed with the
Navy's position that Vanguard would be the faster and easier path -
Vanguard director Milt Rosen felt at the time that he could build on
the Viking sounding rocket and do this for about $20M - and also felt
the scientific return would be greater.
The Committe was not charged with picking the less obviously military
satellite or avoiding German participation. However, lingering but
unspoken anti-German sentiment could have been a factor.
There was definitely no charge to be first, but it wasn't needed - in
any high-tech endeavour, US leadership was confident the "backwards"
Russians would not and could not beat us, and not everyone thought it
even mattered.
There was also, very definitely, no charge that we should be second
and let the Russians set the freedom-of-space precedent. Freedom of
space was discussed a lot, since Ike had approved the start of
reconsat development, but remember two important facts:
1. The Stewart committee allowed a second round of briefings and a
revote, at direction of AF Secretary Donald Quarles, which meant the
winner was not determined in advance
2. Ike was calming in speaking to the public about Sputnik, but he
privately called Quarles on the carpet and demanded an explanation for
why we were spending so much money on Vanguard (budget had quadrupled
at that point) and yet had been beaten into space. Quarles noted the
Russians had "unintentionally done us a good turn" by establishing
freedom of space, and they had. So we did not intentionally launch
second - there's no evidence at all for that.

If the Stewart Committee had picked the Army proposal, I think it's
safe to say we would have launched first. Not only was the Army
further along toward an orbit-capable system, but von Braun and his
boss, General Medaris, were among the people who did believe lanching
first was important. They would have done it.

(Medaris and others have written that he and von Braun were
specifically ordered to make sure there were no "accidental" Army
satellites. Army historians were unable to come up with a record of a
communication on this for us, but it is plausible and could have been
an order given by phone or delivered in person at one of the many
occasions when the Army people were in DC or higher leadership was
visiting Huntsville.)

We worked these issues hard for our 2004 book, speaking to Rosen,
Ernst Stuhlinger, Van Allen, and other US figures. This appears to be
the case where the official story was true. Historians will always
regret that neither Quarles (who died young in office) and Homer Joe
Stewart never wrote memoirs, but they left plenty of documentation.

Matt Bille
co-author, The First Space Race: Launching the World's First
Satellites (Texas A&M, 2004)

While the American people were
not
fully aware of Von Braun's past surely Eisenhower and his
administration were.

Von Braun's past was well know at the time. There were jokes during the
startup of the space that our Nazis are better than Their (the Russians)
Nazis or are they.

Von Braun wrote a book - "I Aim for the Stars" Popular joke - subtitle is
"But usually Hit London"

There was enough publicity about von Braun and his key team members seeking
out the US for surrender. In the news real one of von Braun's arms is in a
cask. We were proud they wanted to come with us. And von Braun was a very
public figure - the books with Chlesley Bonestell and movies like the
conquest of space took the banner of space exploration to the general
public - he also did 4 tomorrow land programs for Disneyland.

The Enemies were Russia and China and we needed the Germans and Japanese on
our side. By the time the space race really got going and three years of the
Korean War we had a whole new definition of who was a friend and who was an
enemy.