Why Cosmonauts Have Never Splashed Down
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лют 2018
- Want weekly Vintage Space ? Don't forget to subscribe! / @amyshirateitel
I've got a more detailed look at the story of splashdowns v. land landings over on Vintage Space at Discover Magazine: blogs.discovermagazine.com/vin...
And more even older space in my book, BREAKING THE CHAINS OF GRAVITY! You can order your copy on Amazon: bit.ly/astbtcog
Or get a signed hardcover edition on my website! www.amyshirateitel.com/store.html - IT'S BACK ONLINE! :) (But orders are slow for the moment - waiting for books from my publisher!)
My blog archives has lots of awesome olde timey space, too (and I'm looking for a new home for it, too!): www.popsci.com/blog-network/vi...
I've also got a PATREON PAGE! Want to listen to a Vintage Space Podcast or get awesome merch like t-shirts? Please consider becoming a patron! I've set up a Patreon account so I can raise funds to buy the gear I'll need to make an awesome podcast and also work with professionals to make better content all around. Any help is so hugely appreciated. / amyshirateitel
Connect on Facebook: / amyshirateitel
Google+: plus.google.com/u/0/+AmyShira...
Instagram: / astvintagespace
Twitter: / astvintagespace - Наука та технологія
Soyuz-23 splashed down on the lake Tengiz and was stuck in the water for a long time, because the was also a storm on the lake and it also was in the freezing weather so the recovery was very hard, it was almost a story of a disaster, you could mention that or make a video about it since it one of the least known stories that deserves its own movie.
"Have you ever wondered why in the 1960's..." - Soyuz-23 was in 1976.
Didn't Soyuz 23 sink after it broke through the ice like the soyuz capsul in (that attrocity of physics) Gravity? Or is that something else the film makers got wrong.
Mike, that's Amy's error, not Bullet's.
What's even more ironic: one of cosmonauts from Soyuz-23 was proffesional diver before he signed to space program!
Rozshdestvenskiy, one of cosmonauts of Soyuz-23, who was diver before he became cosmonaut, was named by his colleagues "The admiral of Tengiz" after this splash down.
While my historical focus is more maritime oriented, I always find these videos fascinating. Keep up the good work, Amy!
I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to make a very small nitpick, regarding the geography you brought up around 2:30 : At the time Baikonur Cosmodrome was constructed, Kazakhstan was simply part of the Soviet Union, same as Russia or any of the other 13 union republics. There was no lease to the Soviet government, as the cosmodrome was on Soviet land. The lease came in the 1990's, when Russia and Kazakhstan were newly independent, and Russia had inherited the program, but not Baikonur.
Love the videos; this one was excellent!
Kazakhstan was a separate country in the USSR, but not really independent. I'm sure negotiations were very efficient. Of course, it was also a massive jobs program.
Also to get around this dependency on Kazakhstan, the Russians are building a new launch site, the Vostochny Cosmodrome, in the far east of Russia near China.
William Hamilton ."Negotiations were very efficient". During Soviet era it was more like "offer you cann't refuse".
"Republics" within the Soviet Union had certain rights and privileges, some real, but most of them were on paper. The right of secession was one of those paper rights; exercise of this right only became possible in the late 1980s. Even then, the secession of the Baltic states circa 1989, followed by Georgia (the country), and the others in December 1991 came as a big shock to almost everyone.
Zelts is pretty much spot on about the nature of these negotiations back in the 1950s :)
Regarding Vostochny Cosmodrome in the Russian Far East:
Already constructed, I believe, with some failed launches to show for it, so far.
I've heard the Soyuz re-entry and landing described as "a train wreck followed by a car crash followed by a bike wreck."
@2:31 Back in the days when space complex was build, Kazakhstan was part of USSR. Russia rent the complex from 1991 when USSR failed. But before that it was just a "domestic spaceport".
Exactly it is not like the government of Kazakhstan had a choice back then
... or Florida had a choice for Cape Canaveral.
Kazakhstan was a separate country within the USSR, as were most other Soviet countries.
You live in a communist day dream - - these were nations in the sense they had there own culture and history, but they were all vassals in the Soviet Empire
By that logic than the US states are all vassals. Plus I think the Historian knows more than you on this.
@4:01 Also the seats are on shock absorbers. They move up a bit just before landing so as to further soften the landing.
It's still not gentle. lol
IIRC the seats in Apollo were set up the same way.
RickyboyH Nope, it isn’t.
Soyuz 23 actually splashed down on lake tengiz, the recovery was made difficult because of freezing weather and there was a storm on the lake,the capsule's escape hatch was actually covered by the water. the crew got out alive, but it was a close call
Love this girl. As a person who always studied the space program growing up, it’s good to see someone actually give us actual information.
The 2 day in the ocean thing is important because after 2 days the astronauts are classified as fish and can be harvested by fishermen.
Wow! I didn't know that, that's scary :(
Would they be considered starfish?
LMAO that would be hilarious...If it were true.
😂
The capsule can be salvaged by citizens if abandoned for longer than two days.... No problem really.
As SOON as they splash down, they are classified as prey by sharks.
Not only is Baikonur at the same latitude as Portland, Maine, but, apparently, so is Paris. The Gulf Stream makes a big difference in climate, there.
Yep, hardly to got the thought that NY is on the line of the southernmost points of Russia, while Moscow where I live is on the line of Hudson Bay, and it called a "middle latitudes" here. :)
Britain is the same latitude as Newfoundland and labrador in Canada and we get no sea ice here ever
I'm going through a bunch of archive videos on this channel - MAN do I prefer these later videos where Amy is herself rather than the earlier Pop-Sci aligned videos. 👍🏻 Great job! Keep going!
Project Gemini in its early design phase did plan for a recovery on land with the Rogallo wing (one of the concerns expressed by someone either in Congress or at NASA was that “half the US Navy was deployed for a splashdown”). Unfortunately the wing never worked sufficiently well in testing and thus Gemini switched to the parachute and a splashdown for recovery. But a remanent of the Rogallo wing design remained as Gemini was outfitted with ejection seats rather than an escape tower as in Mercury and Apollo (you reported on this a few years ago).
One of my favorite anecdotes involved a test of the Gemini ejection seats as the hatches failed to separate from the spacecraft and the seats, now ignited, plowed right through the closed hatches. The late John Young reportedly said “Well, you’d have quite a headache, but a mighty short one!”
Thanks, Amy, for your great and informative work always.
As a historian I am really enjoying your page. Your citing evidence from viable sources and giving an actual " History" other than just the historical opinion. By the way your hair is very attractive and looks so good.
Cheers! Yeah, I suppose I should say, too, that the blog is where the source list lives. That's the research. The video is recapping that research!
Ditto your comment sir. Amy is smart and never looked better on camera than in this vid.
Your research is impressive and is actually done right! I think in historical settings that history is taking a route of opinion rather than fact. I'm very much into history but haven't seen this side of the aisle. Hope to enjoy more.
Truly agree! Nice and classy, but attractive.
Obviously, the most important thing is how she looks to all you guys, which is mightily disrespectful.
Great video. Also just bought your book on Kindle and am loving it :D
💟
What’s it called?
Breaking the Chains of Gravity
ua-cam.com/video/_uNup91ZYw0/v-deo.html
Russian/Soviet lack of access to warm water ports has been one of the drivers of Russian/Soviet foreign policy. Loved "Breaking the Chains of Gravity." I would have preferred if you had read the audio book but I still enjoyed it. Looking forward to the next installment.
Both Atlantic and Pacific Oceans were used for splashdowns by US spacecraft .
Pacific Splashdowns
Apollo's 8 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 .
Gemini 8
Skylab 4
Sigma 7
Faith 7
Atlantic Splashdowns
Apollo's 7 , 9
Gemini 6A , 7 , 9A , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15
Liberty Bell 7
Freedom 7
Aurora 7
Friendship 7
Can you talk about the fact that the Russians keep a gun in the capsule to help if they land in the wilderness and have to fight wildlife? They even had a special pistol made, but nowdays they use the standard russian army pistol.
Lorenzo Pagani damn it.... You beat me to it
Lorenzo Pagani wait what? Source? :D
Russians are so hardy I would have thought a large knife would be enough (its also lower tech and more stable).
From what I can tell, astronauts and cosmonauts both carried various knives. For the Russians, that means they do have the stable/simple tech for survival/defense (also useful for butchering animals). The gun is important, though, since a cosmonaut isn't exactly quipped for a stealthy hunting mission.
+Rob Ostry I don't see why they'd be hardier than anyone else, and knives are not nearly as effective a means of defense against predators. Semiautomatic pistols are still fairly simple, rugged devices that can withstand anything astronauts can and then some.
Kazakstan WAS in the USSR, no leasing required.
You know... not that people from the USA know anything TRUE about USSR
BJ: Lease may not have been 'required" nonetheless, governments still find written agreements helpful in coordinating and defining duties and responsibilities. Payments from Moscow to Khazakstan would still have been needed to defray Khazak costs and support. Being communist doesn't change the cost of doing business or the need for coordination.
It is like saying Florida leased land to the federal government. Though soviet republics had way less autonomy than American states.
DarKodama Not anything? I find that hard to believe.
When I was a kid, I went to an exhibit called "Soviet Space," which was all about the Soviet space program. From this I have a book that shows how all of this equipment worked. It even showed the capsule ejection system on the Soyuz that you were talking about!
Fascinating presentation thanks xxx
Actually, Jules Verne picked up on the equatorial launch site in his novel "From the Earth to the Moon".
And that was in 1865. Also, he had some sound understanding about escape velocities and orbital mechanics.
All of this was picked up by NASA, except maybe for his original launch method, which was using a giant canon :-)
+Michael Rapp True, although I think NASA probably could have figured this out for themselves. :)
When rocket science was first taught in the class room, the text books were actually the works of Jules Verne. True dat
He got a few things wrong, though. In his story, the passengers weren't weightless until they had reached the point at which the earth's gravity and the moon's were in equilibrium. "Weightlessness" is a misnomer - it's an artifact of the vessel - and everything in it - being in free-fall.
Yup. The accellerated/ unaccellerated frame of reference wasn't really a thing until 50 years later.
+lesnyk255 He was thinking more in terms of a straight shot to the Moon, in which case he would have been more or less correct in theory (if the Moon were stationary), although in practice everything is in orbit around the Earth, and the curved path represents an acceleration that counters the Earth's gravity (free fall)--just restating what you said from a different angle. What Verne was thinking would actually apply more to a theoretical journey through the center of the Earth (if we could somehow do that without burning up).
The latitude of the Kazakhstan launch site also contributed to the orbit inclination of the ISS.
Easiest inclination to enter from Florida or Central Asia.
So why not launch from allied Cuba? Just because of the fact you might scare the USA into thinking "ICBM?"
Yep, agreeing on an inclination for IIS was quite an accomplishment in order to be accessible to both US and Russian launch latitudes. Different problem, but the source of the problem is the same--Russia is really far north.
Because it would be way to expensive to ship everything to Cuba every time you wanted to launch a rocket.
It's actually the other way round. The orbit of the ISS was planned so the russians could launch rockets towards it without the need to adjust it's orbit in space and without the risk that rocket parts would crash on Chinese territory.
But making rather large inclination of space station is good by itself, because cosmonauts and astronauts can see the most of the Earth, while with zero inclination they would constantly see very narrow band of equatorial area.
Cool. Thanks for another great video Amy :)
Nice to see a Episode again!
I have always been wondering, how does the range safety officer destroy the SBRs or other parts of the rockets in the event of a catastrophic failure and how does this process work? Can you please make a video on this?!
Also, how many times has the range safety officer destroyed rockets / parts?
He presses a big button :)
The long and short of it - explosives :D
Just a guess, but I believe there are two RSOs and they both have to send an encrypted radio signal to detonate the booster.
And as far as I know the only time it’s been used on a manned mission was after The Challenger exploded...
I’m pretty sure it’s det-cord and C-4 in strategic locations but I’d like to know where on the vehicles and how much.
Retrorockets can set fire to the grass which is a bit worrying when you are trapped inside and can't move much since you just got back to having gravity after 6 months.
Can you do a video on April 5 anomaly (Soyuz 18a)? I think that is the only time a launch abort at high altitude has been made.
I think the Voskhod was the first Russian spacecraft to use landing retro rockets.
What's more interesting about Voskhod missions were that there was no launch escape system and the crew who got to ride the 3 seat Voskhod 1 couldn't wear spacesuits because of the limited interior space.
great video as always, I really appreciate that your videos are so professionally made
I've often wondered if another reason for landing cosmonauts within the Soviet Union was to prevent them from defecting, since if they landed at sea they could conceivably have been picked up by a non-Soviet ship.
There was an element of security to the choice as well. Given how secretive the program was, keeping everything on Soviet land decreased the chance for someone else to see what they were doing. Of course, that went out the window in the event of an emergency landing in a foreign land... If I recall correctly (it's been a while since I looked this up so take this with a grain of salt!) the cosmonauts had things like a pistol on board should they land in an unfriendly place!
Vintage Space it was actually a sawed off shotgun, if I recall one mission landed off course, and it took a while for them to rescued, and they had to deal with wolves. So they were given a shotgun after that
I think the main use for the firearm was if the recovery team couldn't get to the cosmonauts, the cosmonauts could hunt for food.
It was a three-barreled break-open pistol. Two barrels were 12.5×70 mm (a shotgun round) and one was 5.45x39mm (the same round as the AK74 rifle).
Limited defense capability against hostile humans, but useful against four-legged predators.
(I'd rather have the AK74, to be honest!)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TP-82
And there are four-legged predators in Siberian forests. Loads of them. And in real life (unlike some stereotypes and anecdotes) bear won't stop attacking you if you give him balalayka.
"The Kazakh government leased the site to the Soviet Union in the 1950s" No, Kazakhstan was a republic of the Soviet Union, there was no leasing involved.
I think she mixed up what happened after the USSR broke up with the whole leasing bit.
Thanks Amy for another great video.
Great job Amy, thank you.
The Soviet era's obsession for secrecy guaranteed that landing outside Russian territory was a non starter and it's space program was no exception. It's why the public often felt that America was well behind because unlike their counterparts each success/failure was being broadcast live to a fascinated public. The space race for The Soviets cost hundreds of lives which remained hidden for decades and unless Cosmonauts died the picture they presented was nearly always of triumph.
Richard Mattingly "The Soviets cost hundreds of lives"
Citation needed from somewhere else than jingoist propaganda.
Krisztián Povázson Yeah I gotta agree that’s some blatant bs
There is a story that when Yuri Gagarin landed the first person to see him was a little girl, who asked him "Are you a spaceman?" I like to think of her now, telling her grandchildren how she met the first man in space.
Would love to know if that is true and where she is now.
So it was pretty much what I thought. Thanks for the clarifacation and bringing up the many other factors involved.
You Rock-et Amy.😁
thanks for this very clear explanation - yes this disixties landing strategy is something I have wondered about since the sixties
Nasa should take this girl to the ISS for publicity! hint hint Nasa. right Amy? how about a live stream on PBS and youtube of vintage space from ISS? Send Scott Manley too, and some kerbels to keep them company.
FPVREVIEWS Excellent idea!
You mean Russia should take her. NASA's manned programme is just a temp agency for astronauts any more, or a travel agency. Snide remarks aside, that's a good idea.
NASA is probably too superstitious to try to launch another female spaceflight participant for publicity after Christa McAuliffe...
Yeah, I'd like to see her rack floating in the weightlessness of outer space- - cause she is well stacked :-)
why not Roscosmos
Wich kind of music did the crews of Apollo and Gemini take with them and what device did tey use to play it on??
A 17th-century gramophone with a sideboard containing the works of rodgers and hammerstein.
Funny enough gramophone wouldn't work in weightless environement. At least the normal one... From what i heard they used cassette players. They were small and light enough.
Did you really believe me?
From what i recall they played cassette during Apollo 15 lunar ascent.
Sorry for joking. I assumed that the weight would be so controlled as to limit such 'pointless' things as music. However, it seems they took a lot of stuff with them, so I'm most certainly wrong. Obviously, if they took music, they should have been playing Starman by David Bowie. :-)
Great stuff, Amy!
Great as always, Amy! Also, you did a killer job on your eyes! Keep it up!!!
To W--Stranger, In 1989 Russia finally acknowledged the Nedelin Diasater in 1960 were upwards of a 135 men were killed when a booster exploded and injured even more. Indeed hundreds have died in accidents ranging from falling from gantry to an US ICBM fuel tank being breached by a falling wrench with the following explosion launched its warhead and cover out of the silo. Every nation that has achieved orbit has lost people on the ground and the dangers of dying even happened well away from the pad like the Pepcon disaster which made the Schuttles solid rocket fuel...
What would happen if the thrusters would fail the second before landing?
Also, the landing would be the least of my worries if I could go to space. :-P
A hard landing, potential injury or death of a Cosmonaut/Astronaut.
I think this actually happened on Soyuz 5. Google it for the entire story - it's pretty horrifying - but basically what happened was the spacecraft initially began to reenter wrong-end first, damaging the pyros meant to fire those final retros. Volynov landed so hard he was flung out of his seat & broke several teeth.
That's crazy. He's lucky to still be alive today.
Thanks!
Great video, as per usual. I had always wondered about this.
Thanks for the video. I gave this same answer on another thread recently, but its more fun watching you present it!
Nice diagram at 2:40, though it excludes half of the earth's oceans (notably the southern hemisphere). I guess they are too far from the US to be useful recovery zones. Edit: A lot of Apollo splashdowns took place in the South Pacific: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Splashdown_2.png
I wonder which was less expensive. I'm thinking the Land Landing. Especially when you consider the number of men, ships, fuel etc. the Navy had to employ in multiple areas.
Joe Krol well I guess those navy personnel in the ships would be getting paid regardless of where they were at. But I think the amount resourves devoted to the sea landings would have cost more than the landings made on the land
Joe Krol The Navy wasn’t there just to pick up astronauts, so that cost doesn’t really count. Landing so far north would require a decent amount of fuel and the extra rockets and the pistol that they carried to protect themselves once they landed would increase the cost
Splashdown should be relatively cheap since the navy ships are already there on patrol. Changing course and spending a couple of days to pick up astronauts wouldn't really change much. Once the astronauts were on board they could eat what the sailors were eating and be given accommodations that the ship probably already has in excess. Kinda like adding a few extra items to a wholesale order.
The only big bump in the cost would be sending a helicopter to rendezvous with the ship and take them back to land.
Barrett Jordan I dont rhink the pistol itself would have cost much assuming it was a standard one
Not just a single helicopter. There probably was a lot of additional personell involved that needed to be transferred from and to the carrier group and the capsule also needed to be returned. So it's not as if there was no extra cost involved.
They did it for the same reason Russia does a lot of things they do: they didn't have much choice. Naval recovery is hideously expensive and demands resources that Russia lacked...widespread access to warm water ports and a real blue water navy. The Soviets didn't really have that navy for most of the 1960s. Recovering ships from remote oceans would have been difficult for them to pull off when Soyuz was developed. Even now, their navy is far less capable than the US Navy.
Lack of NASA level funding is the blessing and the curse of the Russian space program. It's forced them to use simple, low cost technology, but it's also limited what they can do. You won't see Russia spending $1.5 billion to launch a shuttle or $9 billion to put up a space telescope.
They did occasionally recover craft in the Indian ocean, like Zond 5 back in 1968, which sent a payload of tortoises (and other animals) around the moon. BOR-4 unmanned subscale space planes were also recovered from the Indian Ocean. I suspect a desire for secrecy was a big factor. I believe accounting would be hard to really go over when it comes to funding in the days of the Soviet Union, but by all account the Soviets spent tons of money on their space programs, like with developing Buran and Energia together (and may have actually spent something like the figure above for that single flight in 1988 of the two systems together) ...
Very well explained, was a thought that I had briefly mulled over myself so thank you for the great explanation
Thanks for the video your video's help me feel happy even though I have depression keep up the good work 😊
Israel is the only country who launch towards the west, do to concerns of neighboring countries. As a result, their payloads are very small and then don't launch often.
When we launch satellites from Vandenberg CA, we have to lunch toward the west.
Yes, but we have the option of launching east from Cape Canaveral. We only use Vandenburg when we want to launch into a high-inclination orbit where the sideways velocity that's usually so helpful is now unwanted.
Lothar Erkens Vandenberg also launches to the south.
Lately Isreal sends it's rockets to spacex if they want to launch towards the east
So THAT'S why they launch east to west? I thought it was because the instructions were in Hebrew (read from right to left).
Retro rockets are way cooler though :)
Glurgi possibly. but “Splashdown!” Sounds way cooler.
Fair argument, although I imagine the thud of a land landing is probably more satisfying that a splosh. Pretty sure engineers don't make choices (normally) by how cool it sounds though. Sadly ;)
Amy, I would love to see an episode about Gus Grissom’s Mercury space suit. What little I know is that Betty Grissom loaned the suit to NASA...and they proceeded to 1) claim the Gus misappropriated the suit, and 2) place the suit on permanent display in their museum near the cape.
Amy, love your content, loved your book. You get prettier every video. Keep up the amazing work x
You should probably mention how the Soyuz times the retrorocket burn just before touchdown. If I remember correctly, they use backscatter from a cobalt-60 gamma-ray source. It would be interesting to hear why they picked that as opposed to a radar.
The ejection seat detail I hadn't heard before. Very interesting. Must have been tough.
Go talk to Ed Lu, he can tell you some great stories about training for a Soyuz landing. Apparently they put the whole capsule, with cosmonauts/astronauts inside, in an oven, get it heat soaked, and then drop it on the permafrost. They have a limited amount of time to get out (15 min?), and they train for one crew member to be incapacitated and the others have to haul them out.
These gamma-ray altimeters were developed when Voskhod capsules were still in operation (capable of 3 people or 2 people with EVA). They had their retrorockets attached to parachute strings, while the capsule itself was coated with ablative heat shield. They didn't want to make any additional holes in this shield for radar, so gamma-ray turned out to be the best solution. Altimeter was located inside the capsule and worked through both the aluminum casing and heat shield. Later in Soyuz there were detachable heat shield with retrorockets beneath it, so it was possible to use radio or even optic device, but this gamma-ray altimeter was ready and pretty compact and very robust. BTW, this altimeter is called 'Cactus' which is funny, because it's designed for soft landing.
Maybe gamma-rays have a more accurate reflection from diverse soil than radar at such short distance?
Iain McClatchie I
Could be more energy efficient as well. Radar uses a good bit of power and you probably don't want too many batteries on board.
Since you wouldn't mind the "hard" Soyuz landing, I think we should start the "Let's send Amy to the ISS (with Pete)" petition to NASA! It would be so awesome for you to do a Vintage Space episode from orbit!!!! Whatcha think?? ;)
We could start a crowdfunding. What does one of those Soyuz seats cost these days? I'll chip in a dollar ;)
How would NASA do a litter box in space? Or would Pete have to be toilet trained? :?
I see your point! I could really be a "cat"astrophy!
They'll cut her lovely head off and make her convert to their belief-system.
@Hans Roes 50 million dollars per seat. And she would need to pass some training which I assume won't be cheap either.
I love your channel! I was around during the vintage space era
Great video! as always!
Five Flat-Earthers left a thumbs down...
they forgot what gravity was.
If the earth isn't flat, why are your shoes?
Bob Duckerberg Pssh, you actually believe in the Earth? Quit drinking that government kool-aid.
Yes, let's argue why I shouldn't believe in the Earth. :-)
Pancake-earthers don't know that there is a conspiracy to get them to believe in something demonstrably false so nothing they say can be taken seriously.
All you need to do is sail around Antarctica while measuring the miles traveled then fly around the equator then fly around the arctic circle and you will quickly discover that the distances do not support pancake theory.
The Kazakh government was essentially the Soviet government as it was one of the Soviet Socialist Republics.
James Thacker yeah i was like free decision making nation under soviet times. What lol
She's a historian, I think she knows more about this than you do, random UA-cam comment.
Rob Rose maybe, but not in that case. Kazakhstan was part of the Soviet union, that's a fact.
You are so smart... I also like the new hair color! Thanks for explaining why the space powers take off and land where they do.
Hi Amy, good vid with great vocals - nicely modulated, well done : )
Can You Please make Video about Cars in Space.
Was the Tesla the first Car in Space?
No the Lunar Rover was the first car in space.
I would nominate Lunakhod 1 as the first car in space. It landed on the moon in 1970. The first human drive car was the Lunar Rover used on Apollo 15, which was used on the moon in 1971.
Maybe, but it wasn't human driven like a car.
You could possibly argue that the Tesla was the first regular (production line) electric automobile in space. The Lunar Rover was the first human controlled electric vehicle but it would not be technically classed as a ‘car’. It was a bespoke wheeled vehicle designed to do one job, transport astronauts, tools and samples on the lunar surface. And it wasn’t deployed in space, it was deployed on the moon’s surface.
As for Lunakhod, that was probably the first wheeled vehicle on the moon and, again, technically not in space.
"It was a bespoke wheeled vehicle designed to do one job, transport astronauts, tools and samples on the lunar surface."
Not sure how else you'd define a car. I suppose you could call it a moon car.
Are you jake ropers (vsauce 3) girlfriend?
Great informative video
Great video, Thanks
@2:59 "The bodies of water that the Soviet Union did have access to are all in the Arctic Circle . . . ."
FALSE.
The Soviet Union had direct access to the Sea of Japan, the Sea of Okhotsk, the Bering Sea and, yes, the North Pacific Ocean. These all lie well outside the Arctic Circle. [Please, just *look* at your own map!] Between 1961 and 1991 the Soviet Union possessed a full-fledged blue-water navy capable of operating around the world. Soviet Navy's Pacific Fleet, consisting of hundreds of ships, had its home port at Vladivostok on the Sea of Japan and Avacha Bay (Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and later Vilyuchinsk) offered direct naval access to the Pacific. The idea that there was some kind of geographic or naval reason the USSR could not use a warm-water Pacific splashdown is bogus. [The primary and widely recognized reason, the one glaringly omitted by the video, was secrecy. The Soviets didn't want the outside world to watch what it was doing. The other considerations were trivial by comparison.]
@2:34 "The Kazakh government leased the site to the Soviet Union in the 1950's."
FALSE.
As has been pointed out, in the 1950's the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic was a constituent republic of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The Baikonur Cosmodrome site was established by joint resolution of the Central Committee of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Council of Ministers of the USSR on February 12, 1955. No lease was required for this secret site. It wasn't until December 1991 that the Kazakh SSR declared its independence of the USSR, took the name, "Republic of Kazakhstan" and the USSR dissolved. It was only after this that the problem of Russian interest in facilities within an independent Kazakhstan was addressed by leases. This is very simple common knowledge.
@Vintage Space I just have to ask, ARE YOU NOT ASHAMED OF THIS? Projecting sloppy disinformation like this onto the internet posing as "education" is irresponsible and immoral. You could easily shanghai a high school intern of middling intellect to research scripts before production. Do it. Whoever is doing that work now (if anyone) obviously cannot hack it. And somehow our presenter (a "spaceflight historian" no less) uttered these obviously false prattlings without choking.
How?
How?
Will it help if I unsubscribe?
Will it?
UNSUBSCRIBED
Your quite welcome to take a ride in my ship Amy, she as warp capability and is also configured for atmospheric flight, she's not all that large, though she will give you a rush like nothing on your Earth can, you'd also be the first Terran to board her.
P.S
Joking apart, awesome release, as always
I love you beyond human comprehension. If your ever in Wisconsin, I'd love to have an educated conversation of comprehension itself. Keep up the good work.
NASA'S unexplained misses you! Hope all is well in this crazy world?
Another happy landing! Always interesting thanks!
I once went to a lecture of Chris Hadfield who commanded the ISS for some time.
He described a conversation he had with cosmonauts about the (he spoke with Russian accent) "soft landing rrrockets".
He repeated that with a strange emphasis on "soft" and then fell into this meditative silence. The hall exploded laughing.
The first german in space Mr. Sigmund Jähn (DDR) had such hard landing with Sojus 29 in 1978. He was hurt at his spine I heard an interview once that he never really recovered from it. The sojus capsula was dragged by the parashutes in a wind-gust
on the ground after touch down and they had problems to release... It was like a car crash the casula was rolled over again and again...
Thank you so much for starting a channel Bravo
Simply Brilliant!
Beautiful and Smart!👌
Great video!
Great vid
Thanks for the "shout out" to Portland, Maine
I love your Vintage Space channel! Here is a topic to consider: The development of the space suits used for Gemini and Apollo. I think the Playtex (girdles!!?!!) company was heavily involved. Thanks!
Thanks for the video! Always wondered ^_^
it's interesting seeing genuine vintage film stock. i edit video to look like that sometimes and you often wonder if you're getting the look right
I love this channel. She always makes such well researched and scripted content.
I LOVEEEEE your videos and channel.
i love your channel and i love space
I also wondered this too!
Fascinating.
This channel has bettered my life.
The Voskhod retro braking system was interesting. Having the same round capsule as the Vostoks, their retro braking rocket was suspended under the parachute much like a military, heavy airdrop system.
When I was in the US Navy we got to meet the Chief of Naval Operations whose first time out at sea was to pick up the Apollo 8 command module (yeah, he was that old).
amazing video, next time you could do about the SS 520-5
@Vintage Space.. Hi Amy so love your channel, it feeds my inner space nurd 😂 I am working security for Col Chris Hadfield when his tour comes to Belfast Northern Ireland on 15th of February!! #Starstruck.. OMG As a kid I visited Kennedy space centre (1978) finally I get to meet my 1st real live astronaut! After watching your videos of you meeting Pete Conrad I can say that I will probably be as enthusiastic 😂😂 whilst trying to remain "Professional" Thank you so much as your channel has helped me rekindle my childhood fascination with Apollo and space x PS my 7 yo Grandson Joshua loves your videos and we got him his first telescope for Christmas. Cheers Bill
Amy, do you ever wonder why Soviets choose Baikonur as a launch site? USSR has enough southern territories with better infrastructure and much welcoming climate. One of them was the Stavropol Territory with almost resort conditions. The limiting factor was the location of radio control ground stations. Guidance of the early missiles wasn't autonomous and relied on radio link. Caucasus mountains could interfere with the signal, that's why radio specialists rejected the initial Stavropol proposal. The irony is that few years after the construction of the missile range an inertial navigation system was developed and the need for ground stations was gone. You may read about that in Boris Chertok's memoirs "Rockets and People, Volume 2", Chapter 16. The Seven Problems of the R-7 Missile, Problem number seven, page 306. The book is available on NASA web site. In my opinion it's a must read book on Soviet space program history, highly recommend it :)
Vintage Space and everyday astronaut colab imagine how awesome that world be
Hey! Havent gotten to watch in a while... I'd like to hear more about a landing.... the landing of the soviet Lunokhod tank, rover on the moon! Great channel!
Looking good, Amy, as always. How about a video on the Mercury landing bags?
“The soft landing is not really soft” - Paolo Nespoli
Love your videos
So interesting!
YEY !!! You're back !!!!!!!! "Videos up here" arent appearing to me again tho ..
Hay Amy. That was very informative I love all your vids. ? Is Pete barred from making an appearance? Was he a bad cat?. As always keep up good work.
Thank-you for this piece. I am 63 and have been a space junkie my entire life. Surprisingly, you have taught me many things I didn't know. I would gladly buy the Soyuz ticket to ISS or a Space X ticket to circumnavigate the moon. Some day maybe a viewer will sponsor your first person adventure.
I'd like to see a video on the McDonnell-Douglas DC-X program, the granddaddy of reusable, vertical landing rockets.
Your favourite astronaut, Pete Conrad, was even the pilot in the control van for many of the test flights.