Possible British Manned Spaceflight In The 60s

[MartG]

Just finished reading a book about British rocketry ( A Vertical Empire by C N Hill ). Toward the end of the book there is an interesting possibility raised....

A launcher using a Blue Streak as 1st stage, with 4 Black Knights strapped to it as boosters, a 2nd stage with 4 Stentor motors ( from Blue Steel ), and a 3rd stage with a single Stentor or four Gamma engines, could have put approx 6000lbs into a low Earth orbit. It is noted that this is similar to the weight of a Gemini spacecraft B)  

[BillSlim]

That's an excellent book. It makes me a bit sad reading it though, we withdrew from rocketry just before the satellite boom. The Heath government said that there would be no money in launching satellites, and predicted only a small market.  :dum:
The Black Arrow, and the proposed Black Arrow/Blue Streak combination could have captured a sizable part of the market; at the end Hill does list satellites that could have been launched by Black Arrow.
A manned space programme would have garnered Britain a great deal of prestige, even if it was just something relatively small like the Gemini. Blue Streak was a very reliable missile; when used for the ELDO project not one failed; and would, IMVHO, make an excellent space capsule launch vehicle.

Hill has a website with much of the material from the book, and some extra goodies. It can be found at SpaceUK. It's well worth a look, and replete with 'Whiff' possibilities'.

Sadly Britain, typically for a country that cancelled TSR.2, P1154, the APT etc, is the only country to have developed a satellite launch capability, only to have abandoned it.  

[Lawman]

I would have loved to see the UK investing properly in manned spaceflight, even as a part of a NASA program. The UK could probably have become involved with Gemini, and in particular, might have been able to complement the US program by following on with Big Gemini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Gemini). Since NASA didn't choose to take it up, the UK might have been able to do it jointly with Australia and Canada. A Big Gemini would have made an excellent project, and would have made an excellent complement to the American's later Apollo flights (e.g. Apollo-Soyuz, Skylab etc...), and the shuttle. In particular, it might have been good for NASA to have a Commonwealth-owned shuttle alternative, or even stick with Big Gemini instead of the shuttle entirely!

Any UK manned spaceflight program would have been good news, it is such a pity that the government decided to not even have a small program. If the Commonwealth countries had gone ahead with Big Gemini, perhaps using an indiginous launcher, then we might have seen the ISS fifteen years earlier. The US launches a series of Skylab sized modules, and shuttles for building the station, and the Big Gemini is then used as a crew return vehicle and for crew exchanges. No need to buy Russian Soyuz flights, you simply buy Gemini launches - a proven launcher, especially if it has been running in one form or other since the '60s, it would have hundreds of launches under its belt by now!  

[TsrJoe]

http://www.baxterium.org.uk/

have a looksee at 'sample fiction' then have a read of 'Prospero One'  B)

many years ago i came across an illustration of a 'Blue Streak' launcher with a 'Mercury' capsule atop a second stage, i recall pasting it on a page of an early issue of the R&D. SIG. newsletter...def a 'should have been'!

cheers, Joe    

[GTX]

Of course if Britain goes into space back then, Australia would have to be involved given they trialed a lot of these rockets in Woomera.  Many years ago, I saw the Black Arrow etc still at Woomera.

Regards,

Greg

[BillSlim]

Joe, thanks for posting that link, it was an excellent if bitter-sweet story.

According to the Space UK site Woomera would not be suitable for all sorts of launches and Darwin was looked at as an alternative.

[GTX]

According to the Space UK site Woomera would not be suitable for all sorts of launches and Darwin was looked at as an alternative.

I agree.  Woomera was/is a horrible site for space launches.  It was only ever useful as a weapons range - hence why it was used in the first place.  A much better choice would be Cape York, Darwin (though away from populated areas) or even Cocos Island (now there's a nice place!).

Regards,

Greg

[wagnersm]

I think Arthur C Clarke did several Science Fiction stores about UK/Commonweath space program.  I think Austrialia was used as the lauching point.

Steve

[Bryan H.]

If the UK or Commonwealth had an independent manned spaceflight capability, it is entirely possible that the Skylab could have been saved with their help.  

Early Shuttle flight were to have boosted the Skylab's orbit.  However, due a bad combination of Shuttle program delays & solar heating expanding the atmosphere, the Skylab 'de-orbited' in the late 70's.  NASA had hoped to keep it through the 80's.  Keeping the Skylab would have possibly short-circuited the 'need' for the ISS.  NASA could have redirected the $$$ (that has been frittered away on the ISS) to more exciting & scientifically productive programs like...  More & more capable unmanned missions to Mars & the outer planets or resuming manned missions to the Moon as a precursor to a permenently manned lunar station and missions to Mars.  It's possible we'd be at least 10 years ahead of where we are now.

Bryan  

[elmayerle]

Speaking of frittering away $$$ on the ISS, Congress was quite certainly complicit in ordering some three major redesigns.  The final version being built is one I'd've been tempted to jump to after the first mandated redesign.  "You want reduced costs?  Then let's start with a core of one Mir, or equivalent, delivered to low Earth orbit."  As 'tis, based on data from the Astrnautix site, I'd much rather have the Russian-made FGB module as part of the ISS than as what it was originally built for, the Control hub of an orbital battle station.

Mind you, I'm of the opinion that NASA ought to turn all the ops functions over to non-governmental entities (corporations or whatever) and get back to an expanded version of NACA's charter; the dreamers have moved on and the buros (bureaucrats) have moved in, with all the delay, empire-building, etc. that brings.  I've talked with some of my contemporaries in the industry who've worked with NASA and we're in agreement that they are far more pain to deal with than any part of DOD or the FAA.

[Zen]

It was during the Mcmilland government that the Armstrong Whitworth re-entry capsule was abandoned. Apparently it was to be a waverider, which would've been another first for the UK had it flown.

[Archibald]

If the UK or Commonwealth had an independent manned spaceflight capability, it is entirely possible that the Skylab could have been saved with their help.  

Early Shuttle flight were to have boosted the Skylab's orbit.  However, due a bad combination of Shuttle program delays & solar heating expanding the atmosphere, the Skylab 'de-orbited' in the late 70's.  NASA had hoped to keep it through the 80's.  Keeping the Skylab would have possibly short-circuited the 'need' for the ISS.  NASA could have redirected the $$$ (that has been frittered away on the ISS) to more exciting & scientifically productive programs like...  More & more capable unmanned missions to Mars & the outer planets or resuming manned missions to the Moon as a precursor to a permenently manned lunar station and missions to Mars.  It's possible we'd be at least 10 years ahead of where we are now.

Bryan

Wrote some pages on the subjects two years ago... I imagined that the two Skylab (there was a second space station, which was never laucnhed) were docked together, an european module and a saliout  station. This was a kind of early 80's ISS    

I have to found this story, and translate it in english    (sacrilège, mon dieu!!)