Earliest Plausible Manned Moon Landing

The big slice of wasted time from the space point of view is more or less 1945-55, post WWII shock, recovery, realignment, beginning of the Cold War. The rocket enthusiasts are there, but the government interest and aerospace industry backing take a while to align. Once both sides get serious about it, I don't see too many good opportunities to pop time off- good was in that aren't marginal or dangerous, that is. Beginning the space race earlier seems most practical.

More aggressive sabre rattling could have kicked things off earlier; if the first orbital launch is around the time of the Berlin Airlift, then maybe the moon by '60, '61. It's the next step on from that that turns out to be the hard bit; we're long past the earliest plausible return to the moon, and counting.
 
Like the title says, when do you think the earliest plausible manned moon landing would be?
How many PODs do you want?

If OTL everything goes according to plans both the USA and SU go to the moon in 1967.
If it's the Germans doing space exploration after the war it shaves off maybe 5 years because USA/SU spent some time sitting on the technology they got after the war and organizing it to the level the Germans already had.
If there's no WW2 von Braun continues his work but without war time funding, it could set the date back 10 years or he gets Hitlers complete support for his ideas which could advance it 10 years, hard to say.
If there's no WW1 the countries continue to arm up against each other, moving into exotic projects as soon as engineers can sell them, who moves into rockets first would be hard to say, could be anyone and at any point in time.
 
Wasn't Apollo 8 capable of landing on the Moon, but wasn't allowed to because that wasn't what its mission.
No, Apollo 8 was the first circum lunar mission and only had a mock up lander to simulate the mass, Apollo 10 could theoretically land and there was some fear that the crew might go against its orders and land so they only filled the ascent modules tanks to half.
 
No, Apollo 8 was the first circum lunar mission and only had a mock up lander to simulate the mass, Apollo 10 could theoretically land and there was some fear that the crew might go against its orders and land so they only filled the ascent modules tanks to half.

Ah, ok. I knew it was one of the earlier rockets.

However, Apollo 8 could have done it, if it was outfitted with a proper lander. If the Apollo project was started earlier, then a landing could have taken place at anytime during the 1960s.
 
Ah, ok. I knew it was one of the earlier rockets.

However, Apollo 8 could have done it, if it was outfitted with a proper lander. If the Apollo project was started earlier, then a landing could have taken place at anytime during the 1960s.
I dont think Apollo 8 could, Apollo 11 though could happen earlier, but they still need missions like Apollo 8, 9 and 10 to work out the kinks and confirm everything works. For example the lander on Apollo 10 was still overweight, that's why the tanks were half full. Only Apollo 11 gota lander which could take off properly.
 
Like the title says, when do you think the earliest plausible manned moon landing would be?
Early 1960s. Assuming vents up to 1940 go more-or-less as OTL.
1. In 1947 the UK lofts the first man ("Winkle"?) in space via a stretched V2, Megaroc. This is followed by a number of other sub-orbital flights. This is a huge morale boost and mightily annoys the USA.
2. The Space Race begins when both the USA and Russia, irritated by the British achievement announce plans for a "real" space mission. Massive funding is injected into anything vaguely plausible and corners are cut.
3. In the US von Braun and his cohort are rapidly cleansed of Nazi connections. As part of the infighting between the US Army and their bastard child the USAF he and the others playing with rockets at Fort Bliss are assigned to the newly formed National Space Bureau and given a blank cheque.
4. The UK, still on a mild high (despite the lack of tea, butter, petrol sugar et cetera) continue. This is assisted by a lot of public interest and a programm of public lectures and radio talks by scientisist and visionaries. Clarke is allowed to patent the concept of a geostationary artificial satellite for use as a radio relay.
5. The Russian do stuff too.

And there the timeline is cut short by my SO's desire for lunch.

To Be Continued?
 

SsgtC

Banned
If you butterfly away the Apollo 1 launch pad fire, you can probably get a lunar landing around the same time as OTL Apollo 8. Much before that, you need a POD probably 20-30 years earlier
 
What’s the most plausible way to speed up rocket development and space race urgency in January 1900? The challenge after all is to get to the moon, and by the forum we’re in that’s the earliest possible POD date.

Goddard is 18 years old in 1900, how can he have unlimited resources and financing and a love for rockets as fast as possible?
 
A whopping big meteor impact at any time after we realize what they are could get things going. I actually started one based on a meteor striking Lincoln, NH on June 6, 1876 and blasting a hole a few miles across in the White Mountains. My plan had been for an increased interest in New Hampshire, and the USA in general, in defending against threats from the sky. My ultra rough outline had the first artificial satellite somewhere in the 1940's, perhaps earlier.
 

marathag

Banned
Came here to post this, and saw I was Ninja'd
From the link
Chamberlin came up with an even more ambitious plan. He proposed to not just fly around the moon, but to land on it, at a cost 1/20 of that of the Apollo project. The key was the use of the technique of lunar orbit rendezvous and a bare-bones, open cockpit lunar module. This would weigh 4,372 kg in the storable propellant version or 3,284 kg in the cryogenic Lox/LH2 version (calculated propellant loads 3,500 kg and 2,200 kg, respectively). The total mass to be injected into an escape trajectory toward the moon would be no more than 13,000 kg, one fifth of the 68,000 kg planned for the Nova-boosted direct-lunar landing approach favored at that time. At this mass, instead of Nova, a Saturn C-3 launch vehicle could be used. The flight schedule would have been delayed by a year in order to develop a more capable spacecraft. However by launching every 45 days instead of every 60 days Gemini would still put an American on the moon by January 1966:

Date Flight Description
Titan 2 Launches

Mar 1964 Gemini 1 Unmanned orbital
May 1964 Gemini 2 Manned orbital
Jun 1964 Gemini 3 7-day manned orbital
Aug 1964 Gemini 4 14-day manned orbital
Sep 1964 Gemini 5 Agena docking
Nov 1964 Gemini 6 Agena docking
Dec 1964 Gemini 7 Agena docking
Feb 1965 Gemini 8 Centaur docking, boost to high Earth orbit
Mar 1965 Gemini 9 Centaur docking, boost to high Earth orbit
May 1965 Gemini 10 LM docking
Jun 1965 Gemini 11 LM docking
Jul 1965 Gemini 12 LM docking
Sep 1965 Gemini 13 Centaur docking, boost to Lunar flyby
Oct 1965 Gemini 14 Centaur docking, boost to Lunar flyby

Saturn C-3 Launches

Nov 1965 Gemini 15 Manned Lunar orbital
Jan 1966 Gemini 16 Manned Lunar landing

The lunar module would have been launched separately by Titan II for the three Earth orbital docking missions. This moon landing project was projected to cost $ 584 million 'plus the cost of two Saturn C-3's'.

c074b.gif
 

marathag

Banned
That's the difference between reality and fiction--reality doesn't need to make sense. That said, I think that OTL's Apollo was not all that implausible. Expensive, yes, but not implausible.

The implausible bit, is 50 years after putting a host of Crews on the Moon, and even Moon Buggy, that they wouldn't have a single Man-rated launcher that could even do a sub-orbital hop, let alone a LEO.

You would have told me in 1968, as Apollo 8 whizzed past the Moon, that in 50 years the only way for NASA to get a guy in orbit, would be to hitch a ride on a Russian Rocket, I would have though that person insane.
Yet here we are.
 
Top