Blue Gemini

[MikeJenneBlueGemini]

Hello everyone! I'm new to this forum, so bear with me if I'm not posting this in an appropriate thread. I wrote a trilogy of books (the "Blue Gemini" series) that followed several characters involved in secret military space programs (both US and Soviet) during the Cold War era. I have a website for the books at www.mikejennebooks.com. Of special note, you might be interested in the collection of technical illustrations that depict technology unique to the story, including the "Blue Gemini" interceptor variant of the Gemini spacecraft, a Navy ocean surveillance MOL, and a Soviet nuclear-armed OBS (Orbital Bombardment System). These drawings were done by my brother Ed, a former technical illustrator for NASA, in the style of that era. The entire collection is available at https://www.mikejennebooks.com/tech_drawings.htm and are free to download in PDF format.

 

[Michel Van]

Welkom to our Forum, Mike Jenne

We had some of that good stuff in MOL and Military Gemini discussion

 

[Dilandu]

Hello from Mother Russia)

and a Soviet nuclear-armed OBS (Orbital Bombardment System).

I take it is based on the TKS spacecraft? A possible solution, but:

1) Why arm it with just one warhead in clearly improvised re-entry vechicle?

2) The warhead doesn't look like thermonuclear; more like old type spherical implosion fission weapon. Maybe you mean boosted fission weapon?

3) How exactly the crew is supposed to leave the station, if the RV is used to drop a warhead? Soviet Kosmonauts weren't exactly kamikaze type & Soviet military doctrine did not endorse such things.

4) Why it isn't armed? The real Almaz military space stations (a derivative of civilian Salyut) were armed with 14.5-mm autocannon. It's kinda impossible to assume that if USSR decided to create a bombardment space station, it would not equip it with at least some self-defense system.

5) What exactly the purpose of dropping just one warhead (even if rather powerful one) with low accuracy from space station that is set on predictable orbit & always under observation?

 

[MikeJenneBlueGemini]

Hello from Mother Russia)

and a Soviet nuclear-armed OBS (Orbital Bombardment System).

I take it is based on the TKS spacecraft? A possible solution, but:

1) Why arm it with just one warhead in clearly improvised re-entry vechicle?

2) The warhead doesn't look like thermonuclear; more like old type spherical implosion fission weapon. Maybe you mean boosted fission weapon?

3) How exactly the crew is supposed to leave the station, if the RV is used to drop a warhead? Soviet Kosmonauts weren't exactly kamikaze type & Soviet military doctrine did not endorse such things.

4) Why it isn't armed? The real Almaz military space stations (a derivative of civilian Salyut) were armed with 14.5-mm autocannon. It's kinda impossible to assume that if USSR decided to create a bombardment space station, it would not equip it with at least some self-defense system.

5) What exactly the purpose of dropping just one warhead (even if rather powerful one) with low accuracy from space station that is set on predictable orbit & always under observation?

Dilandu, it's all described in the books. Be aware that a key element of the story that the program ("Krepost') is an effort that basically survives on bureaucratic inertia. Even the general who is assigned to run the program knows that it is of limited practical value, but he ends up pushing it to the point where it becomes operational. You're correct; the reentry vehicle is essentially an enlarged version of the TKS. It is a spherical implosion weapon. Concerning your question 3, this design is primarily based on the Almaz station, but using Soyuz vehicles to swap out crews, as well as a modified Soyuz (similar in concept to a Progress) for resupply; I'm attaching another illustration that might make this a little clearer. Concerning your question 4, it is armed; although it's not well depicted in these illustrations, the book describes the weapon. Question 5 - Please refer to my previous answer about bureaucratic inertia.

 

[archipeppe]

Hello everyone! I'm new to this forum, so bear with me if I'm not posting this in an appropriate thread. I wrote a trilogy of books (the "Blue Gemini" series) that followed several characters involved in secret military space programs (both US and Soviet) during the Cold War era. I have a website for the books at www.mikejennebooks.com. Of special note, you might be interested in the collection of technical illustrations that depict technology unique to the story, including the "Blue Gemini" interceptor variant of the Gemini spacecraft, a Navy ocean surveillance MOL, and a Soviet nuclear-armed OBS (Orbital Bombardment System). These drawings were done by my brother Ed, a former technical illustrator for NASA, in the style of that era. The entire collection is available at https://www.mikejennebooks.com/tech_drawings.htm and are free to download in PDF format.

Hi Mike,

welcome among us, I know your books as also your brother's definitely nice artworks.

I have a question: how much reality and how much fantasy are in your novels?

 

[MikeJenneBlueGemini]

Hello everyone! I'm new to this forum, so bear with me if I'm not posting this in an appropriate thread. I wrote a trilogy of books (the "Blue Gemini" series) that followed several characters involved in secret military space programs (both US and Soviet) during the Cold War era. I have a website for the books at www.mikejennebooks.com. Of special note, you might be interested in the collection of technical illustrations that depict technology unique to the story, including the "Blue Gemini" interceptor variant of the Gemini spacecraft, a Navy ocean surveillance MOL, and a Soviet nuclear-armed OBS (Orbital Bombardment System). These drawings were done by my brother Ed, a former technical illustrator for NASA, in the style of that era. The entire collection is available at https://www.mikejennebooks.com/tech_drawings.htm and are free to download in PDF format.

Hi Mike,

welcome among us, I know your books as also your brother's definitely nice artworks.

I have a question: how much reality and how much fantasy are in your novels?

No fantasy, but you may be using that word in lieu of "fiction." A lot of people (including my publisher, much to my annoyance) try to peg the series into the science fiction genre, but that's really not appropriate. I describe the series as "plausible history." The difference between plausible history and alternative history is that the former describes events that could have actually happened (parallel to real historical events) as opposed to the latter, in which history goes off on a completely different tangent based on a key event (Hitler decides not to invade the Soviet Union, the Soviets are first to the moon, etc.) occurring or perhaps not occurring. Believe it or not, while the characters and the program are certainly fig newtons of my imagination, there's a lot of actual history going on in the background; I usually tell people that it's about 80% true and 20% fiction, and the stuff that sounds most outlandish is usually true.

 

[Dilandu]

Be aware that a key element of the story that the program ("Krepost') is an effort that basically survives on bureaucratic inertia. Even the general who is assigned to run the program knows that it is of limited practical value, but he ends up pushing it to the point where it becomes operational.

I take it there is no "Outer space treaty" of 1967 in your timeline? Because "bureaucratic inertia" is kinda weak explanation for the action that would clearly violate the treaty for near-zero gain. Or you meant that station was deployed pre-treaty and just wasn't decommissioned yet due to bureaucratic inertia?

 

[Dilandu]

You're correct; the reentry vehicle is essentially an enlarged version of the TKS. It is a spherical implosion weapon. Concerning your question 3, this design is primarily based on the Almaz station, but using Soyuz vehicles to swap out crews, as well as a modified Soyuz (similar in concept to a Progress) for resupply; I'm attaching another illustration that might make this a little clearer.

Aha, now I see how it set. Thanks!

 

[MikeJenneBlueGemini]

Be aware that a key element of the story that the program ("Krepost') is an effort that basically survives on bureaucratic inertia. Even the general who is assigned to run the program knows that it is of limited practical value, but he ends up pushing it to the point where it becomes operational.

I take it there is no "Outer space treaty" of 1967 in your timeline? Because "bureaucratic inertia" is kinda weak explanation for the action that would clearly violate the treaty for near-zero gain. Or you meant that station was deployed pre-treaty and just wasn't decommissioned yet due to bureaucratic inertia?

The Outer Space treaty is in there, but the implication is that both sides are breaking it. Actually, the American response (deploying a vehicle for IIK--Intercept, Identify, Kill--operations) is in direct response to the Soviet's program for basing nuclear weapons in orbit. The Krepost OBS was deployed post-treaty.

 

[Dilandu]

The Outer Space treaty is in there, but the implication is that both sides are breaking it. Actually, the American response (deploying a vehicle for IIK--Intercept, Identify, Kill--operations) is in direct response to the Soviet's program for basing nuclear weapons in orbit. The Krepost OBS was deployed post-treaty.

Make no sence, sorry. I know that "evul russianz" is an instinctive American archetype, but no "bureaucratic inertia" could explain why USSR decided to violate quite an important treaty for something that is NOT very important. It's just not how USSR operated.

And especially not -

Even the general who is assigned to run the program knows that it is of limited practical value, but he ends up pushing it to the point where it becomes operational.

- this. To put it simply, no general in USSR could have such level of influence. It could only be from the Party leadership (Central Committe), and only with pretty heavy lobbying from industry (the Soviet industry was actually much, MUCH more influential than Soviet military).

 

[MikeJenneBlueGemini]

The Outer Space treaty is in there, but the implication is that both sides are breaking it. Actually, the American response (deploying a vehicle for IIK--Intercept, Identify, Kill--operations) is in direct response to the Soviet's program for basing nuclear weapons in orbit. The Krepost OBS was deployed post-treaty.

Make no sence, sorry. I know that "evul russianz" is an instinctive American archetype, but no "bureaucratic inertia" could explain why USSR decided to violate quite an important treaty for something that is NOT very important. It's just not how USSR operated.

And especially not -

Even the general who is assigned to run the program knows that it is of limited practical value, but he ends up pushing it to the point where it becomes operational.

- this. To put it simply, no general in USSR could have such level of influence. It could only be from the Party leadership (Central Committe), and only with pretty heavy lobbying from industry (the Soviet industry was actually much, MUCH more influential than Soviet military).

...and all of that comes into play in the story.

 

[publiusr]

Great books, you have written.