-
#400
by
madscientist197
on 13 Jan, 2010 10:06
-
Part of the problem is probably the old-fashioned Russian 'passing the buck' mentality, where the major players were more interesting in trying to put the blame elsewhere than finding out the truth.
-
#401
by
clongton
on 13 Jan, 2010 11:55
-
Part of the problem is probably the old-fashioned Russian 'passing the buck' mentality, where the major players were more interesting in trying to put the blame elsewhere than finding out the truth.
No. That statement does an injustice to the complexity of building a huge launch vehicle like the N-1 and the intellectual capability of our Russian counterparts as well as displaying a lack of understanding of how the Russian space program functioned under the Soviet Union. It was not pretty. At one time they put Korolov himself into a gulag in Siberia because he displeased the leaders. You didn't get rewarded for a job well done; you avoided prison.
They were required, under pain of extreme personal penalty, to make sure that a complex program that would take years to put together correctly and safely was flying in less than 1/2 the minimum necessary time. It was simply impossible to deliver. It is amazing that they had as much success as they did and speaks well of the determination and capability of their scientists and engineers.
Please give credit where credit is due.
-
#402
by
ckiki lwai
on 13 Jan, 2010 14:05
-
Part of the problem is probably the old-fashioned Russian 'passing the buck' mentality, where the major players were more interesting in trying to put the blame elsewhere than finding out the truth.
No. That statement does an injustice to the complexity of building a huge launch vehicle like the N-1 and the intellectual capability of our Russian counterparts as well as displaying a lack of understanding of how the Russian space program functioned under the Soviet Union. It was not pretty. At one time they put Korolov himself into a gulag in Siberia because he displeased the leaders. You didn't get rewarded for a job well done; you avoided prison.
That only happened under Stalin, way before the N-1.
The passing the bucket mentality seemed to be the case if you read Chertoks memoirs.
Unfortunately part IV where he talks about the N-1 isn't translated to English yet.
-
#403
by
clongton
on 13 Jan, 2010 15:28
-
Part of the problem is probably the old-fashioned Russian 'passing the buck' mentality, where the major players were more interesting in trying to put the blame elsewhere than finding out the truth.
No. That statement does an injustice to the complexity of building a huge launch vehicle like the N-1 and the intellectual capability of our Russian counterparts as well as displaying a lack of understanding of how the Russian space program functioned under the Soviet Union. It was not pretty. At one time they put Korolov himself into a gulag in Siberia because he displeased the leaders. You didn't get rewarded for a job well done; you avoided prison.
That only happened under Stalin, way before the N-1.
The passing the bucket mentality seemed to be the case if you read Chertoks memoirs.
Unfortunately part IV where he talks about the N-1 isn't translated to English yet.
"At one time they put Korolov himself into a gulag in Siberia because he displeased the leaders."
That is an historical fact. Look it up.
-
#404
by
kraisee
on 13 Jan, 2010 18:35
-
So, does anyone know about the oscillation?
Ross.
-
#405
by
Bernie Roehl
on 13 Jan, 2010 18:59
-
That only happened under Stalin, way before the N-1.
"At one time they put Korolov himself into a gulag in Siberia because he displeased the leaders."
That is an historical fact. Look it up.
You're both right, actually. Korolov was in fact imprisoned in a gulag in Siberia, but it was indeed under Stalin and long before the N-1. In fact, Korolov was released from the gulag in order to work on the Soviet space program. If it hadn't been for his technical skills, he probably would have died in prison.
-
#406
by
Bernie Roehl
on 13 Jan, 2010 19:03
-
So, does anyone know about the oscillation?
Ross.
Unfortunately, I think the answers is "no".
The launch was over 40 years ago, so the data probably no longer exists and many of the people who were involved with the project (and who might have had some insight into the problems) have long since passed away.
-
#407
by
sewand
on 14 Jan, 2010 03:37
-
-
#408
by
kraisee
on 15 Jan, 2010 04:27
-
Thanks sewand, that second link was to something I had not seen before. Much appreciated.
Ross.
-
#409
by
Nicolas PILLET
on 17 Feb, 2010 13:31
-
Hi everybody,
In the very good Russian book "Mirovaya Pilotiruyemaya Kosmonavtika", it is written the following about the aborted launch of spacecraft 7K-T n°39 ("Soyuz-18-1") :
on the 289th second of the flight, simultaneously with the stop of the 2nd stage engines, the control system send a wrong (several seconds before the planned time) command to jettison the 3rd stage's aft compartment
(page 237 of the book, it is my translation)
I don't understand that, because according to the document I join to this message, the 2nd stage is stopped at 285,05s, and the separation occurs at 287,29s.
So I list three possibilities :
- a mistake in the book
- a mistake in my document
- the chronology of the Soyuz launcher has changed since 1975, or the chronology is different on 11A511 and 11A511U.
Any idea on this ?
Thanks !
-
#410
by
TJL
on 19 Feb, 2010 16:43
-
I was wondering how it was determined whether a cosmonaut who has previously commanded an ISS expedition is assigned to a future ISS long duration crew as a Flight Engineer or Commander?
For example, while Yuri Malenchenko commanded Exp-7, served as F.E. on Exp-16 as well as being assigned as F.E. on Exp-32/33, Gennady Padalka was CDR on Exp-9 , flew as CDR on Exp-19/20 and assigned as CDR on Exp-32.
Is the CDR and F.E role assigned, or requested by the crew member?
Thank you.
-
#411
by
kevin-rf
on 01 Mar, 2010 13:08
-
This may be a bit off topic, but looking at the up and coming Sukhoi Superjet 100 it had me wondering.
Back during the cold war the west perception was that Russian Jet Engines where inferior to Western Jet Engines. At the same time Russian Rocket engines like the NK-33's and RD-170 are second to none.
Is there a reason why Russian rocket turbo machinery was second to none while aerospace turbo machinery was considered "not" up to par.
-
#412
by
Danderman
on 05 Mar, 2010 23:03
-
This may be a bit off topic, but looking at the up and coming Sukhoi Superjet 100 it had me wondering.
Back during the cold war the west perception was that Russian Jet Engines where inferior to Western Jet Engines. At the same time Russian Rocket engines like the NK-33's and RD-170 are second to none.
Is there a reason why Russian rocket turbo machinery was second to none while aerospace turbo machinery was considered "not" up to par.
Khruschev tended to starve Russian aviation while feeding Russian space system designers and manufacturers.
-
#413
by
Cog_in_the_machine
on 08 Mar, 2010 17:38
-
Does anyone know why oldschool russian rockets have that gap between stages? Is it to save weight?
-
#414
by
Jorge
on 08 Mar, 2010 17:39
-
Does anyone know why oldschool russian rockets have that gap between stages? Is it to save weight?
It is because they typically use "fire in the hole" staging rather than igniting after staging. The exhaust has to go somewhere.
-
#415
by
Cog_in_the_machine
on 08 Mar, 2010 17:43
-
Ahhhh, now it makes sense. Thanks Jorge
Besides firing the engines to push the stage away, what is the more common method?
Edit
Answered my own question - they use small explosive charges to push it away and then light the second stage.
-
#416
by
Jorge
on 08 Mar, 2010 18:01
-
Ahhhh, now it makes sense. Thanks Jorge
Besides firing the engines to push the stage away, what is the more common method?
Edit
Answered my own question - they use small explosive charges to push it away and then light the second stage.
Or pyros accompanied by small separation motors.
-
#417
by
Jim
on 08 Mar, 2010 18:19
-
Ahhhh, now it makes sense. Thanks Jorge
Besides firing the engines to push the stage away, what is the more common method?
Edit
Answered my own question - they use small explosive charges to push it away and then light the second stage.
Actually more common method is springs. Or retro motors to pull the jettisoned stage.
-
#418
by
Stan Black
on 08 Mar, 2010 20:14
-
Hi everybody,
In the very good Russian book "Mirovaya Pilotiruyemaya Kosmonavtika", it is written the following about the aborted launch of spacecraft 7K-T n°39 ("Soyuz-18-1") :
on the 289th second of the flight, simultaneously with the stop of the 2nd stage engines, the control system send a wrong (several seconds before the planned time) command to jettison the 3rd stage's aft compartment
(page 237 of the book, it is my translation)
I don't understand that, because according to the document I join to this message, the 2nd stage is stopped at 285,05s, and the separation occurs at 287,29s.
So I list three possibilities :
- a mistake in the book
- a mistake in my document
- the chronology of the Soyuz launcher has changed since 1975, or the chronology is different on 11A511 and 11A511U.
Any idea on this ?
Thanks !
After seperation, at 305 seconds the three piece KhO section (aft compartment) around the 3rd stage engines is jettisoned. Its the orange section above the lattice framework.
Just noticed you already asked this question?
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5174
-
#419
by
Stan Black
on 14 Mar, 2010 14:18
-
