Man in space

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

That is indeed interesting, wish I had info to provide. Will stay tuned for further developments.

ah thats alright, what neat features did the apollo garments have? Apart from being uber thin

 

[southwestforests]

what neat features did the apollo garments have?

My health is a bit of a mess now and memory doesn't retain info like it used to,
so I'd have to go look it up.
Which brings to mind,
this book by the Smithsonian a few decades ago,
Author Lillian D. Kozloski, who was a resident expert on space suits from 1970s to 1990s.

 

[southwestforests]

what neat features did the apollo garments have?

Part 2: I do remember that info on the web exists, such as these re-found just now via Googling, astronaut glove hand cold;

Hands and Gloves in Space

There is a common saying that the hands are where the mind meets the world. In space there is no direct contact between the mind and the world. This transaction is mediated by the artificial structures called gloves.

airandspace.si.edu

Warm Hands and Feet | NASA Spinoff

spinoff.nasa.gov

Also,

look for a PDF from NASA,

Spacesuit Glove Induced Hand Trauma and Analysis of
Potentially Related Risk Variables

Chacqueline M. Charvat1 and Jason Norcross2
Wyle Laboratories/NASA-JSC, Houston, TX
Christopher R. Reid3
Lockheed Martin/NASA-JSC, Houston, TX
and
Shane M. McFarland4
MEI Technologies/NASA-JSC, Houston, TX

Injuries to the hands are common among astronauts who train for extravehicular activity (EVA). When the gloves are pressurized, they restrict movement and create pressure points during tasks, sometimes resulting in pain, muscle fatigue, abrasions, and occasionally more severe injuries such as onycholysis. Glove injuries, both anecdotal and recorded, have been reported during EVA training and flight persistently through NASA’s history regardless of mission or glove model. Theories as to causation such as glove-hand fit are common but often lacking in supporting evidence. Previous statistical analysis has evaluated onycholysis in the context of crew anthropometry only.
The purpose of this study was to analyze all injuries (as documented in the medical records) and available risk factor variables with the goal to determine engineering and operational controls that may reduce hand injuries due to the EVA glove in the future. A literature review and data mining study were conducted between 2012 and 2014. This study included 179 US NASA crew who trained or completed an EVA between 1981 and 2010 (crossing both Shuttle and ISS eras) and wore either the 4000 Series or Phase VI glove during Extravehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) spacesuit EVA training and flight. All injuries recorded in medical records were analyzed in their association to candidate risk factor variables. Those risk factor variables included demographic characteristics, hand anthropometry, glove fit characteristics, and training/EVA characteristics.
Utilizing literature, medical records and anecdotal causation comments recorded in crewmember injury data, investigators were able to identify several risk factors associated with increased risk of glove related injuries. Prime among them were smaller hand anthropometry, duration of individual suited exposures, and improper glove-hand fit as calculated by the difference in the anthropometry middle finger length compared to the baseline EVA glove middle finger length.

See also:

Getting a Hand Up on Spacewalks

astronauttomjones.com

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

My health is a bit of a mess now and memory doesn't retain info like it used to,
so I'd have to go look it up.
Which brings to mind,
this book by the Smithsonian a few decades ago,
Author Lillian D. Kozloski, who was a resident expert on space suits from 1970s to 1990s.

View attachment 728451

this should be most helpful, I wonder if there's a copy on Archive.org

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Go ahead its free design, just put my name in small print as free contribution...

How are these, bearing in mind it is just a rough draft. Any input?

My health is a bit of a mess now and memory doesn't retain info like it used to,
so I'd have to go look it up.
Which brings to mind,
this book by the Smithsonian a few decades ago,
Author Lillian D. Kozloski, who was a resident expert on space suits from 1970s to 1990s.

View attachment 728451

also, have I shown you lot my design for the American suits yet? I made several major revisions

 

[Michel Van]

ow are these, bearing in mind it is just a rough draft. Any input?

they are good

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

they are good

any alterations to recommend?

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

they are good

what from your suits would ye recommend I implement into the designs?

 

[Michel Van]

what from your suits would ye recommend I implement into the designs?

the fold helmet
and way to attach the Portable Life support to suit, so Hero has both hand free.

On the selenites
the design is good keep it

 

[southwestforests]

so Hero has both hand free.

Speaking of hands, go back a few posts and see the 4 references in my "Part 2" post Friday at 14:56 - hands have been a long running issue with spacesuits.

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Speaking of hands, go back a few posts and see the 4 references in my "Part 2" post Friday at 14:56 - hands have been a long running issue with spacesuits.

well, in the original plans and on the actually made reproduction of the suit, there were two layers to the gloves, like the apollo suits. The first layer, pictured first, was to be a rubber glove, very tight like a surgical glove. The second layer would be a mitten the same colour as the suit.
this is the mitten, egress/ingress instructions still visible on the left

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

the fold helmet
and way to attach the Portable Life support to suit, so Hero has both hand free.

On the selenites
the design is good keep it

righto, I'll see what I can do, the finished outcome will likely be the dark blue garment I posted earlier with your helmet pretty much, also should it have a life jacket?

 

[Michel Van]

it have a life jacket?

Is there any ocean on Moon or Mars ?
otherwise it make only sense for Launch and landing on Earth...

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Is there any ocean on Moon or Mars ?
otherwise it make only sense for Launch and landing on Earth...

well, thats the intention of the craft, just a simple LEO crew ferry, that can go to the moon at a pinch, with some orbital refuelling, and land on skis for a swift crew rotation of the lunar colony.

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Is there any ocean on Moon or Mars ?
otherwise it make only sense for Launch and landing on Earth...

also, how exactly would an orbital tanker work? The period books from the BIS and their members I have vaguely discuss it, but not the nitty gritty, any help?

 

[southwestforests]

but not the nitty gritty, any help?

While whether it can be scientifically documented as 'help' could be its own conversation, my thoughts are practical experience would soon show that those looping hoses which look so dynamic in static art are a cumbersome danger in zero-G as they drift and wobble from the forces both of the hose material itself and the pressure of fuel or oxidizer being pumped through them.

Have thought that since years ago coming across the following artwork.
What the crew is doing there is just plain dangerous.
Dynamic illustration yes, true.
Risky and unwise in real life as forces are applied and objects move, absolutely.

So, there therefore must be another way to do the task without introducing loose hose ends wiggling around near hull skins and viewports and space helmet faceplates.

(and there's a lot of potential waste of valuable fuel and oxidizer in that hose length below, too)
(how does one get all the liquid within that hose length back in to the facility tanks or onward in to the rocket's tanks?)

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

While whether it can be scientifically documented as 'help' could be its own conversation, my thoughts are practical experience would soon show that those looping hoses which look so dynamic in static art are a cumbersome danger in zero-G as they drift and wobble from the forces both of the hose material itself and the pressure of fuel or oxidizer being pumped through them.

Have thought that since years ago coming across the following artwork.
What the crew is doing there is just plain dangerous.
Dynamic illustration yes, true.
Risky and unwise in real life as forces are applied and objects move, absolutely.

So, there therefore must be another way to do the task without introducing loose hose ends wiggling around near hull skins and viewports and space helmet faceplates.

View attachment 728757

I see, well I am trying to stick to the ideas laid down by the BIS, so how would you recommend I go about this, as the start of the game does require some orbital refuelling. How about we start with how such a tanker rocket would work?

 

[southwestforests]

ideas laid down by the BIS

I am not familiar with the details of BIS ideas other than a few illustration of ships and spacesuits, and hence do not know what to suggest that would fit the setting.

My own ideas are two:

Hard docking of the craft to be fuelled, with short fuel and oxidizer transfer probes and fittings being part of the docking mechanism.

or,

modular and transferable fuel and oxidizer containers,

both as in the following real world space refuelling concept art,

(which of course introduce their own sets of hazards and failure points, but, hey, you Will have hazards and failure points, the trick is to select them wisely)

fut-unk_v_c_o_EKC (ca. 1960-62, unnumbered NASA-MSFC photo, verso hand-annotated 2-205-1) by Mike Acs, on Flickr


fut-unk_v_c_o_EKC (ca. 1960-62, unnumbered NASA photo, verso hand-annotated 2-205-7) by Mike Acs, on Flickr

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

I am not familiar with the details of BIS ideas other than a few illustration of ships and spacesuits, and hence do not know what to suggest that would fit the setting.

My own ideas are two:

Hard docking of the craft to be fuelled, with short fuel and oxidizer transfer probes and fittings being part of the docking mechanism.

or,

modular and transferable fuel and oxidizer containers,

both as in the following real world space refuelling concept art,

(which of course introduce their own sets of hazards and failure points, but, hey, you Will have hazards and failure points, the trick is to select them wisely)

fut-unk_v_c_o_EKC (ca. 1960-62, unnumbered NASA-MSFC photo, verso hand-annotated 2-205-1) by Mike Acs, on Flickr


fut-unk_v_c_o_EKC (ca. 1960-62, unnumbered NASA photo, verso hand-annotated 2-205-7) by Mike Acs, on Flickr

hang on, I just found my copy of AC Clarke's "the exploration of the moon", lets see what it has to say

"Once the tankers had been successfully placed in their orbit, the next step would be to fly up to one of the piloted rockets to "home" on them. When a rendezvous had been made with one of the tankers, the crew of the rocket plan would leave their ship and couple up the two vessels by means of a pipeline. Fuel would then be pumped across from the tanker into the manned rocket"

It also mentions that the process of using either gas-pressure or pumping would cause the two craft to drive away from each other, due to the pipeline straightening, so he suggests the practice of "lashing the them together before pumping began".

what do you make of this?

 

[Michel Van]

There several system to pump propellant into Spaceship
the question is what propellant ?

the Russian use gas pressure to transfer hyperbolic at room temperature

with cryogenic propellants this method not work well
you need pumps to transfer the propellants (spaceX tested that on Flight-3)
here you need rendezvous system also docking system for transfer the propellants, Pumps and little rocket engines.
those push the dock spacecraft forward were propellants sink down in tank to collect by Pump.

 

[southwestforests]

what do you make of this?

I make of that what I started post #265 with,

... my thoughts are practical experience would soon show that those looping hoses which look so dynamic in static art are a cumbersome danger in zero-G as they drift and wobble from the forces both of the hose material itself and the pressure of fuel or oxidizer being pumped through them.

The "lashing the them together before pumping began" falls within the things which I expect practical experience would soon lead to a better way to do.

Okay, you've got your craft lashed, you've got your fuel pumped.
Now you need to:
de-tension the hose
disconnect the hose
(while doing the above, what becomes of the tension on those lashings?)
recover and stow the hose
de-tension the probably several lashings
disconnect the probably several lashings
recover and stow the lashings

... all of which are presented as manual labor which eats up time, physical energy, and spacesuit consumables.
as well as adding usage wear to the spacesuits
(with each of those operations introducing multiple points where spacesuits could be damaged and personnel harmed or lost)

... all of which costs resources, which have to be transported to space, and ultimately money.
now, true, if you are already transporting fuel to the space-borne refueling facility those things above can be added
except that every bit of mass beyond the necessary load of refueling fuel itself requires some quantity albeit small of additional spacecraft structure/mass which then requires additional fuel to transport
and man-hours to manage once it arrives

... therefore, hard docking with automated processes would soon be developed.
true, the automation machinery requires servicing and maintenance
but you can arrange the hardware where a good portion of it can be serviced from pressurized compartments.

Additional ponderings:

My Dad was in the USN during the Cold War where fuel transfer between ships was very much a manual process with hoses and lashings.
Space is not the sea.
Spacecraft involved in coming together for a refueling will not each have independent motions induced by wave and wind.
Therefore refuelling in space will not look like refuelling at sea.

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

There several system to pump propellant into Spaceship
the question is what propellant ?

the Russian use gas pressure to transfer hyperbolic at room temperature

with cryogenic propellants this method not work well
you need pumps to transfer the propellants (spaceX tested that on Flight-3)
here you need rendezvous system also docking system for transfer the propellants, Pumps and little rocket engines.
those push the dock spacecraft forward were propellants sink down in tank to collect by Pump.

which method would ye recommend for LOx and Ethanol? also, I do believe the tankers and by extension the gliders themselves have a rudimentary form of RCS, the ones along the bottom are for roll and the top ones for pitch and yaw, so these should prove adequate for the Ullage

 

[southwestforests]

Also, as I wait for lunch to cook, the following thoughts,

the sooner one automates the refuelling process, the sooner one slows down the count of airlock cycles it takes to get six to a dozen laborers out there and back in.
(going by the numbers in the several posted illustrations)
Every airlock cycle induces wear on both the mechanism and the structure & potentially wastes at least a little bit of atmosphere to space.

true, using the automated refuelling system by definition induces wear on it, but, do you want to eventually replace refuelling system components or stress-cycle fatigued airlock walls?

and using automation also reduces the number of humans necessary for the process. One would really only want to have to pay the minimally necessary mass and money required to house and sustain humans in space.

and the more refuelling laborers you have out there exerting themselves and getting sweaty in their spacesuits, the more water mass you are going to dirty then need to consume energy to clean and recycle, as they clean their sweaty selves and undergarments.

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

The "lashing the them together before pumping began" falls within the things which I expect practical experience would soon lead to a better way to do.

I'm not sure, most of the schemes that I'm sticking to rely more on manoeuvring into close proximity to the object rather than docking to it, which applies for orbital construction as well as refuelling, so I'm not sure here

Okay, you've got your craft lashed, you've got your fuel pumped.
Now you need to:
de-tension the hose
disconnect the hose
(while doing the above, what becomes of the tension on those lashings?)
recover and stow the hose
de-tension the probably several lashings
disconnect the probably several lashings
recover and stow the lashings

...that seems like a reasonable checklist of things for the player to do.

therefore, hard docking with automated processes would soon be developed.
true, the automation machinery requires servicing and maintenance
but you can arrange the hardware where a good portion of it can be serviced from pressurized compartments.

I honestly doubt if such systems would be developed, as for example the BIS space station can't really dock with anything, it just has an airlock for the astronauts. Considering that Ross and Smith's likely inspiration for such a feat was Air-to-Air refuelling, I don't think they would even consider that such systems would even be developed, nor did any scientist of the period as I can find no record of them in either them or Von braun's schemes of the same time

all of which are presented as manual labor which eats up time, physical energy, and spacesuit consumables.
as well as adding usage wear to the spacesuits
(with each of those operations introducing multiple points where spacesuits could be damaged and personnel harmed or lost)

...hmm, well regular suit servicing could solve the wear and tear issue, especially with the BIC's launch cadences warranting such a procedure be regularly carried out. As for the physical energy and suit consumables, considering this is a world where lunar spacesuits can carry up to 12 hours of oxygen, plus a little more reclaimed from CO2 and moisture, I'd say that the 7 hours in the earth orbit suits would probably suffice for this task, which would probably be carried out in about 2-3 hours, but due to the average gamer having the attention-span of a hyper-active amoeba, I'd probably have to get the segment done in about 15 minutes...

 

[Michel Van]

which method would ye recommend for LOx and Ethanol?

Lox Methan
is more powerful as Lox/Ethanol or Lox/kerosine.
can be stored up to 115 days in space with good Isolation.
and can be produce on Mars or C-type asteroids
Lox can manufacture on Moon

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Lox Methan
is more powerful as Lox/Ethanol or Lox/kerosine.
can be stored up to 115 days in space with good Isolation.
and can be produce on Mars or C-type asteroids
Lox can manufacture on Moon

well, this is the 40s and 50s, so really the only two kinds of fuel would be Ethalox or Hypergols, so not a lot of options

 

[southwestforests]

but due to the average gamer

...that seems like a reasonable checklist of things for the player to do.

Ah, I'd forgotten there was a game involved in this.



And speaking of games, "Thanks" to the effects of having acquired ME/CFS in early 2000s my ability to maintain focus on board games or miniatures games or role playing games is pretty much gone.
In earlier times much enjoyed Starfire; Star Fleet Battles; Full Thrust; ICE's Silent Death; and a number of others which have since been given away or sold.
Do still possess Starfire, and fun little retro sci-fi miniatures game pair from here in the 2000s titled Retro Raygun and War Rocket.

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Ah, I'd forgotten there was a game involved in this.



And speaking of games, "Thanks" to the effects of having acquired ME/CFS in early 2000s my ability to maintain focus on board games or miniatures games or role playing games is pretty much gone.
In earlier times much enjoyed Starfire; Star Fleet Battles; Full Thrust; ICE's Silent Death; and a number of others which have since been given away or sold.
Do still possess Starfire, and fun little retro sci-fi miniatures game pair from here in the 2000s titled Retro Raygun and War Rocket.

Oh, this is for a video game, not board game, lol

 

[southwestforests]

Oh, this is for a video game, not board game, lol

Guess that's a result of having been a child and young adult in the 60's, 70's, early 80's, and of my natural inclination to want physical objects, to this day, even with having and using Trainz railroad simulator, video games usually simply do not come to mind, only board, miniature, and RPGs come to mind when games are considered.

Alright, enough digression about that/me, on with the topic!

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Guess that's a result of having been a child and young adult in the 60's, 70's, early 80's, and of my natural inclination to want physical objects, to this day, even with having and using Trainz railroad simulator, video games usually simply do not come to mind, only board, miniature, and RPGs come to mind when games are considered.

Alright, enough digression about that/me, on with the topic!

True lol, so, what think to the above arguments I posted?

 

[southwestforests]

so, what think to the above arguments I posted?

Things both direct and indirect come to mind.

A direct one being that, as noted, doing the manual refuelling steps/process would give player interaction with the game, and perhaps with other players too. With room for both player roles and NPC roles.

Indirect there comes to mind that Trainz railroad simulator/game. It has player involvement at different levels all the way from personally operating locomotives, to scheduling/dispatching/routing traffic, to planning economies. I like how a good percentage of the various locomotives offer choice of actually driving the train with the cab controls, or, operating it more simply with a model train set style controller.
As a third option there is a place to set up a string of control commands for the simulator/game AI to follow in driving, routing, loading and unloading a train.

I do not know how well tabletop RPG processes translate to computer games nor do I know what computer game players want from a game.
But, and yes, of course to a point which it is possible to exceed, it is the doing of actions which is interesting.
Within that doing,
sometimes you want to go collect the fuel and go snare the game for supper, and sometimes you want to just note that supper happened and get on with the plot.

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

sometimes you want to go collect the fuel and go snare the game for supper, and sometimes you want to just note that supper happened and get on with the plot.

too true matey, there is a limit to this kind of stuff before the player gets bored stiff, lol.

A direct one being that, as noted, doing the manual refuelling steps/process would give player interaction with the game, and perhaps with other players too. With room for both player roles and NPC roles.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I have planned, for example the player can actually drive the moon-tank over the surface of the moon for about 5-10 mins (with aid from a micro-film gps idea I came up with, but we can get to that later), plus rights at the games' end, the player must manually do a few reentry skips, interstellar style ("no... it's necessary").

I do not know how well tabletop RPG processes translate to computer games nor do I know what computer game players want from a game.

I'm not sure either, but the game should take after games like Half-Life, Wolfenstein and Left 4 Dead 2, if you are of course familiar with these titles.

 

[martinbayer]

Dear Mr. Kind Sir Astronautics Gentleman, I think it would really enormously help to speed this discussion along if you would just plainly lay out the *exact* goals, assumptions and conditions, e.g. in terms of technology maturity (such as in terms of NASA TRLs, if possible) or otherwise, operational scenario (i.e. CONOPS), original time line departure point, and ultimate objective(s) of your game plan, as well as any other boundary conditions and constraints you consider vital (such as perhaps the existence of (moody teenage?) vampires, zombies, werewolves, (thermo)nuclear/antimatter power, clairvoyance, Harry Pottery, etc.), because otherwise this discussion will end up as just another grabbing in the dark exercise, and I won't partake in any of those anymore, thank you oh so much. And no, I have no familiarity whatsoever with any socalled "games" like Half-Life, Wolfenstein, or Left 4 Dead 2 (and why would anybody possibly be left for dead twice ???)...

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Dear Mr. Kind Sir Gentleman Astronautics, I think it would really enormously help to speed this discussion along if you would just plainly lay out the *exact* scenario, departure point, and objective of your game plan, as well as any boundary conditions and constraints you consider vital, because otherwise this discussion will end up as just another grabbing in the dark exercise, and I won't partake in any of those anymore.

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

the *exact* scenario, departure point

you mean the precise departure point from history, I assume? In that case, the lore starts in the 1850s with the discovery of Vulcan, but doesn't kick off until WW2 has concluded.
Britain becomes the first to break the sound barrier in 1946 in the Miles M.52, and this makes it so Britain becomes a bit more open to the idea of more wacky projects. They conduct operation backfire, as in our timeline, but then the project comes under the control of the British Interplanetary Society, as they have special permission to construct a man-carrying missile, known as Project Megaroc.

A group of astronauts are recruited from the finest flyers of the RAF and the RAE, the MC of the game among them, one Wg Cdr David Rathbone. These would be the "megaroc men"

The MC is selected for the first manned flight of the megaroc in November of 1947, which goes smoothly. At the same time, the soviets and Americans, not wishing to be outdone by the british, launch their own manned missiles a few weeks later, on much more impressive trajectories, but still suborbital.

This new, albeit brief, venture out into the frontier spurs on the development of rocketry no end, and is a massive morale booster for the british people. Clement Attlee makes a speech on the night of April 30th, 1948, stating that, " I wish to see the heavens crossed in the name of the scientific benefit of man, and for the betterment mankind itself "

This marks the beginning of the Space Race. On 23rd April, 1948, after the soaring success of the first 3 manned flights to space, the first International Spaceflight Conference is convened in Washington, at the Americans behest. Major figures from RaketaKosmos, the BIC and NACA are all in attendance. The conference was held to determine the place man fills in the heavens, and the future direction of the world’s space programs.After much deliberation over the course of 2 days, major scientific figures and politicians agreed that Space should be International Waters, and that man should set his eyes on the Ultimate goal, The Moon.Instantly, papers across were thrown into a frenzy of excitement, as at last, the space age had come

What followed was a series of firsts that I shall write in a date format, as this description is getting a bit long

- July -1949: First satellite (UK)
- August 1951: first orbital flight of a man (USSR)
- November 1951: first Englishman in orbit
- February 1953: First spacewalk (US)
- May 1953: First rendezvous in space (UK, between rocket-plane and radio beacon)
- October 1954: First flight around the moon (US)
- November 1954: First soft landing on the moon (USSR)
- January 1955: First deep-space EVA (UK)
- June 1955: first interplanetary object (US- Venus Express)
- September 1955: US and UK announce joint lunar mission after individual national landings, invitation extended to Soviets
- December 1955: First Manned Lunar Landing (UK)
- April 1956: First Soviet lunar landing
- July 1956: first American lunar landing and longest duration lunar landing
- September 1957: construction of national lunar bases begins
- March 1958: Point Prospero is activated in BIC service, acting as a proto-colony and testing station

- December 18th 1958: game takes place

Sufficient enough info for the scenario? And what do you mean for the Games primary objective?

 

[martinbayer]

Agreed, wholeheartedly.


you mean the precise departure point from history, I assume? In that case, the lore starts in the 1850s with the discovery of Vulcan, but doesn't kick off until WW2 has concluded.
Britain becomes the first to break the sound barrier in 1946 in the Miles M.52, and this makes it so Britain becomes a bit more open to the idea of more wacky projects. They conduct operation backfire, as in our timeline, but then the project comes under the control of the British Interplanetary Society, as they have special permission to construct a man-carrying missile, known as Project Megaroc.

A group of astronauts are recruited from the finest flyers of the RAF and the RAE, the MC of the game among them, one Wg Cdr David Rathbone. These would be the "megaroc men"

The MC is selected for the first manned flight of the megaroc in November of 1947, which goes smoothly. At the same time, the soviets and Americans, not wishing to be outdone by the british, launch their own manned missiles a few weeks later, on much more impressive trajectories, but still suborbital.

This new, albeit brief, venture out into the frontier spurs on the development of rocketry no end, and is a massive morale booster for the british people. Clement Attlee makes a speech on the night of April 30th, 1948, stating that, " I wish to see the heavens crossed in the name of the scientific benefit of man, and for the betterment mankind itself "

This marks the beginning of the Space Race. On 23rd April, 1948, after the soaring success of the first 3 manned flights to space, the first International Spaceflight Conference is convened in Washington, at the Americans behest. Major figures from RaketaKosmos, the BIC and NACA are all in attendance. The conference was held to determine the place man fills in the heavens, and the future direction of the world’s space programs.After much deliberation over the course of 2 days, major scientific figures and politicians agreed that Space should be International Waters, and that man should set his eyes on the Ultimate goal, The Moon.Instantly, papers across were thrown into a frenzy of excitement, as at last, the space age had come

What followed was a series of firsts that I shall write in a date format, as this description is getting a bit long

- July -1949: First satellite (UK)
- August 1951: first orbital flight of a man (USSR)
- November 1951: first Englishman in orbit
- February 1953: First spacewalk (US)
- May 1953: First rendezvous in space (UK, between rocket-plane and radio beacon)
- October 1954: First flight around the moon (US)
- November 1954: First soft landing on the moon (USSR)
- January 1955: First deep-space EVA (UK)
- June 1955: first interplanetary object (US- Venus Express)
- September 1955: US and UK announce joint lunar mission after individual national landings, invitation extended to Soviets
- December 1955: First Manned Lunar Landing (UK)
- April 1956: First Soviet lunar landing
- July 1956: first American lunar landing and longest duration lunar landing
- September 1957: construction of national lunar bases begins
- March 1958: Point Prospero is activated in BIC service, acting as a proto-colony and testing station

- December 18th 1958: game takes place

Sufficient enough info for the scenario? And what do you mean for the Games primary objective?

Nice work!

Two questions:

1. What is this Vulcan that you speak of - I presume it's not Spock ?

2. Why on Earth (pun intended) would an International Spaceflight Conference randomly/timidly/myopicly decree the Moon to be the *ultimate* goal of human spaceflight - what about all the other bodies in the Solar System, most notably Mars, not to mention the rest of the universe?

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

1. What is this Vulcan that you speak of - I presume it's not Spock ?

Oh, I meant the hypothetical planet Vulcan, the one discovered by Le Verrier in 1859, that orbited inside mercury's orbit..

2. Why on Earth (pun intended) would an International Spaceflight Conference randomly/timidly/myopicly decree the Moon to be the *ultimate* goal of human spaceflight - what about all the other bodies in the Solar System, most notably Mars, not to mention the rest of the universe?

nice pun lol, anyways I believe I didn't phrase it right. I meant that they decreed that the moon would be the target of earthly exploration and observation first, then the other planets would be explored, as this was deemed a "testing the waters of manned planetary landings" type deal.

Nice work!

thanks, is it a wholly sensible timeline?

 

[martinbayer]

thanks, is it a wholly sensible timeline?

Extremely ambitious, but in my view not utopian. If it's a truly international high priority effort, the Manhattan Project could serve as a blueprint.

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

Highly ambitious, but not utopian. If it's a truly international high priority effort, the Manhattan Project could serve as a blueprint.

probably, national prestige is at stake, like the nuclear arms race, but more civilian and science oriented, everyone wants to make the next big contribution to the Next Frontier. You would be right on the mahanttan project, I'll look into that. As for the Utopian stuff, I wanted it to certainly be a better timeline, though its possibly a tad bit worse in a couple of ways, the NHS wasn't introduced until like 1957, for example

I have no familiarity whatsoever with any socalled "games" like Half-Life, Wolfenstein, or Left 4 Dead 2 (and why would anybody possibly be left for dead twice ???)...

Essentially, what I meant by this was that these were all fairly linear, story driven games, which is precisely the angle of attack I wish to position the game in, sorry for the confusion, lol. And what do you mean by the Game's primary objective?

 

[martinbayer]

Essentially, what I meant by this was that these were all fairly linear, story driven games, which is precisely the angle of attack I wish to position the game in, sorry for the confusion, lol. And what do you mean by the Game's primary objective?

What exactly is the ultimate game over mission accomplished endpoint?

 

[Gentleman’s Astronautics]

What exactly is the ultimate game over mission accomplished endpoint?

Basically, either vanquish the martian foe in any which way that you can (linking up with the selenites to eliminate whatever martians lurk in the moons' interior) or to try and delay and kill as many of the enemy as you can in a hasty retreat (linking up with the survivors to blow up the nuclear reactor and bid a hasty retreat back to earth)