What if the Space Race took place in the 1900s?

[fredinno]

OK, so we've been working out a story for this:

and we kind of hit a roadblock. We need an alternate space race between two nations to begin space operations around 1900. I've done a bit of research- though the tech is fine (for the most part), the development of rockets and space tech to nail everything out would take some time, along with the completion and advancement of tech such as turbopumps, better SRB and LRB propellants, and computers to make it happen.

The rival nations would likely be Britain + ?. Britain + US is out, since Britain wasn't really willing to fight against the Americans at the time. The Boer Wars and the beginning of Irish Nationalism would also be factors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radio#19th_century

The first accomplishment might start in 1900 with the creation of the first wireless telegraph signal from a successful sounding rocket launch, something that appears to be (barely possible), and either finishing up by 1915, just as WW1 begins, or by 1910, depending on how far we want to take this tech.

The end might be the first Man in space, before winding down to basic satellites until the V2 in WW2.

Thank you in advance.

 

Rules:

No technologies that require a POD before 1800.

No nukes.

No advanced computers. (Analog only)

Nothing developed after 1940 in OTL.

Something in space before 1900.

Some kind of manned orbital spaceflight before 1910.

No cancelling any major wars.

 

Edited March 4, 2016 by fredinno

[UmbralRaptor]

A race for more impressive sounding rockets? A somewhat obvious choice would be to model it on the shipbuilding arms race circa 1906-1914. (Britain vs Germany for the big rivalry, but several other countries involved to varying degrees)

[SinBad]

I think china or japan (i believe japan was tech-ing up at this point?) Because they already had rockets, vrs germany because they were leading in industrialisation. That and it would be nice to see this kind of story without a 'USA vrs Someothercountry' tag line.

now:
For really cool stuff, edit out the 800 years of no science that the dark ages gave us. That puts the space race AnyWhen you like in the last 800 years. May i suggest the colonial expansion era that saw britain, france, spain and portugul land grabbing every island and continent they could plant a flag on?

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by SinBad
spelling

[RizzoTheRat]

I think you'd do well to look at the build up to WW1.  As UmbralRaptor said there was a shipbuilding arms race going on with Britain as the dominant power and wanting to keep it that way, and threatening to blockade the German coast, causing massive economic damage, if Germany tried to get involved in the Boer war, resulting in the Germans expanding their navy to try and prevent it, and Britain building more to compensate.

The main European power blocks before WW1 were the Triple Alliance of Italy, German and Austro-Hungary, and the Triple Entente of Britain, Russia and France, but prior to 1907 Britain was keeping out of European affairs with our policy of "Splendid Isolation", so you need to be careful on your timings.

There's also the Russian instigated 1899 international peace conference in the Hauge (the Peace Palace is well worth a visit if you're ever over here) which could be a useful plot point.

 

China was pretty much screwed and controlled by other countries at the turn of the century, and scuffling with Japan over Korea. 

No idea if America had much interest in world affairs at the time.

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by RizzoTheRat

[Spaceception]

Hello, I'm one of the participants of this subject, but I wanted to continue this discussion with my thoughts anyway

I'd think;

Would war 1 would be the war that see's missiles

Shortly after or before ww1 there would be a man in orbit using steampunk rockets

Shortly before of after ww2 there would be satellites in orbit still likely with steampunk

By 1969 we would have colonies on the Moon, Aurora, Mars, Bellona, and Venus, as well as orbital colonies (Normal rockets at this point)

We would use Nuclear pulse propulsion, Nuclear thermal rockets, and Solar electric propulsion to traverse the solar system

We may even see space based Solar arrays in orbit, beaming power to Earth

By 2000 most the world would be at peace, and more than 70% of countries have the ability to launch humans to the Moon.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Spaceception

[RizzoTheRat]

Is it really right to assume WW1 and WW2 take place as they did?  The space race was a proxy for US/Soviet cold war/WW3.  If you're suggesting a man in orbit before WW1 then you're looking at (non nuclear) ICBM's before that, which would possibly spark a cold war rather than WW2 or maybe even WW1. 

Don't forget the other technologies that were developed before space travel either.  If you're assuming the technology to put rockets in to space before 1914 then you're probably also looking at much more advanced aircraft, meaning the trench warfare of WW1 would probably be a much more mobile war, probably with much lower attrition as a result.  WW1 resulted in 17 Million dead and 20 Million wounded, with the main combatants losing 2-5%  of their population, and some countries hitting 5 times this figure.  Reducing those casualties would have changed the post war situation a lot.

Plus we still have the British empire, which totalled around 1/5 of the worlds population at the time.  With the advanced industrialisation I'd assume you need to kick off the space race, that would mean an absolutely insane manufacturing base.  As anyone who's ever played Civilisation will tell you, controlling that much of the globe in an industrialised world means nobody stands in your way.   However would the earlier modernisation have brought forward the collapse of the British Empire?

[tater]

The Space Race did take place in the 1900s.

Just not the year 1900.

[kerbiloid]

It would be difficult to build a spacerocket made of cast iron and rivet steel, as both alumina electrolysis and arc welding have appeared after WWI.

Also probably the very first attempts would be made with the smokeless powder solid fuel motors, as IRL, because it would take decades to create more or less powerfull liquid fuel engine.
Imagine that: both US & SU had their nuclear reactors (and more-or-less bombs) working in 1940s, while the primitive alcoholic V-2 was an outstanding thing for them both.

So, the first 20 years of 1900 space race would be dedicated to unproductive attempts to launch a rocketplane-shaped ironclad, full of rivets and tamped with powder.
Then there would be 1930s and fantasy coalesce with IRL-history.
 

[insert_name]

I suggest cutting out part of the dark ages and thus updating the tech by a bit, 1900s tech isn't gonna work 

[HebaruSan]

9 hours ago, RizzoTheRat said:

No idea if America had much interest in world affairs at the time.

Just starting to. The 1898 Spanish-American War gave the US control of Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, the first time it held territory outside of mainland North America (you historians can step in here if I'm missing one). The US acquired the Panama Canal Zone in 1903, and the canal itself was built 1904-1914. It kind of snowballed from there.

In any case, if the question is "Britain versus", the answer has to be "Germany". And I would recommend reading Jules Verne to get a sense of nineteenth century sci fi. He even wrote a moon mission story in 1865.

[RizzoTheRat]

Didn't realise they got involved in South America that early on.  Bearing in mind they stayed neutral in WW1 until 3 years in when the German U-boat campaign against convoys got going, would they have been interested in an arms/shipbuilding/space race the other side of the Atlantic.

Not read From the Earth to the Moon in years, and of course it's available for free on the Kindle store.  Downloaded!

[wumpus]

[UK's Rival] The Germans (and their chemical engineering) would presumably be the only choice.  You might want to just further massage reality and let France compete, but I really don't think anyone (even the US) could challenge England in 1900.

I spent far too long in the "beat Sputnik" thread and came to the conclusion that it would be prohibitively difficult to do such much before 1950.  Remember, in 1900 aerodynamics simply wasn't understood: the Wright brothers had to build their own windtunnel.  This gave them answers that were horribly wrong (the scaling gave them answers for a "mollasesphere" worse than the "souposphere" of <1.0.0) but still better than any available science.

Since you obviously have to change the society and technology, can you cheat a little bit more and put them on a planet like Kerbal?  On such a planet, the Baltimore Gun Club could build a cannon that shot a [young] Goddard-designed rocket at ~1500m/s.  The rocket would then only need a further 1500m/s of delta-v and such might be possible with black powder alone (although double base propellants should be available).  I seriously doubt that 1900 tech will get you to 9000 m/s (it would likely work under the "beat sputnik" rules since you would have a completely tested design handed to your 1900s engineers.  Building such without computer design and testing is another story, see above lack of wind tunnels for a single example).

[fredinno]

18 hours ago, SinBad said:

I think china or japan (i believe japan was tech-ing up at this point?) Because they already had rockets, vrs germany because they were leading in industrialisation. That and it would be nice to see this kind of story without a 'USA vrs Someothercountry' tag line.

now:
For really cool stuff, edit out the 800 years of no science that the dark ages gave us. That puts the space race AnyWhen you like in the last 800 years. May i suggest the colonial expansion era that saw britain, france, spain and portugul land grabbing every island and continent they could plant a flag on?

 

Nah, removing the dark ages would be too difficult, changing centuries of history.

 

5 hours ago, wumpus said:

[UK's Rival] The Germans (and their chemical engineering) would presumably be the only choice.  You might want to just further massage reality and let France compete, but I really don't think anyone (even the US) could challenge England in 1900.

I spent far too long in the "beat Sputnik" thread and came to the conclusion that it would be prohibitively difficult to do such much before 1950.  Remember, in 1900 aerodynamics simply wasn't understood: the Wright brothers had to build their own windtunnel.  This gave them answers that were horribly wrong (the scaling gave them answers for a "mollasesphere" worse than the "souposphere" of <1.0.0) but still better than any available science.

Since you obviously have to change the society and technology, can you cheat a little bit more and put them on a planet like Kerbal?  On such a planet, the Baltimore Gun Club could build a cannon that shot a [young] Goddard-designed rocket at ~1500m/s.  The rocket would then only need a further 1500m/s of delta-v and such might be possible with black powder alone (although double base propellants should be available).  I seriously doubt that 1900 tech will get you to 9000 m/s (it would likely work under the "beat sputnik" rules since you would have a completely tested design handed to your 1900s engineers.  Building such without computer design and testing is another story, see above lack of wind tunnels for a single example).

Would supersonic rockets be impossible then?

14 hours ago, Spaceception said:

Hello, I'm one of the participants of this subject, but I wanted to continue this discussion with my thoughts anyway

I'd think;

Would war 1 would be the war that see's missiles

Shortly after or before ww1 there would be a man in orbit using steampunk rockets

Shortly before of after ww2 there would be satellites in orbit still likely with steampunk

By 1969 we would have colonies on the Moon, Aurora, Mars, Bellona, and Venus, as well as orbital colonies (Normal rockets at this point)

We would use Nuclear pulse propulsion, Nuclear thermal rockets, and Solar electric propulsion to traverse the solar system

We may even see space based Solar arrays in orbit, beaming power to Earth

Interstellar travel would become a reality by 1980

By 2000 most the world would be at peace, and more than 70% of countries have the ability to launch humans to the Moon.

EDIT: Also, ww1/2 wouldn't last as long as OTL.

That's way too ambitious.

14 hours ago, RizzoTheRat said:

Is it really right to assume WW1 and WW2 take place as they did?  The space race was a proxy for US/Soviet cold war/WW3.  If you're suggesting a man in orbit before WW1 then you're looking at (non nuclear) ICBM's before that, which would possibly spark a cold war rather than WW2 or maybe even WW1. 

Don't forget the other technologies that were developed before space travel either.  If you're assuming the technology to put rockets in to space before 1914 then you're probably also looking at much more advanced aircraft, meaning the trench warfare of WW1 would probably be a much more mobile war, probably with much lower attrition as a result.  WW1 resulted in 17 Million dead and 20 Million wounded, with the main combatants losing 2-5%  of their population, and some countries hitting 5 times this figure.  Reducing those casualties would have changed the post war situation a lot.

Plus we still have the British empire, which totalled around 1/5 of the worlds population at the time.  With the advanced industrialisation I'd assume you need to kick off the space race, that would mean an absolutely insane manufacturing base.  As anyone who's ever played Civilisation will tell you, controlling that much of the globe in an industrialised world means nobody stands in your way.   However would the earlier modernisation have brought forward the collapse of the British Empire?

Well, Missles were not useful for military use until nukes were made.

11 hours ago, tater said:

The Space Race did take place in the 1900s.

Just not the year 1900.

Stop tryng to be clever.

8 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

It would be difficult to build a spacerocket made of cast iron and rivet steel, as both alumina electrolysis and arc welding have appeared after WWI.

Also probably the very first attempts would be made with the smokeless powder solid fuel motors, as IRL, because it would take decades to create more or less powerfull liquid fuel engine.
Imagine that: both US & SU had their nuclear reactors (and more-or-less bombs) working in 1940s, while the primitive alcoholic V-2 was an outstanding thing for them both.

So, the first 20 years of 1900 space race would be dedicated to unproductive attempts to launch a rocketplane-shaped ironclad, full of rivets and tamped with powder.
Then there would be 1930s and fantasy coalesce with IRL-history.
 

Nah, mass-production of cheap aluminum occured before 1900, 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History

and oxy-welding was invented in 1903, with arc welding a decade before then, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_welding#History

I think liquid engines could be made by 1905 (IRL 1920), the basic tech was there, thus allowing for gunpowder solid first stage rockets, with a liquid-fueled ground-lit core, probably using RP-1, which would be the fastest to implement due to being refined kerosene.

It would be possible, but that's why

8 hours ago, insert_name said:

I suggest cutting out part of the dark ages and thus updating the tech by a bit, 1900s tech isn't gonna work 

Well, I might be able to push a few tech up, but ChrisSpace is really the boss of this.

[tater]

45 minutes ago, fredinno said:

Stop tryng to be clever.

This didn't really require any effort.

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Nah, mass-production of cheap aluminum occured before 1900, 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium#History

and oxy-welding was invented in 1903, with arc welding a decade before then, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_welding#History

I think liquid engines could be made by 1905 (IRL 1920), the basic tech was there, thus allowing for gunpowder solid first stage rockets, with a liquid-fueled ground-lit core, probably using RP-1, which would be the fastest to implement due to being refined kerosene.

It would be possible, but that's why

Typical level of 1905 engineering looks like:

Not very close to a rocket engine of V-2 which had required efforts of whole Germany industry.

Gas welding quality is far from arc welding, though. Not that they would can into space.

[ChrisSpace]

21 hours ago, fredinno said:

We need an alternate space race between two nations to begin space operations around 1900. I've done a bit of research- though the tech is fine (for the most part), the development of rockets and space tech to nail everything out would take some time, along with the completion and advancement of tech such as turbopumps, better SRB and LRB propellants, and computers to make it happen.

The rival nations would likely be Britain + ?. Britain + US is out, since Britain wasn't really willing to fight against the Americans at the time. The Boer Wars and the beginning of Irish Nationalism would also be factors.

First, thanks for making a thread for this. As for who would be involved in the Space Race, here is some info I found:

https://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090826132944AArMEBc

https://www.makewav.es/story/374214/title/thegreatpowersineurope1900

https://www.quora.com/Who-were-the-most-powerful-countries-in-the-world-at-different-points-in-history

So overall we have a few other countries who could compete with the British, creating a space race consisting of multiple players.

21 hours ago, fredinno said:

The first accomplishment might start in 1900 with the creation of the first wireless telegraph signal from a successful sounding rocket launch

Wasn't radio already being used? Also, this timeline you've come up with is a bit late.

21 hours ago, UmbralRaptor said:

A race for more impressive sounding rockets? A somewhat obvious choice would be to model it on the shipbuilding arms race circa 1906-1914. (Britain vs Germany for the big rivalry, but several other countries involved to varying degrees)

So the motives here would be similar to that of the Space Race I suppose.

16 hours ago, Spaceception said:

Would war 1 would be the war that see's missiles

Shortly after or before ww1 there would be a man in orbit using steampunk rockets

Shortly before of after ww2 there would be satellites in orbit still likely with steampunk

By 1969 we would have colonies on the Moon, Aurora, Mars, Bellona, and Venus, as well as orbital colonies (Normal rockets at this point)

We would use Nuclear pulse propulsion, Nuclear thermal rockets, and Solar electric propulsion to traverse the solar system

We may even see space based Solar arrays in orbit, beaming power to Earth

Good, it sounds a bit like this: http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Space_Race_Didn't_End

16 hours ago, Spaceception said:

Interstellar travel would become a reality by 1980

By 2000 most the world would be at peace, and more than 70% of countries have the ability to launch humans to the Moon.

EDIT: Also, ww1/2 wouldn't last as long as OTL.

No, probably no and NO. Do you have any idea how big the interplanetary to interstellar jump is? It's about as big as the jump from intercontinental to interplanetary.

And why shorten the wars?

16 hours ago, RizzoTheRat said:

Is it really right to assume WW1 and WW2 take place as they did?  The space race was a proxy for US/Soviet cold war/WW3.  If you're suggesting a man in orbit before WW1 then you're looking at (non nuclear) ICBM's before that, which would possibly spark a cold war rather than WW2 or maybe even WW1.

WW 1 and 2 were both inevitable as direct conflicts.

10 hours ago, insert_name said:

I suggest cutting out part of the dark ages and thus updating the tech by a bit, 1900s tech isn't gonna work

You'd be surprised how capable 1900s tech is with this sort of thing.

7 hours ago, wumpus said:

[UK's Rival] The Germans (and their chemical engineering) would presumably be the only choice.  You might want to just further massage reality and let France compete, but I really don't think anyone (even the US) could challenge England in 1900.

The US had already surpassed Britain in population, and was rapidly growing.

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Nah, removing the dark ages would be too difficult, changing centuries of history.

Agreed.

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Well, Missles were not useful for military use until nukes were made.

Well, not necessarily. There are many other types of ICBMs that could have seen development.

1 hour ago, fredinno said:

Well, I might be able to push a few tech up, but ChrisSpace is really the boss of this.

Okay, how about I set some actual rules:

 

No technologies that require a POD before 1700.

No nukes.

No advanced computers.

Nothing developed after 1950 in OTL.

Something in space before 1895.

Some kind of manned orbital spaceflight before 1905.

Manned Luna and Aurora landings before 1935.

No cancelling any major wars.

At least 2 major spacefaring nations outside Europe (probably America and Japan or something).

[RizzoTheRat]

4 hours ago, fredinno said:

Well, Missles were not useful for military use until nukes were made.

Missiles weren't that useful for military use until decent rocket motors and guidance systems were made, both of which would be needed for a space race.  It just happens that this was about the same time as the nuclear bomb was developed.  A V1 or V2 with a decent guidance system would have been a devastating weapon, and don't forget that the same technology would give you accurate rocket artillery, much more advanced anti armour and anti ship weapons, plus you're a guidance/sensor development away from air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles

 

2 hours ago, ChrisSpace said:

Some kind of manned orbital spaceflight before 1905.

Manned Luna and Aurora landings before 1935.

No cancelling any major wars.

Fair enough for your storyline but I still think the difference in available technology would have a huge impact on how those wars were fought.  Just look at the different air power and armour made between WW1 and WW2 as it is.  I reckon there could be a fascinating side story there as an alternate history of the wars.

[Spaceception]

6 hours ago, ChrisSpace said:

First, thanks for making a thread for this. As for who would be involved in the Space Race, here is some info I found:

https://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090826132944AArMEBc

https://www.makewav.es/story/374214/title/thegreatpowersineurope1900

https://www.quora.com/Who-were-the-most-powerful-countries-in-the-world-at-different-points-in-history

So overall we have a few other countries who could compete with the British, creating a space race consisting of multiple players.

Wasn't radio already being used? Also, this timeline you've come up with is a bit late.

So the motives here would be similar to that of the Space Race I suppose.

Good, it sounds a bit like this: http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Space_Race_Didn't_End

No, probably no and NO. Do you have any idea how big the interplanetary to interstellar jump is? It's about as big as the jump from intercontinental to interplanetary.

And why shorten the wars?

WW 1 and 2 were both inevitable as direct conflicts.

You'd be surprised how capable 1900s tech is with this sort of thing.

The US had already surpassed Britain in population, and was rapidly growing.

Agreed.

Well, not necessarily. There are many other types of ICBMs that could have seen development.

Okay, how about I set some actual rules:

 

No technologies that require a POD before 1700.

No nukes.

No advanced computers.

Nothing developed after 1950 in OTL.

Something in space before 1895.

Some kind of manned orbital spaceflight before 1905.

Manned Luna and Aurora landings before 1935.

No cancelling any major wars.

At least 2 major spacefaring nations outside Europe (probably America and Japan or something).

Okay.

[lugge]

When you have your 1895-space-object and your 1905-man-in-space, THIS WILL have an impact on WW1 and WW2.

The events and technology would have been a game changer, changing all 20th century history.

I do not say there would have been no major wars. But they would be drastically different, maybe shorter, maybe more loses in WW1. Maybe different allys. Depending on who won the space race.

Consider this: if a huge ICBM, maybe even nuclear, had burnt some cities in WW1, there would be no WW2 because the cold war would have started right after WW1.

[DerekL1963]

On 3/2/2016 at 11:36 PM, fredinno said:

We need an alternate space race between two nations to begin space operations around 1900.

You run into the same problem you run into in the "beat Sputnick [sic]" discussion - the technologies needed don't even begin to arise before the 1920's/30's, and then from aviation.   You simply aren't going to cold start a Space Race in 1900 without serious alterations to the technological time line.

 

On 3/2/2016 at 11:36 PM, fredinno said:

I've done a bit of research- though the tech is fine (for the most part), the development of rockets and space tech to nail everything out would take some time, along with the completion and advancement of tech such as turbopumps, better SRB and LRB propellants, and computers to make it happen.

No, the tech isn't "fine for the most part".   You have no advanced welding until after WWI.  You have no serious aluminum industry until after WWI.  You don't have miniature vacuum tubes until practically WWII.  You don't have vacuum tubes designed for high stress environments until WWII.  You don't have high performance gyroscopes until right before WWI.   (These come out of aviation and submarine torpedo requirements.)   Etc... etc...

[wumpus]

12 hours ago, fredinno said:

Would supersonic rockets be impossible then?

Two issues: going supersonic and maintaining control after going supersonic.

Going supersonic.  No brainer, just add thrust.  Bullets were going supersonic in 1900 after all... You might find out that your control fins are a bad idea (eject them before going supersonic?) unless you know the one weird trick about SST aircraft...

Maintaining control.  You can only use fins for guidance past the sound barrier if you know about the cross-sectional rule.  Either way, you will have to be doing "proper rocket science" and balancing on your nozzle when you exit the atmosphere.  I remember hearing that the Germans knew about the cross-sectional rule during WWII (the V2 appears to follow it), while the war ended (and the X-1 had already flown) before Kelly Johnson knew why the P-38 lightning had control issues at speed.

A bit of googling has let me down.  I have no idea if Goddard produced rockets that broke the sound barrier.  Then again, I don't think Goddard ever dealt with control (other than straight up).  He may have been willing to simply let the get exactly on course from 0-500mph, then hopefully maintain course after that (spin stabalization should have been relatively easy).  Maintaining a gravity turn would be considerably more difficult, although since you need control out of the atmosphere, it might not matter so much if you switch to vector control inside the atmosphere after you approach the sound barrier.  - Note: In the "beat sputnik" thread, I assumed that the ancients wouldn't have a prayer of building a controllable nozzle (although the modern designers obviously have full modeling/wind tunnel apparatus), so it would essentially be the other way around: 1900 designers would have to build proper "rocket only" controls much earlier than Von Braun.

And yes, this is one tiny bit of rocket science the 1900 engineers need to know.  Probably one of the smallest details.  I'd really recommend having it happen on Kerbal (which lets you have proper steam-punk designs instead of "futuristic 1940s designs").

[HebaruSan]

10 minutes ago, DerekL1963 said:

No, the tech isn't "fine for the most part".

I guess it's worth asking what the point of this exercise is. I assumed it wasn't to create a setting with full 1960s tech and call it "1900" arbitrarily. Usually a story in Victorian times involves heavy, bulky machines made out of iron, wood, and brass belching out soot clouds, driven by mechanisms made from big gears and levers, which has a "cool factor" if it's doing something we know needs at least aluminum and vacuum tubes in real life.

Is technological development supposed to be accelerated? Or is earlier tech supposed to get the job done with hand-waving because steampunk is fun? I see some of each so far, and the feedback would probably be more helpful if the intended direction was more clear.

[wumpus]

4 hours ago, lugge said:

Consider this: if a huge ICBM, maybe even nuclear, had burnt some cities in WW1, there would be no WW2 because the cold war would have started right after WW1.

Google the Paris gun.  Same effect, lower cost (for non-nuclear ICBMs).

[insert_name]

I belive that due to the fact that Bellona would be visible orbiting mars, the heliocentric model would have been disproved sooner, making the scientific revolution happen sooner

[sevenperforce]

14 hours ago, fredinno said:

Well, Missles were not useful for military use until nukes were made.

Are we just ignoring the V1?