The rest of the world didn't do much did they?
Moderator
Thread Starter
Tu144, I agree, it was rushed and disastrous.
The space programme (and I've worked out there with some of this technology) I disagree on everything except the shuttle Buran - the quality of science, and the amount they did with it is every bit as respectable as the NASA effort, in some cases rather better. Okay, a lot of it was military, but that was hardly missing from the US effort!
G
The space programme (and I've worked out there with some of this technology) I disagree on everything except the shuttle Buran - the quality of science, and the amount they did with it is every bit as respectable as the NASA effort, in some cases rather better. Okay, a lot of it was military, but that was hardly missing from the US effort!
G
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder why Richard Pearce is not included - or would that cause a major re-write of the US history books, not to mention, offending the Smithsonian Institute?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Covering the Commonwealth
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Genghis the Engineer
I don't think there's anything wrong with any kind of "hall of fame" celebrating the greats of a particular nation's aviation achievements - so long as they admit that's what they are doing.
But, if you start to introduce people from outside your own parish, you really need to be less partisan.
G
But, if you start to introduce people from outside your own parish, you really need to be less partisan.
G
But my point is even when 'pretending' or 'attempting' to be unbiassed, just by the nature of what you know, a national bias always creeps in. The exception is international collaborative listing efforts - such as the 'Chronicle of Aviation' book.
Show me a listing of greats, and I'll tell you what nationality the compiler was...
Yes, we would have to rewrite the history books for Pearce - The jury's in and the answer was 'not successful'. There was an excellent series in Aeroplane Monthly about several pioneers whose achievements were massaged and re-invented for national adulation. Pearce and Santos Dumont were two who'd done a fair amount, but not as much as their NZ and Brazilian boosters would have you believe. "Intelligent Design" for aviation, I'm afraid.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genghis,
Buran was a bit of a non starter....However I was wondering more about the manned missions to the moon....
From Starman and Korolev's books it would appear that technically they were making progress to match the americans...if not ahead but political pressure was applied to expedite the operation of immature designs which resulted in failures. especially the main booster (SV euqivalent) which then set the programme back....
Your experience may well contradict this but it is this perception that has generated the impression of a 'rush' to be first regardless....
As for the qulaity we need look noe further than the continued use and 'safety' of designs from that era...whilat the US has allowed these to become obsolete and rely solely on new technology....
Buran was a bit of a non starter....However I was wondering more about the manned missions to the moon....
From Starman and Korolev's books it would appear that technically they were making progress to match the americans...if not ahead but political pressure was applied to expedite the operation of immature designs which resulted in failures. especially the main booster (SV euqivalent) which then set the programme back....
Your experience may well contradict this but it is this perception that has generated the impression of a 'rush' to be first regardless....
As for the qulaity we need look noe further than the continued use and 'safety' of designs from that era...whilat the US has allowed these to become obsolete and rely solely on new technology....
Moderator
Thread Starter
Let's face it, both sides were rushing to be first pretty much regardless.
The Soviet rocket, which was designated N1 was kept extremely secret, primarily it was being developed by the Progress and Nikolai-Kolmykov bureaus in Samara - I've met a few of the Engineers who worked on the design and even now they are cagey about it. I've never seen drawings or models, but it was described to me as "very much like the Saturn V". Hardly surprising, since the state of the art in modern rocket technology was fairly similar both sides of the iron curtain.
A problem of the era is that unlike in the US, the Engineers couldn't readily walk away from political pressure when it all got too difficult - and that lack of ability certainly led to a few too-many corners being cut occasionally - I suspect that Tu-144 and Buran were particularly bad examples of this.
However, when the US landed on the moon with Apollo 11, the decision from the Kremlin was to simply bin it all and pretend that the project never happened. When you consider the amount of brilliant work that must have been buried, a real tragedy - what could have happened if they'd carried on?
G
The Soviet rocket, which was designated N1 was kept extremely secret, primarily it was being developed by the Progress and Nikolai-Kolmykov bureaus in Samara - I've met a few of the Engineers who worked on the design and even now they are cagey about it. I've never seen drawings or models, but it was described to me as "very much like the Saturn V". Hardly surprising, since the state of the art in modern rocket technology was fairly similar both sides of the iron curtain.
A problem of the era is that unlike in the US, the Engineers couldn't readily walk away from political pressure when it all got too difficult - and that lack of ability certainly led to a few too-many corners being cut occasionally - I suspect that Tu-144 and Buran were particularly bad examples of this.
However, when the US landed on the moon with Apollo 11, the decision from the Kremlin was to simply bin it all and pretend that the project never happened. When you consider the amount of brilliant work that must have been buried, a real tragedy - what could have happened if they'd carried on?
G
Peter Barron:
You forget that other 'famous american' Charlie Chaplin, who like Stan Laurel, started his career with Fred Karno's troupe in south london (Elephant & Castle so the wife tells me)
You forget that other 'famous american' Charlie Chaplin, who like Stan Laurel, started his career with Fred Karno's troupe in south london (Elephant & Castle so the wife tells me)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Russian Moon programme
You can learn all that is known (just about) on the website http://www.astronautix.com
Originally Posted by Woomera
I wonder why Richard Pearce is not included - or would that cause a major re-write of the US history books, not to mention, offending the Smithsonian Institute?
*nods*
They just keep on ignoring him and hoping he'll go away ...
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Slough
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
chevvron.
I did know about Charlie Chaplin being English but never really rated him, each to their own I suppose, I found Stan Laurel much funnier.
For some reason Americans seem to think that they were the first and best in everything even when they are not.
I have a model American Steam Engine, its called the J Class, it was a Streamliner Engine in the 1930s and very fast.
The model is made by an American company and has the history of the Engine on the box.
According to them the J Class was the fastest Steam Engine in the world ever made.
So my question to them is What about the Mallard, everyone knows that the fastest steam locomotive ever made was the A4 Mallard, its never been beaten, so why say the J Class is the fastest when its not, I just can't see the point of them saying that.
Errol Flynn did not take Burma
Peter.
I did know about Charlie Chaplin being English but never really rated him, each to their own I suppose, I found Stan Laurel much funnier.
For some reason Americans seem to think that they were the first and best in everything even when they are not.
I have a model American Steam Engine, its called the J Class, it was a Streamliner Engine in the 1930s and very fast.
The model is made by an American company and has the history of the Engine on the box.
According to them the J Class was the fastest Steam Engine in the world ever made.
So my question to them is What about the Mallard, everyone knows that the fastest steam locomotive ever made was the A4 Mallard, its never been beaten, so why say the J Class is the fastest when its not, I just can't see the point of them saying that.
Errol Flynn did not take Burma
Peter.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Covering the Commonwealth
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Peter,
~sigh~ I could substitute 'Britons' for your 'American'. But that's OK (for the Brits.) As I said above, look to the mote in your own eye. It's easy, and frankly boring to go on about xenophobia, and I'm afraid coming from the UK, often hypocritical.
Errol Flynn was born in Tasmania. Obviously he was very unpatriotic not to go to Ealing but to Hollywood, maybe because it *shock horror* offered better opportunities?
I could find the same attitude on a number of British websites and box-tops, but, you know, life's too short.
No offence intended...
~sigh~ I could substitute 'Britons' for your 'American'. But that's OK (for the Brits.) As I said above, look to the mote in your own eye. It's easy, and frankly boring to go on about xenophobia, and I'm afraid coming from the UK, often hypocritical.
Errol Flynn was born in Tasmania. Obviously he was very unpatriotic not to go to Ealing but to Hollywood, maybe because it *shock horror* offered better opportunities?
I could find the same attitude on a number of British websites and box-tops, but, you know, life's too short.
No offence intended...
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Covering the Commonwealth
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nooooo...
I TOLD him not to do that portrait.
Can your majesty see what it is yet?
All better, thanks nurse.
Back (sort of) on topic - John Gilespie McGee Jr. (Yes him, surly bonds etc...) American, Canadian or RAF hero?
I TOLD him not to do that portrait.
Can your majesty see what it is yet?
All better, thanks nurse.
Back (sort of) on topic - John Gilespie McGee Jr. (Yes him, surly bonds etc...) American, Canadian or RAF hero?
Moderator
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by JDK
Back (sort of) on topic - John Gilespie McGee Jr. (Yes him, surly bonds etc...) American, Canadian or RAF hero?
Of course, more recently, many people in Britain are still convinced that Michael Foale was a British Astronaut!
G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Swindon, Wilts,UK
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That would be Helen Sharman shurely!
If you've a few spare moments this is an interesting site
Russian Space web
If you think the N1 was a monster have a look at the UR-700.
The Mars mission plans are pretty impressive as well.
It's a shame that the political system in Russia allowed personality clashes to divide the efforts to achive these things.
As an aside aren't they using regenerative engines which were originally built for the N1, which were hidden by the engineers who could not bring themselves to destroy them when the programe foundered on American airframes now. Apparently they are extremely efficient despite being forty year old technology.
If you've a few spare moments this is an interesting site
Russian Space web
If you think the N1 was a monster have a look at the UR-700.
The Mars mission plans are pretty impressive as well.
It's a shame that the political system in Russia allowed personality clashes to divide the efforts to achive these things.
As an aside aren't they using regenerative engines which were originally built for the N1, which were hidden by the engineers who could not bring themselves to destroy them when the programe foundered on American airframes now. Apparently they are extremely efficient despite being forty year old technology.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by JDK
Errol Flynn was born in Tasmania.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Covering the Commonwealth
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flynn...
From Wikipedia:
Incidentally, I never knew either, until recently, when on hols in Taz - he's often regarded as a 'famous export' there 
and I was guessing at the not happy in England, but, there y'are. (Not a fan, don't care where anyone's from, it's how that act that counts...)
From Wikipedia:
Born in Hobart, Tasmania, he was taken to Sydney, Australia as a child, where he attended two schools and was expelled from both. Shortly afterwards he moved to New Guinea, where he bought a tobacco plantation, a business which failed. In 1933 he starred in the Australian made film In The Wake Of The Bounty directed by Charles Chauvel. In the early 1930s he left for Britain and in 1933 got an acting job with Northampton Repertory Theatre, where he worked for six months. According to Gerry Connelly's Book Errol Flynn in Northampton, he also acted at the 1934 Malvern Festival, and also in Glasgow and in London's West End. After gaining this experience in the acting trade, he moved to Hollywood looking for film work.
and I was guessing at the not happy in England, but, there y'are. (Not a fan, don't care where anyone's from, it's how that act that counts...)
