N1 soviet moon rocket / N1-3L Launch
Uploader Comments (juancarlosbascu)
Top Comments
-
it's a shame the N1 didn't work... it was an amazing piece of engineering
All Comments (88)
-
I had read that the failure here was much more likely than for Saturn V, because there were very many smaller rocket engines, which increased the probability of failure, many times. The Saturn V, had many fewer, and more powerful engines. It was really just a matter of stochastic probability.
-
Let's hope that the United States, Russia, the European Union, Japan, China, India, Brazil, as well as many other nations put their political differences aside and allot money to a Global Human Space Exploration Initiative. If we all spend just 5% of our GDPs on Space Exploration, instead of the Military, we'd be much better off in many ways.
-
@bestamerica If they stop using vodka as fuel then yeah it might work.
-
this is a prime example of what happens when people dont get along and think of thierselves, i like this rocket, it reminds me of something out of a alternate reality. if only the right cccp parties woulld front the money and if glushko was willing to play ball with korolov maybe just maybe that would keep pressure on NASA and we would have a moon colony. but thats my rant
-
'
i like american saturn V big rocket was the best top rocket in the world than CCCP ussr russia
-
it would be possible to go on moon with such a rocket, only it needed is little more money, time and valentin glushko and korolov to work together while korolev was alive
and btw americans could have gone more far in space technology till now if they only listened to Dr. Werner Von Braun ideas
but Also USA made alot of mistakes and they also focused too much on military, nuclear development and wasting money on medium range balistic missiles for submarines back in the 50s and 60s
-
@Blahblobify For example, the most reliable and safety rocket R7 (Soyuz) also had 3 unsuccessful flying tests. R7 could fly only after three unsuccessful flying tests in 1957. N1 had 4 unsuccessful flying tests. Is 4 much more badly than 3? It is not, it is the same.
-
@Blahblobify Everyone knows that the payload of N1 was 73% of Saturn-5. But it does not matter because N1 was 5 times cheaper than Saturn-5. And in 1974 Russia could send 6-7 cosmonauts to the Moon with 2 rockets for living on the Moon for a month. By the way, N1 was originally designed not for the Moon, but for sending robot apparatuses to the Mars without men.
-
English please
-
Candy coat it any way you want, they made 4, all 4 blew up. That makes it a complete failure. Stop trying to brag up the N1, which wasn't shit compared to the Saturn V anyway. Even if the N1 worked, it's payload capacity to the moon would have been HALF of the Saturn V !
I think the money was no cause because in 1974 two absolute perfect N1 rockets stood on the start pad and were ready to successfully complete their mission. All needed money for that program was found and already spent. The cause was Valentine Glushkos arrogance and his envy to Korolevs achievements and fame. And the ideological mistake of the Russian government which had no more interest for the lunar program after the success of the U.S.
SergeiPilipenko 2 years ago 17
And also the failures after the Korolev dead during Mishin works in the Bureau, Then Glushko gave the best and last powerfull rocket to the soviet union, the Energia.
Maybe if Korolev and Glushko didn't fight, the N1 flew with succes
juancarlosbascu 2 years ago 3