AHC: More Competetive Space Race

Okay, maybe that's not quite the right title, but let me explain. Looking at the timeline of the space-race, I note that while the USA and USSR seem to be about even in terms of the number of firsts, it's the USSR that takes out most of the 'manned' firsts, first animal in space (Sputnik 5 if you're after recovery, Sputnik 2 otherwise), first man in space, first woman (and first civilian) in space, first multi-crew spacecraft, etc. while the US firsts have mostly involved satellites. How do we change this so that each side gets a closer share of both satellite and manned firsts? And what effect would this have on later developments in space?
 

Riain

Banned
I think the standard answer is that the US had better aviation technology so relied more on bombers than the Soviets, and that US nukes were smaller and lighter so early US missiles lacked the throw-weight of the Soviet R7. How you would change these things I'm not sure, perhaps the timeline of events can put the Mercury Redstone ahead of the Vostok, but I don't know if Atlas can be moved forward enough to get in on the action.
 
Well I had had the thought that if something goes wrong with Gagarin's flight then Alan Shepard will become the first man in space, and if the Soviets delay the next launch to try to figure out what went wrong the time-gap between Vostok 2 and Mercury-Atlas 6 might not be nearly as big as it was.
 
Its easy for the US to beat Sputnik into space. The US had the ability to launch a Jupiter-C rocket as early as Aug 1956
 
That's a tall order there. As has been said before, a lot of the reasoning behind the USSR's early lead in Spaceflight came from there R-7 ICBM, which due to it's ignite-all-stages-on-ground approach (necessitated by the serious unreliability of Liquid Rocket Engines at the time) and the heavy Soviet Nuclear Warheads (5.5 Tonnes total), required a massive booster to get the warheads from their Launch Sites to the US. This in turn made retrofitting them to serve as satellite launch vehicles a very simple affair, since they could easily accomplish the task. Heavier LEO payloads and their first BEO payloads were made possible by the addition of upper stages and further improvements to the Core Stage and Boosters. This meant that for them, launching everything up to Soyuz was a relatively simple affair for them and allowed them to achieve their long list of Firsts for a somewhat modest budget.

To help close the gap early on, and make it more even, one way would be to up the mass of US Nucleur Warheads to the point where ICBMs are required early on (or a general favouring of ICBM-delivery systems at an early stage) to permit them a powerful rocket that they can quickly adapt into a launch vehicle and secure maybe a few of the early firsts themselves. It should be noted that the Mercury-Redstone used a Redstone IRBM, while the Mercury-Atlas used an Atlas ICBM.
 
So a couple of screw-ups by the Soviets wouldn't help?

Even with a few screw-ups by the Soviets, the early 1960's saw them with a big enough lead that they could take the hits IOTL. Vostok was Orbital, Mercury-Redstone was not to cite an example.
 
A screw-up with Vostok 1 would still make Alan Shepard the first man to live through a space-journey. Likewise, if Alexey Leonov manages to lose control of his suit valve somehow, White becomes the first successful space-walker.
 
More competitive does not mean an early US lead, I'd say.
It'd rather mean the Soviets not losing at the long run, such as doing an earlier human lunar launch. The US may land a man on the moon, but if the Soviets did a faster moonshot with a highly elliptical orbit an year earlier, it would equal out. The lunar landing would have less prestige.
(Yes I know about Apollo 8. That is why I said 1 year before- which would be June 1968.)
..........
Actually, I've had a TL that I was thinking of recently- where the Soviets and Americans literally (and coincidentally!) have a space race- a race divided into minutes and seconds for who would land on the moon and plant the flag first. Wouldn't that be pretty interesting?
 

Curiousone

Banned
..........
Actually, I've had a TL that I was thinking of recently- where the Soviets and Americans literally (and coincidentally!) have a space race- a race divided into minutes and seconds for who would land on the moon and plant the flag first. Wouldn't that be pretty interesting?

That'd be great. Both are neck & neck, one side gets its Rocket ready, is secretly preparing to launch. The other side isn't quite ready but gets wind of this, launches a hail-mary pass..
 
A better question, though still sticking with the general "more-competetive"-aspect.


what if there had been a more competetive contracting enviroment from day 1. With NASA being more like NACA in the sense of doing research projects on aerodynamics/engines/ect.

Funding would be tighter, more lean, but there would be less of the "Not-Invented-Here-Syndrome" that had nasa ignore decent designs.
 
Top