Why are Soyuz rockets so superior to American rockets?

Why are Soyuz rockets so superior to American rockets?

Other urls found in this thread:

fti.neep.wisc.edu/research/he3
twitter.com/AnonBabble

are they?

they aren't superior, it's simply that they exist and it's so darn expensive for both countries to make new rockets they just cooperate

It's not that it's more efficient, NASA just has a deal with Russia while they develop better technology since shuttles were decommissioned

By they look way cooler

Dat korolev cross

They are actually in trouble. Much lower costing rockets are about to hit the market and make them obsolete.

Russia is making a successor, but whether or not it can compete we'll have to see.

...

They are tried and tested and engineered with simplicity. The fuel tanks and the geometrical importance of the sphere for example. They are a fuck ton cheaper to make too

degenerate incest trash

Also, no one is gonna deny that the Russians are pretty fucking good at this stuff. We just don't really need anything else for the iss right now. Russia gets glory while NASA gets a ride

...

ITT: butthurt murricans

As long as he bumps I don't care

When they were developed, the Soviets didn't have the technology to make anything BUT spheres. One of the many things that bit them in the ass when scaling up for the n1.

Horseshit. NASA sucks and has no current, reliable and available delivery vehicle worth a shit. Sad thing is they have a bigger budget and access to 50 years of technical development in the field and can still not compete with Russia, India, China or a couple of private corporations when it comes down to it.

Russians have always excelled at rocket engineering. That's why they were first in the space race, and why America was so obsessed in trying to get the other space "firsts" after that.

>Superior rockets.
>Still hasn't made it to the moon.

What?

soviet union captured best german scientists for rockets at end of war

That's why they are researching new rockets, they need a lift while they try bigger and better rockets for further and more efficient delivery

They got second helpings then dumped them back into East Germany to be forgotten once they got them to show them everything.

A lot of the top bracket went West because of the reputations the Soviets had.

better colorway

You all are morons, the US government decided that rather than infesting shittons of money in NASA to make new/better rockets opted to allow the private sector to develop rockets.

this

russians were first to leave the planet. anything america has done in space won't ever top that

MOON

That doesn't mean NASA isn't doing their own shit still

Wernersville von braun was the director of nasa from its inception until 1968. A year before the moon landing. Nasa was originally based on the German v1 program. It's quite the contrary

I'd say both are on par with each other. Each will be remembered equally

>MOON
fake moon landing that eventually happened

That's passe. Forget Mars, too. Leaving Earth is a transition from air to space. The next big step will take leaving the solar system and visiting another star system..

Interstellar travel, however, is the next frontier, and may the best survive to see that glorious day.

Ok nutjob, you do you

I heard the chimp the US sent up actually died and they had like 2 spares just in case.

Politics.

>Interstellar travel
tfw we probably won't be alive to see it

USSR captured german research sites that were all in Poland
America got one guy and none of the research

Soviet system was completely based on the V2 rocket. They found a few engineers and had them rebuild one so they could learn how to make it. Everything was an evolution of that.

Soviets added more rockets to the V2, Americans made them bigger.

You can't just pull out some blueprints and make a rocket. There are entire untold parts of the process and tooling that cannot be easily recreated.

Technically the Nazis were first to send an object into space, just not into orbit.

From Terra Nova to space is easy, landing on a body that isnt TerraNova is fucking hard (even harder when the goal is to come back alive...)

Voyager 1 is the first manmade object to leave the solar system.

Still functioning on low power two.

Unfortunately we probably won't be alive to see man do this.

>fucking hard (even harder when the goal is to come back alive...)

Sure, but, honestly, there was no point to it. Going into space has all kinds of awesome implications, like satellites and such, but landing on the moon was all politics. I mean. honestly.... what did they expect to find? little green men? cheese?

That one guy smuggled a ton of research and scientists with him. Adding to that, Americans quickly brought tons of equipment and tooling west before the war ended. Soviets weren't empty handed, but they still got sloppy seconds.

most of the technologies from the US and soviet union is based off of the work from german nazi scientists...so, it really comes down to funding, resources and creative engineering. besides, space is likely to end up in the private sector with some government assistance than some states dominance over space.


tl;dr we have a long way to go and only a retard involves states being truly relevant in space colonization

>Soyuz has never tried to go to the moon
>???

Very interested in SpaceX for example. Will be cool to see what their heavy launcher does. Blue Origin is producing cool shit too, besides their tiny micropenis rocket.

Other countries are making progress as well, but not in the private sector afaik.

>we probably won't live to see it

I would expect not, unless the plot is advancing somewhere without our knowledge, but can you imagine what a glorious day to be the first people in an alien star system? On an alien planet orbiting an alien star? It's more than most people can probably appreciate. What fantastic possiblities await with interstellar travel.

Maybe when something better than mankind evolves from the best of our best, in some far future.

It would mean we can survive much longer as a species. If pride is all you have, that's something to invest in.

>Maybe when something better than mankind evolves from the best of our best, in some far future.

That'll change the laws of physics...

Its not what they found when they got thare, its what they developed and made getting there, also why hasnt anybody gone to the moon since? Because its not easy. Also, NASA has taken High res photos of nearly every major body in our solar system, flew past and landed on them too, so getting into space was the easiest part

The moon is limited in potential scientific value. I mean yes, geologists have lots of stuff they would like better answers to regarding the moon but nothing that is going to justify the expense of the trip.

I appreciate that it wasn't easy, but you have to admit it was all politics.

>why hasnt anybody gone to the moon since?

Because there's nothing there worth the costs and risks of getting there and back, right?


I mean, OK, let's just be honest for a second. Technology to explore and colonize the ocean floor would be 10 times.. no, a hundred thousand times more applicable, useful, and reasonable, than some random moon rock base baloney.

Honestly, I always figures the space race to be a clever way for the governments to perfect their rocket technology without diverting from the defense budget, increasing the effective budget, and gaining wide popular support for it at the same time.

That's the argument for private industry. We know how to get shit into space. We are very good at it. Now let's do it for cheap on an industrial level.

Part of the talk of private enterprise is getting scaled up to the point where celestial bodies can be mined for resources. Usually this is limited to asteroids though.

The moon's value would be as a habitat off the planet with lower gravity and easy access to the further reaches of space. If such a thing can be self-sustaining then it means no longer fighting the Earth's gravity to get things up and down.

If you can lift a man to the moon, you can lift a nuke of any size to any location on the planet.

>That'll change the laws of physics...

More like change our current primitive and imperfect MODELS of the laws of physics.

Last I checked, there's no unified field theory anywhere that completely explains all physical behavior and properties of matter under all possible circumstances.

The way to Mars is through a Moon colony, you need to test equipment, maneuvers, and generally how to do things. Also, there could be oil on the moon for all we know, its not about the reasoning, its about the discovery.

Sure, but that's not something you just make a single trip to it for, which is what user was saying about the russians never having gone to the moon. Moon base would be a massive operation requiring years of planning ahead of time and lots of data collecting on its feasibility and potential benefit.

Helium-3 on the Moon is of significant economic importance

I don't know, But you cannot, scientifically, 100% say that there isnt oil on the Moon.
also it was an example to prove a point, Of course there isn't oil on the Moon

Oil isn't likely. Raw materials, yes.

Didn't realize Helium 3 was on it. I know they suspect Uranium deposits are present.

Russians absolutely tried. They failed so spectacularly that the program wasn't public until the USSR dissolved. See Pic Related. American spy photo showing the aftermath of one of the largest man-made non-nuclear explosions to ever created.

The Moons core is Dino Jizz...

Prove me wrong...

xD

There's a ton of it on the Moon, the Apollo astronauts confirmed it

fti.neep.wisc.edu/research/he3

That's awesome, didn't know. Thanks for sharing.

My brother is a neutron physicist. He'd give a nut for He3.

Russian rockets carried an air mix for the cosmonauts to breathe, whereas USA carried oxygen, so Russian rockets were bigger.

Also, Russian were designed to land on land, not at sea.

They are old tech but far superior to anything that was or currently is on the market.

Is very close to no longer being true, but still...

Its not, its easier to make then it is to harvest from the moon and send back...

its a curiosity, nothing more

at best it will be used to fuel a rocket from the moon to another location, but doubtful since it would be cheaper to bring the fuel to a space fuel depot and refuel there.

If the Lunnahaud didn't count, then we also never been to mars.

This is how you get moon Nazis

Who the fuck said anything about NASA? The private companies have rockets that are far superior than anything they have.

>Its not, its easier to make then it is to harvest from the moon and send back
That's the first I've ever heard of that

Lol oh yeah? Are they? How much space exploration do they have? Oh yeha.....wait a minute.....weird....yep they dont

Because they have 1/3 the reliability at 1/10th the price.
Also, because Russia can't into cost cutting to eliminate government waste and corruption.

>implying rockets are only used for space exploration

>how much space exploration do they have

it's how many space exploration do they have, dumbass

tell me more about Russia landed used rockets like SpaceX, tell me more about Russian landing men on the moon multiple times, tell me more about Russia landing SUV sized rovers on Mars..

then read more scientific papers instead of pop culture "buzzfeed" shite

tell me more about that has literally nothing to do with anything concerning their rocket tech...

the US had worse rockets, but more money to compensate.

Americans wanted to build bigger and better and retired old designs.

Soviets stayed with what they had because they couldn't.

Hard to really qualify one as better than the other because there wasn't consistency.

My horse is amazing

Let him know if he goes all the way to Moon and sifts through an absolute shitload of extremely abrasive lunar regolith he can get a teeny tiny amount of the stuff. He'd only have to go through (at minimum) 150 million times more dirt than the amount of He3 he wanted.