Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Jalopnik)   Once upon a time the US planned to send an Apollo spacecraft to a Soviet space station. Also, the Russians had their own space station   (jalopnik.com) divider line
    More: Vintage, International Space Station, Soviet Salyut space station, Soviet space station, Soviet Soyuz spacecraft, humanity's actual space programs, Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, Space exploration, joint mission  
•       •       •

550 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Jun 2020 at 3:35 PM (3 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



29 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
TWX [TotalFark]
2020-06-09 1:32:03 PM  
The Soviets had many space stations.  Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.
 
2020-06-09 2:46:59 PM  

TWX: The Soviets had many space stations.  Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.


I didn't realize they had that many.  I knew of Mir, but not of the others.
 
2020-06-09 3:45:14 PM  
They also had indoor plumbing and electricity.
 
2020-06-09 3:45:28 PM  

xanadian: TWX: The Soviets had many space stations.  Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

I didn't realize they had that many.  I knew of Mir, but not of the others.


Half-dozen Salyuts.  China is copying their development process.
 
2020-06-09 3:46:00 PM  

TWX: The Soviets had many space stations.  Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.


There was MIr and Salyut, but I don't remember any others outside of that. I do know they did a lot of docking exercises but I am not sure you can call two Soyuz craft docked together a space station.
 
2020-06-09 3:49:11 PM  
 
2020-06-09 3:49:59 PM  

Slives: TWX: The Soviets had many space stations.  Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There was MIr and Salyut, but I don't remember any others outside of that. I do know they did a lot of docking exercises but I am not sure you can call two Soyuz craft docked together a space station.


I'd base my definition on changing the crew of the vessel while in orbit.
 
2020-06-09 4:07:01 PM  

Slives: TWX: The Soviets had many space stations.  Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There was MIr and Salyut, but I don't remember any others outside of that. I do know they did a lot of docking exercises but I am not sure you can call two Soyuz craft docked together a space station.


There were several Salyuts, and in two varieties:  The purely civilian stations, and the military Almaz stations that did a lot of photographic surveillance.

One of the stations was even armed with a cannon, and it was test fired after the station was abandoned.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_​3​#On-board_gun
 
2020-06-09 5:41:07 PM  

TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.


There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.
 
2020-06-09 5:52:44 PM  

vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.


Different governments, different goals, different methods.
The US trailed in the space race because it ultimately focused on going to the moon. This was a difficult project that came at the cost of setting other firsts. Eventually it would build a space station with the remains of its shuttered lunar program, one which easily dwarfs anything prior to the ISS.
We then became obsessed with the shuttle and hypersonics for a time, but again it was to the cost of actual reusability or sustainable spaceflight.

The Russians focused on keeping a space station and stayed on that. The capsule they use now is a direct descendent.  The Chinese are copying the Russian model because it is highly sustainable for 1970's technology.
Nothing was pushing them further once they ran out of the easier firsts.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-09 5:54:15 PM  

TWX: The Soviets had many space stations.  Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.


Indeed they were the first to have a space station. Sadly the only crew to stay in it became the only people so far to die in space. On the way home their Soyuz depressurized.

/Obviously not the only space-related deaths. Apollo 1 was never launched. Soyuz 1 and the two shuttles were not in space when their crews died.

//I wonder if Subby is too young to remember Shuttles visiting Mir.
 
2020-06-09 5:55:12 PM  
Just to clarify the above is the shuttle docked to the Russian Mir space station.
Below is Skylab, which deorbited before the shuttle was finished development.
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-09 6:31:00 PM  

way south: vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.

Different governments, different goals, different methods.
The US trailed in the space race because it ultimately focused on going to the moon. This was a difficult project that came at the cost of setting other firsts. Eventually it would build a space station with the remains of its shuttered lunar program, one which easily dwarfs anything prior to the ISS.
We then became obsessed with the shuttle and hypersonics for a time, but again it was to the cost of actual reusability or sustainable spaceflight.

The Russians focused on keeping a space station and stayed on that. The capsule they use now is a direct descendent.  The Chinese are copying the Russian model because it is highly sustainable for 1970's technology.
Nothing was pushing them further once they ran out of the easier firsts.

[Fark user image image 850x680]


Don't disagree with much.  Different Cultures = Different X.  I don't know if I'd say we (the US) trailed in the space race because we went to the moon, but we certainly lost velocity after having done so.  (AKA the "been there, done that" syndrome.)

Skylab was a little before my time in Houston, but I was part of Space Station Freedom program, both before and after the Pre-Integrated Truss (PIT) design.  There was an STS mission where they tried to assemble the most basic elements of the former and realized it was going to be a disaster.  PIT then got introduced to mitigate that. Then they realized maybe they should spread the cost around and SSF became the ISS.

FWIW, those solar arrays and radiators are mine!   (OK, not really but that's what I worked on.  Very boring work, BTW.  Could've been a bridge for what we were doing.)
 
2020-06-09 7:09:38 PM  

vestona22: way south: vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.

Different governments, different goals, different methods.
The US trailed in the space race because it ultimately focused on going to the moon. This was a difficult project that came at the cost of setting other firsts. Eventually it would build a space station with the remains of its shuttered lunar program, one which easily dwarfs anything prior to the ISS.
We then became obsessed with the shuttle and hypersonics for a time, but again it was to the cost of actual reusability or sustainable spaceflight.

The Russians focused on keeping a space station and stayed on that. The capsule they use now is a direct descendent.  The Chinese are copying the Russian model because it is highly sustainable for 1970's technology.
Nothing was pushing them further once they ran out of the easier firsts.

[Fark user image image 850x680]

Don't disagree with much.  Different Cultures = Different X.  I don't know if I'd say we (the US) trailed in the space race because we went to the moon, but we certainly lost velocity after having done so.  (AKA the "been there, done that" syndrome.)

Skylab was a little before my time in Houston, but I was part of Space Station Freedom program, both before and after the Pre-Integrated Truss (PIT) design.  There was an STS mission where they tried to assemble the most basic elements of the former and realized it was going to be a disaster.  PIT then got introduced to mitigate that. Then they realized maybe they should spread the cost around and SSF became the ISS.

FWIW, those solar arrays and radiators are mine!   (OK, not really but that's what I worked on.  Very boring work, BTW.  Could've been a bridge for what we were doing.)


I'd still argue the soviets were ahead, tho I'll concede it depends on how we follow the race.
They had first animal and man in space, first woman and first black cosmonaut. They had first spacewalk and if I'm not mistaken first docking and a few others. There was quite a few firsts for space probes too.  They did everything you could do with an common capsule and rocket.

Going to the moon was a tall order tho. You'd need more launch power and a lander along with host of stuff.   They were failing at getting a bigger rockets off the ground, and at some point they decided to give up entirely. They couldn't make the technological leap. I believe they'd lost their head engineer around this time and they just couldn't close that gap.
Maybe they saw stationkeeping as a means to do move ahead but... we could also say they were saving face by gathering more records. It just seems like Soyuz and Mir was as good as it got, and it was as good as necessary for their leaders.  They lost interest in doing more.
 
2020-06-09 7:10:51 PM  
Yeah. I heard a toilet seat from one of them killed some girl when it deorbited.
 
2020-06-09 7:28:23 PM  
We had our own secret space station, but it was never launched.
 
2020-06-09 7:33:49 PM  

way south: vestona22: way south: vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.

Different governments, different goals, different methods.
The US trailed in the space race because it ultimately focused on going to the moon. This was a difficult project that came at the cost of setting other firsts. Eventually it would build a space station with the remains of its shuttered lunar program, one which easily dwarfs anything prior to the ISS.
We then became obsessed with the shuttle and hypersonics for a time, but again it was to the cost of actual reusability or sustainable spaceflight.

The Russians focused on keeping a space station and stayed on that. The capsule they use now is a direct descendent.  The Chinese are copying the Russian model because it is highly sustainable for 1970's technology.
Nothing was pushing them further once they ran out of the easier firsts.

[Fark user image image 850x680]

Don't disagree with much.  Different Cultures = Different X.  I don't know if I'd say we (the US) trailed in the space race because we went to the moon, but we certainly lost velocity after having done so.  (AKA the "been there, done that" syndrome.)

Skylab was a little before my time in Houston, but I was part of Space Station Freedom program, both before and after the Pre-Integrated Truss (PIT) design.  There was an STS mission where they tried to assemble the most basic elements of the former and realized it was going to be a disaster.  PIT then got introduced to mitigate that. Then they realized maybe they should spread the cost around and SSF became the ISS.

FWIW, those solar arrays and radiators are mine!   (OK, not really but that's what I worked on.  Very boring work, BTW.  Could've been a bridge for what we were doing.)

I'd still argue the soviets were ahead, tho I'll concede it depends on how we foll ...


Neil Armstrong and Dave Scott did the first docking in space.
 
2020-06-09 8:01:03 PM  
 
2020-06-09 8:16:49 PM  

way south: (snip) It just seems like Soyuz and Mir was as good as it got, and it was as good as necessary for their leaders.  They lost interest in doing more.


I think we both did.   And I hate to say it it, going to Mars might be well off in the future.  Elon's dream of a tourist trade?  Imagine dropping a cruise ship into the middle of the desert.  Might be cool to look at for a couple days, but then people would just head to the buffet.  Oh, and it might take a year to get to that buffet.
 
2020-06-09 8:40:49 PM  

TheMysteriousStranger: Neil Armstrong and Dave Scott did the first docking in space.


You are correct. First attempt was Vostok but the first successes were Gemini.

vestona22: way south: (snip) It just seems like Soyuz and Mir was as good as it got, and it was as good as necessary for their leaders.  They lost interest in doing more.

I think we both did.   And I hate to say it it, going to Mars might be well off in the future.  Elon's dream of a tourist trade?  Imagine dropping a cruise ship into the middle of the desert.  Might be cool to look at for a couple days, but then people would just head to the buffet.  Oh, and it might take a year to get to that buffet.


I think a lot depends on how Elon sells this.
No one is going to Mars for day tours on a five year trip. I'd wager it's going to be scientists on government contract first followed by the hard core ideologically driven adventurers and then colonists. Some obviously won't decide to stay but it's a half decade stint regardless. They'll probably poke the first crews pretty hard to see who can put up with that.

Space tourism will be low earth orbit and maybe the moon. Starship is easily capable of that so Elon's probably got a side gig even if he hasn't planned it. Being able to associate with the true adventurers is a big bonus even if you aren't on the Mars team.  I can see a lot of wealthy people signing up for shorter missions.

I think the real money is mining the moon to build out earth facing orbital infrastructure for now. Space based power and communications. More robust satellites and more tourist stops turning into work platforms.
The moon is also a good place to build mars bound equipment since you'll pay far less of a mass penalty and you can use lunar ice to launch it.

Making Mars work means finding proper pilgrims who want to go there and build out a full destination. That could take decades and it's a life long project all by itself.
I think there are people who would gladly do that. It's like a second chance at developing mankind from the ground up.

/or course sending people with that mindset can be a problem all by itself.
/you don't want revolutionaries if the first half century of development is run on total charity from earth.
 
2020-06-09 8:48:25 PM  

vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.


I think you could argue the Soviet Union, and Russia still today, were/are far more risk averse than the United States.

They're still using the Soyuz/R-7 combination that goes back all the way to the late 1960's (the R-7 is the same rocket that launched Sputnik-1 in 1957).

Granted, they've been upgraded over the years, so a Soyuz/R-7 today isn't the same as a Soyuz/R-7 combo from 1967, but they are the same basic vehicle.

Think about that.  It's like driving around in an original model Ford Mustang, just with upgrades to things like seat belts, better radio, navigation system, air bags, Bluetooth, USB charging outlets, etc. but the car is the same basic engine, frame, suspension, and bodywork.
 
2020-06-09 9:58:17 PM  

way south: It just seems like Soyuz and Mir was as good as it got, and it was as good as necessary for their leaders. They lost interest in doing more.


It's not so much the lost interest as they lost their country.  Mir launched in 1986, the same year Chernobyl exploded.  Gorbachev said the cost of the Chernobyl response was a major cause for the economic collapse that led to the breakup of the Soviet Union (or words to that effect, according to HBO).

Cosmonaut 3rd Class Sergei Krikalev actually launched from the Soviet Union towards his stay on Mir, and when he returned, he landed in Kazakhstan, part of the Commonwealth of Independent States formed in the wake of the breakup.
 
TWX [TotalFark]
2020-06-09 11:25:03 PM  

dittybopper: vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.

I think you could argue the Soviet Union, and Russia still today, were/are far more risk averse than the United States.

They're still using the Soyuz/R-7 combination that goes back all the way to the late 1960's (the R-7 is the same rocket that launched Sputnik-1 in 1957).

Granted, they've been upgraded over the years, so a Soyuz/R-7 today isn't the same as a Soyuz/R-7 combo from 1967, but they are the same basic vehicle.

Think about that.  It's like driving around in an original model Ford Mustang, just with upgrades to things like seat belts, better radio, navigation system, air bags, Bluetooth, USB charging outlets, etc. but the car is the same basic engine, frame, suspension, and bodywork.


Counter argument, Constellation/SLS are trying to perpetuate Shuttle program technology from the 1970s, even when one can argue that the technology is foolhardy (ie, SRBs) and that safer methods have already been developed.  More disappointing, SLS Block II won't even reach the total tonnage that the space shuttle and cargo bay had when launching Chandra X-ray observatory, coming in five tons short, and is still slated to be ten tons behind the Saturn V.

Age itself doesn't bother me, but the lack of progress on SLS does.  The combined Constellation and SLS programs have taken longer to develop than the Space Shuttle originally did and hasn't produced a single launch, despite literally billions of dollars spent on it and having full access to the Shuttle Program's technical package and their literal parts bins.
 
2020-06-10 3:52:02 AM  

way south: vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.

Different governments, different goals, different methods.
The US trailed in the space race because it ultimately focused on going to the moon. This was a difficult project that came at the cost of setting other firsts. Eventually it would build a space station with the remains of its shuttered lunar program, one which easily dwarfs anything prior to the ISS.
We then became obsessed with the shuttle and hypersonics for a time, but again it was to the cost of actual reusability or sustainable spaceflight.

The Russians focused on keeping a space station and stayed on that. The capsule they use now is a direct descendent.  The Chinese are copying the Russian model because it is highly sustainable for 1970's technology.
Nothing was pushing them further once they ran out of the easier firsts.

[Fark user image 850x680]


From their last public mission, the Crew Dragon is also being use as a source of inspiration for Chinese spacecraft.
 
2020-06-10 6:01:30 AM  

TWX: dittybopper: vestona22: TWX: Space operations are one place where the Soviets excelled.

There are a number of places.  Different culture, different attitudes of risk tolerance.  Not meant to be a slam or insult.  Who Dares Wins.

I think you could argue the Soviet Union, and Russia still today, were/are far more risk averse than the United States.

They're still using the Soyuz/R-7 combination that goes back all the way to the late 1960's (the R-7 is the same rocket that launched Sputnik-1 in 1957).

Granted, they've been upgraded over the years, so a Soyuz/R-7 today isn't the same as a Soyuz/R-7 combo from 1967, but they are the same basic vehicle.

Think about that.  It's like driving around in an original model Ford Mustang, just with upgrades to things like seat belts, better radio, navigation system, air bags, Bluetooth, USB charging outlets, etc. but the car is the same basic engine, frame, suspension, and bodywork.

Counter argument, Constellation/SLS are trying to perpetuate Shuttle program technology from the 1970s, even when one can argue that the technology is foolhardy (ie, SRBs) and that safer methods have already been developed.  More disappointing, SLS Block II won't even reach the total tonnage that the space shuttle and cargo bay had when launching Chandra X-ray observatory, coming in five tons short, and is still slated to be ten tons behind the Saturn V.

Age itself doesn't bother me, but the lack of progress on SLS does.  The combined Constellation and SLS programs have taken longer to develop than the Space Shuttle originally did and hasn't produced a single launch, despite literally billions of dollars spent on it and having full access to the Shuttle Program's technical package and their literal parts bins.


There is nothing inherently wrong with SLS tech, not even using solid rocket boosters.

The big defect was in not having your vehicle at the top of the vehicle stack.  Certainly the Columbia disaster would have been avoided, and arguably the Challenger disaster would have been survivable.

But what I'm talking about is if we were as conservative as the Russians, we'd still be flying Apollo command modules on top of Titan boosters.
 
2020-06-10 8:31:07 AM  
The first time I went to KSC the Apollo half of Apollo-Soyuz was on the pad.

/Got nothin
 
TWX [TotalFark]
2020-06-10 10:06:21 AM  

dittybopper: But what I'm talking about is if we were as conservative as the Russians, we'd still be flying Apollo command modules on top of Titan boosters.


Perhaps, but it is very disappointing that so many Titan/II/III/IV rockets were built and then broken-up instead of used for peaceful space launches.  The Titan family did prove useful for space launches in all of its interations.  I wouldn't advocate the construction of new missiles in this family, but having spent the money to manufacture the missiles, destroying them unflown if they could have performed cargo or satellite launches seems very wasteful.
 
2020-06-10 4:12:25 PM  

TWX: dittybopper: But what I'm talking about is if we were as conservative as the Russians, we'd still be flying Apollo command modules on top of Titan boosters.

Perhaps, but it is very disappointing that so many Titan/II/III/IV rockets were built and then broken-up instead of used for peaceful space launches.  The Titan family did prove useful for space launches in all of its interations.  I wouldn't advocate the construction of new missiles in this family, but having spent the money to manufacture the missiles, destroying them unflown if they could have performed cargo or satellite launches seems very wasteful.


Agreed.

However, if I recall, that was part of some arms control agreement.
 
2020-06-10 4:13:26 PM  

NotThatGuyAgain: The first time I went to KSC the Apollo half of Apollo-Soyuz was on the pad.

/Got nothin


No, you got something.   That's amazing, and something I wish I had seen.
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.