Beep
Well-Known Member
Well, sure.... I mean, if you’re going to nit pick about every tiny little glitch!Didn't their moon rocket, the N1, explode on the launch pad and kill 100+ people?
Well, sure.... I mean, if you’re going to nit pick about every tiny little glitch!Didn't their moon rocket, the N1, explode on the launch pad and kill 100+ people?
Didn't their moon rocket, the N1, explode on the launch pad and kill 100+ people?
They can always make more Russians.Cost/Benefit, dude.
They can always make more Russians.
I thought it was our Germans.
It’s nice to know I have that effect on men as well as womenYou're not invited to my party.
I agree. Before the iron curtain fell the prevailing opinion was that America built better engineered, more efficient rockets and the Sovietskis just used a lot more fuel. After the curtain fell NASA found out that some of the ISP values on Russian engines were higher than we thought possible. Turns out they were way more efficient than us and our solution to “better rockets,” in American fashion, was an assload more kerosene. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.It's hardly the Commies' fault that NASA barbecued the Apollo 1 astronauts. Whether the pencil myth is accurate or not, the overarching point stands. To wit, unlimited budgets breed unlimited complexity and thus unlimited modes of failure. There comes a point of diminishing returns on engineering. The Soviet-era Reds are the original "do more with less" all-stars, AFAICT. I mean, yes, we built the Saturn V and landed men on the Moon and all the rest, and well done us. But I suspect they could have done the same with maybe a few more casualties and a little bit more pig-iron and less aluminum, and they'd have come in on time and under budget because no one wanted to wind up in the gulag. Motivational, those gulags...
If I remember right, that was a case of being cleared direct to somewhere and a mountain obscured by the clouds between the plane and that somewhere.One crashed on a demo flight too.