Why were Soviet moon rockets so shit?

>The US was tried but failed because they couldn't into metallurgy
False. The F-1 and Shuttle main engines were beyond the reach of Soviet manufacturing tech.

How many Saturn V rockets failed before they got to the moon?

It's a mixed bag.
Neither could make the other's engines for different reasons.

Are some of you faggots forgetting that the soviets landed a fucking rover on Venus?

I am surprised by how much this is ignored. It's incredibly impressive.

Attached: image_proxy.jpg (319x160, 12K)

Soviets tried to get to the moon, concluded it was impossible, and canned the project quietly.
NASA tried to get to the moon, concluded the same thing, and called up their friends in Hollywood to make a moon they could get to.

>cope
The RD180 was beyond the reach of Soviet manufacturing tech. It is a closed cycle combustion engine. An engine that routes the exhaust of the pre-burner into the combustion chamber. It was the Russians who invented the metallurgy needed to make them safe for use. The USA, Europe, China and Japan all believed CCC engines were not feasible.

Are people dumb enough to still believe that NASA had people go to the moon?
Wernher von Braun would agree with me. "They" know the deal.

The question was, how many rockets failed before then.

This guy gets it

Attached: 1441414102071.gif (501x585, 14K)

Why do we assume von braun was inferior to Sergei Korolev?

>The RD180 was beyond the reach of Soviet manufacturing tech.
You mean USA.

No, because then you would also be asking how many Soviet rockets failed before then instead of just limiting it to the N1 like a dishonest dumbfuck.

You could answer both preemptively instead of being a little bitch.

They're planning to go back.
meduza.io/en/feature/2019/04/03/joint-russia-u-s-project-plans-to-land-a-spacecraft-on-venus-for-the-first-time-since-1985

The answer is a lot, for both countries.
I'm not even sure if we know exactly how many Soviet rocket failures there were because they were very secretive about it and we don't know if everything has come out.
But there was only one significant Saturn V failure, discounting Apollo 13.

They landed a lander on Venus, not a rover.
It didn't rove.

>The big problem with the N1 was just that it was too complex, and the Soviet space program was falling apart at the time it was being built because of the death of the lead designer.
The ridiculously small budget the space program had by the mid 60's definitively doomed the N1
The budget for the Saturn V was magnitudes higher than that of the entire Luna program

Why does the N1 look so retarded?

The N1 has more Delta-v in the assembly under the fairing, the struts inbetween the stages are for hot staging I suppose, thus avoiding the need for interstage fairings like the second and third stage sep sequences of the Saturn V had. The interstage separation for the second stage was of considerable concern for NASA engineers since they were unsure of how cleanly it would slide away from the engines.

Right, so the 11 story tall rocket they launched in public was just some sort of decoy, right?

>arguing with Jow Forumspol/
your time is better spent doing literally anything else

Oh also, since the N1 apparently didn't have ullage motors from what I know, hot staging would be a simple and effective way to ensure ignition for each stage.

>the government would never build anything with the sole purpose of fooling the people

Attached: auschwitzchimney.jpg (330x432, 109K)

>be soviet engineer
>can choose to rest and get shot or collapse from exhaustion and probably still get shot
>fall off catwalk
>accidentally ignite experimental rocket
>destroy facility

Some of Jow Forums's more politically grounded conspiracy theories are in the realm of reality, sadly as soon as it get's to something like space exploration for example they seem to backflip and assume a position that discovering the cosmos is somehow subtracting from the human spirit. I find that quite ironic since most of the people on Jow Forums agree that the European exploration and conquering of the world was part of a pioneering spirit. Armstrong himself even thought the idea of keeping some 8,000 employees quiet about this conspiracy was quite humourous. It's even funnier to consider that Jow Forums users hail Assange as a hero who exposed government secrets by himself, yet thousands of people who easily saw and had access to documents in the 70's didn't expose a thing.

The problem is more that they had to fool more than their own people.
People in the UK, Russia, Australia were able to pick up the transmissions from the Apollo missions and do the Doppler calculations to work out distance and speed. What you're trying to say is that it was a secret world government that controls everything.

>retard anti-space shill is from Jow Forums
You must not browse Jow Forums if you don't know how hard those fags get shit on when they try to derail threads.

Higher res

Attached: 1511585112066.jpg (998x500, 114K)

Holy fuck, just leave it with this conspiracy. I don't like the social and financial influence of certain individuals over the layman either, but raving on about shit that happened (or didn't) almost a century ago now, won't help you personally. Learn HOW the world is run financially and learn how you can make money and sustain yourself better. Be like bamboo: patient, strong and flexible.

The overwhelming detail of scientific concepts that verify the truth of these missions, still seem to be lost on a lot of people. Perhaps the biggest irony is the fact that everyday science is willfully accepted by these same people, despite it being just as complex in many instances.

>joint russia us project
Nice.
Glad our systems not believing the MSM.

>a secret world government that controls everything.
No that's outlandish.

Attached: chimney2.jpg (584x383, 55K)

Read dullard

It's really more of an engineering than a scientific feat. Get a few pictures before the probe was destroyed. NASA never bothered with Venus landers because the expense was not worth the meager returns.

NASA is colluding with Russia. Let's hire a special prosecutor to look in to this.

>It's even funnier to consider that Jow Forums users hail Assange as a hero who exposed government secrets by himself, yet thousands of people who easily saw and had access to documents in the 70's didn't expose a thing.
You're an idiot.
>what is blackmail

The Politburo just didn't care enough about space exploration when national defense was an overriding priority. They liked getting space firsts for propaganda, but not if they had to spend too much money on it.

>unironically being merchant

Attached: 1496522721604.jpg (1280x720, 260K)

>stop noticing goy
Yeah you're right. There's nothing to see here. Yawn. I'm feeling kind of sleepy. I think i'll take a nap.

Attached: chimney3.jpg (552x394, 37K)

>be soviet
>landed on Venus
>deployed probe to sample Venus soil
>probe hit camera cover and send back data on compositions of camera cover.
> lander got crashed by Venus atomsphere.
>the end

Honestly, putting aside any details, I do in some small part, believe that faking it was a possibility. But even if it was, I don't think it has much of a bearing on my life.

Ayy Tone, come the chimney isn't even connected to anything.

>arguing about the veracity of the moon missions
>moron calls it derailing
>get backlash from (((them)))
the absolute state of this place

You realised that they literally don't care if you know or not? You are considered fringe anyway for one thing and what good is it knowing these things anyway when you still suffer in the present? Read, learn about finance, socialise and help others in a meaningful personal way. I wish the best for everyone who suffers the burden of knowledge about the world's inequality. We are not victims unless we chose to be.

Lmao we literally buy rocket tech from the Russians now

The lack of a worldwide tracking network was a big problem--they couldn't communicate with probes unless their tracking stations were facing them, which of course was only part of the day.

>they literally don't care if you know or not
I don't care if they care
>learn about finance
that's my degree
>when you still suffer in the present
i don't
> We are not victims unless we chose to be.
you didn't choose to be a slave but you are one

dont respond to that troll man. evidence for the moon landing is clear, it happened, anybody that says otherwise is trolling or retarded.

You're so right. It's soMu warm around the fire. I think I'll nap right here.

Attached: chimney4.jpg (2592x1944, 1.66M)

2. Thou shalt not misrepresent or exaggerate a person's argument in order to make it easier to attack. (Straw man fallacy)

Attached: Russian Mars missions.png (596x509, 30K)

I see you're sleepy too. Come share my fire and blanket.

Attached: chimney5.jpg (800x600, 127K)

I'm glad to hear that you don't suffer, I would hope that you feel happiness and inspiration about something in your life. You're also correct, I didn't choose to be a slave, but I was for a length of time. At a certain point I realised that education and the workforce are setup to sustain a slave-like mentality. That's why I decided, with the encouragement of a close friend who was already financially involved, to also trade and invest as he does.

That was either an early attempt or done for show. It went up and veered to the side so as not to hit the dome. Then it fell back to earth as all things that go up do.

>compare two government space programs
>one failed because gommunisum bad

It's actually the NASA being cheap that saved them some trouble. The USSR used pure oxygen at lower pressure instead of a standard atmosphere at 1atm. Pure oxygen of course, is far more flammable.

They didn't have jewish engineers like the US did.

Actually now that I remember NASA quit pure oxygen after Apollo 1.

>trade and invest
a relaxed option for those of us who have money but not for the average person
>evidence for the moon landing is clear
This is the most retarded thing to say, the reason that there is controversy surrounding it is precisely because it's not clear regardless of your opinion.

because gommunism

>the dark side
how is there a dark side of the moon

does it rotate in perfect sync with the earth or something

>trade and invest
>a relaxed option for those of us who have money but not for the average person

That's the biggest lie so far in this thread and you wouldn't think this if you were in fact, studying finance. That is if you're the same user.

It does. It's called tidal locking.

But muh Energia

Attached: vulkan-family-1x.jpg (1500x1351, 144K)

Venus' environment is so adverse to technology that despite how badly it fucked up, the fact that it landed and returned images is still a great achievement.

The proper term would be the far side because the Moon always keeps the same side facing towards Earth. An Apollo landing on the far side was considered but rejected due to the risk of the rough terrain there and because it would need an additional communication satellite to relay signals between the astronauts and Earth. NASA didn't have the money for this and it added an extra piece of complexity/failure point.

>comsat requires a separate rocket to be launched on
>if the launch fails, mission ruined
>also the satellite could malfunction in orbit around the Moon, in which case mission also ruined

There is no "dark side of the moon", just a far side and a near side.

The moon is sort of heavier on one side by just enough that eventually that side will be pulled toward the earth permanently via gravity.

The effect is that one side always faces the earth.

Also, how the fuck have you not noticed this?

Attached: aa.jpg (480x600, 68K)

The Venera program only succeeded after the Kremlin reassigned planetary probes from Korolev to the Lavochkin Bureau due to the continued failed missions. Lavochkin built a centrifuge and discovered that the landers could only survive half the atmospheric pressure at the surface of Venus with their existing design. Korolev had also stubbornly refused to ground-test anything other than manned missions. The very first planetary mission under Lavochkin's management was Luna 9, which was the first soft landing on the Moon.

The moon completes one full revolution every time it orbits. The side facing Earth doesn't change but the side facing the Sun DOES change.

The Proton rockets had a horrible failure rate in the early years due to a rushed development program, Remarkably, the Proton was not declared an operational (as opposed to an R&D) vehicle until 1977, twelve years after the first one had flown.

Proton's failure rate is still quite horrible tbqh.

Hahaahahhahahhaah, good one.

how the heck would I notice this

because Saturn V basically lucked out 5 big ass nozzle beasts that somehow had a coherent stream of burning hydrocarbons. The plumbing for these big ass nozzles and engines were likely easier than what the soviets had to make do with, with all those NK-33's.

then explain this brainlet

Attached: pink_floyd_dark_side_1496067627000_1332639.jpg (1000x1000, 62K)

That was one problem, but the other was that despite greater overall first stage thrust, the N-1 could not orbit as big of a payload due to the lack of LH2 engines. Soviet engineers wouldn't accept that LH2 was a viable rocket propellant despite the Centaur already being flown. In fact Werner Von Braun had also doubted LH2 until finally being convinced that it was necessary for a Moon rocket.

That's Dark Side of the Moon.
Notice the difference.

gives me the creeps
im glad we are not born in space exploration generation, just imagine you landed in a wrong fucking planet to colonize

The Chelomei Bureau also proposed their own Saturn-class LV, the UR-700, which Korolev, who hated hypergolic propellants due to their toxcicity, rejected. Since Soviet metallurgy couldn't overcome the problem of rough combustion in large kerolox engines, the result was the N-1 having dozens of small ones which added weight and complexity.

The UR-700 would have been a horrible idea anyway. It was estimated that a launch failure in the first 20 seconds of flight (not at all an unlikely possibility) would leave the ground around the pad completely sterilized and unable to support organic life for at least 20 years, and the Proton crash during an attempted launch of a Mars probe in April 1969 (involving a vehicle approximately half the size of the UR-700) effectively drove home the point why a Saturn-class vehicle loaded with nitrogen tetroxide and UDMH might not be a very good idea.

That's not something that prevented it getting into orbit, though. The N1 did suffer payload capacity behind the Saturn V (to the moon at least, I think it was actually better for missions to Mars or Venus) but it wasn't THAT bad.
The second big problem was their onboard computer to deal with all the engines. I think that one of the launch failures was basically attributed to the telemetry being wired incorrectly to the computer such that when one of the engines failed the computer shut down the wrong engine, resulting in a cascade failure that would have otherwise been avoided.
Potentially it would have limped into orbit lacking two or three engines but the overly complex nature of the rocket doomed it.

I believe the N-1 first stage had to be shipped via rail to Baikonur in pieces and reassembled on-site which of course increased the chances of mistakes happening.

> and the Proton crash during an attempted launch of a Mars probe in April 1969
I was just looking up the Proton launches and that year they attempted 10 launches with only two successful.
Most of the failures were in upper stages but still. Fuck the Proton is a hot mess. Almost every year it has launched there has been at least one failure, and the multiple failure years make up the difference.

RS-25 is basically the same fucking shit but isn't slav tier costs. didn't help when the primary importer of the slav shit, Pratt & Whitney, also owned the company that made RS-25, Rocketdyne.

Eventually ULA was pressured politically to buy american again for the Atlas shit rockets so you now have real RD-180 competition again and america shat out two different, virtual equivalents: BE-4 (Blue Origin) and AJ-1 (P&W Sold, Aerojet Rocketdyne). Both, like RS-25 and RD-180, staged combustion engine and similar thrust to weight ratio.

boomers

You ever look up at the moon. Once? Twice? Ever see it rotate? Ever see any of the features of he moon change? No? Ever hear people talk about their favorite degree of rotation of the moon like people talk about the phases? Anything in our entire collective historical and culture that says ANYTHING about the FUCKING MOON. THE. FUCKING. MOON our only natural satellite turning?

perhaps he might be legally blind
I can't make out the features of the moon without glasses and I just have mild astigmatism

>Ever see it rotate? Ever see any of the features of he moon change?
I literally don't think this is something I could see with my eyes

>Ever hear people talk about their favorite degree of rotation of the moon like people talk about the phases?
I barely hear anyone talk about the phases

FPBP and dubs of truth