Timeline for What caused the N1 to become a failure?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://space.stackexchange.com/ with https://space.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 7, 2016 at 15:28 | history | edited | DylanSp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Corrected N-1 to N1.
|
| Apr 7, 2016 at 13:21 | comment | added | Future Historian | @DylanSp Well, that is not good. :( | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 13:19 | comment | added | DylanSp | @FutureHistorian For both the 7K-LOK and the LK, to allow them to support docking. I imagine that whatever managers were in charge thought it was easier to just increase the capability of the N-1. It wasn't really feasible, especially in hindsight, but that's Soviet management for you. | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 13:09 | comment | added | Future Historian | @DylanSp So, in other words: some design updates might be needed for the Soyuz 7K-LOK. | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 12:58 | comment | added | DylanSp | @FutureHistorian That's a good question. My guess is that it might have been able to lift it, but the 7K-LOK/LK wasn't designed for EOR. | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 12:48 | comment | added | Future Historian | @DylanSp And the 75 tonne version of the N1 could be used to launch the Soyuz 7K-LOK, correct? | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 12:46 | comment | added | DylanSp | @FutureHistorian The Proton/UR-500 was capable of launching the stripped-down 7K-L1, though, which could be used for a lunar flyby. See falsesteps.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/… | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 12:45 | comment | added | Future Historian | @DylanSp But could the 75 tonne version of the N1 do it? | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 12:44 | comment | added | DylanSp | @FutureHistorian That's the EOR (Earth Orbit Rendevous) mission profile. IIRC, the Soviets explored that with Chelomei's UR-500 rocket (which would eventually become the Proton). It wasn't capable of lifting the 7K-LOK, though. | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 12:34 | comment | added | Future Historian | Well, could the USSR not have launched the Soyuz 7K-LOK and the LK separately? | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 12:31 | comment | added | Organic Marble | The early US space program certainly used waterfall. No idea about USSR. But I believe this was intended as a jest. | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 8:13 | comment | added | JDługosz | I thought Agile was invented a decade later. I recall that aerospace used the Waterfall model prior to the 777 team, according to the Nova episode. | |
| Apr 7, 2016 at 7:47 | comment | added | vgru | "Well, our agile burndown chart indicates we will either have to seriously sacrifice quality, or seriously sacrifice deadlines." -- Look son, we don't call this whole thing a space race for no reason. | |
| Apr 6, 2016 at 18:50 | comment | added | Dan Bryant | "Yeah, we know we told you to design for 75 tons, but now we need 95 tons. You can fix that in software, right?" | |
| Apr 6, 2016 at 16:48 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 6, 2016 at 16:50 | |||||
| Apr 6, 2016 at 16:43 | history | answered | DylanSp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |