The history of Mercury, Apollo, and the early Space Age is so well known that most of us assume that was the way events were fated to happen. So, it’s interesting to go back and look at some of the alternatives that were presented at the time. In our library for example, we have a small book written by the late G. Harry Stine which shows a different path which history might have taken.

The book is called Earth Satellites and the Race for Space Superiority. The sensationalistic title is not surprising, given that it was published right after Sputnik (although written just before). At the time, Stine was a young rocket engineer at the White Sands Proving Grounds (as the cover prominently states).

Although he was working on expendable ballistic rockets at White Sands, Stine did not see those as paths to the future. He conceded that “we could design a manned ballistic rocket which would thunder vertically into the upper atmosphere in the same manner as any high-altititude research rocket” with safe recovery of the pilot made possible by parachute but correctly predicted that such rockets would be expensive and dangerous. Sine may have slightly overestimated the danger – he feared it might be “so risky that no competent man might consider volunteering for it”) – but, if anything, he may have underestimated the expense.

Instead, Stine saw the future in reusable rocketships like the X-15. Details of the X-15 program were still classified at the time Stine wrote his book. Since he couldn’t discuss the X-15, he talked about a hypothetical follow-on called Griffon.

Like the X-15, Griffon would be a manned research vehicle. Griffon would take off vertically from a pad but use its wings to extend its range by skip-gliding across the top of the atmosphere. After attaining an apogee of 80 miles, Griffon would glide for at least 700 miles before making a runway landing.

Stine believed that Griffon would be the first step toward orbital spaceships and a manned space station, but he saw other possibilities as well. He devoted an entire chapter to Aeolus, a 3000-mile range 32-passenger rocket transport.

Stine envisioned rocket transports like Aeolus carrying passengers between New York and Los Angeles by 1966. (This was long before public concerns about sonic booms.) He also envisioned a military reconnaissance version of Aeolus.

Stine’s ideas were shared by many engineers at the time. The logical path to space led from high-speed atmospheric flight to suborbital and finally to orbit. That path was abandoned after Sputnik, which brought about a sudden dramatic shift in national priorities.

Today, after a detour of more than a half century, new companies like Armadillo Aerospace, Blue Origin, Masten Space Systems, Virgin Galactic, and XCOR Aerospace are setting out on the path which G. Harry Stine laid out in the 1950’s.

 

Written by Astro1 on May 5th, 2012 , Space History

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

COMMENTS
    Keith Henson commented

    It was a hard path 50 years ago, and it still is. The energy difference between a short orbital hop and LEO is huge.

    You left out Reaction Engines. Their Skylon is he only vehicle I know about that seems likely to get into orbit, and even there the payload fraction is not impressive.

    Though if you are willing to spend the money for propulsion lasers located in GEO, the payload fraction to LEO goes up to 25% of the takeoff mass.

    Keith Henson

    Reply
    January 19, 2013 at 11:26 am
      admin commented

      Rockets have overcome that horrible “energy difference” and put payloads into orbit for 50 years. Scramjets and lasers, not so much.

      Before you claim you have the only way of putting payloads into orbit, perhaps you should actually put a payload into orbit?

      “Though if you are willing to spend the money for propulsion lasers located in GEO, the payload fraction to LEO goes up to 25% of the takeoff mass.”

      If you just spend enough money, you can eliminate some of that dreadful propellant, which costs pennies per pound? And you’re having trouble selling that? 🙂

      Reply
      January 19, 2013 at 3:27 pm