5
$\begingroup$

This answer notes that Voskhod:

...added a small solid-fuel rocket to the parachute lines. It fired as the descent module neared touchdown, providing a softer landing.

How exactly did they safely and reliably add a "solid-fuel rocket to the parachute lines"? I'm thinking that the rocket's exhaust could burn and sever the line directly below, defeating the purpose.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Rockets pulling on lines have long been a thing. Check out the unbelievable Stanley Yankee ejection system. youtu.be/8Yw8g1Soigk?t=45 $\endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 0:17
  • $\begingroup$ @OrganicMarble enjoying the video, made my morning! $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 0:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ An engineer from Stanley gave a presentation to our aerospace engineering society when I was in college. I've never forgotten it! $\endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 0:42

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
12
$\begingroup$

I found a diagram that explains it better than words. The landing rocket module was at the base of the parachute lines, not above them:

enter image description here

The linkage (9) appears to be hinged, but I'm guessing it's a solid piece of metal rather than easily-burned fiber.

According to Space Biology & Medicine: Space and its Exploration, the capsule would be falling at 7-8 m/s (~25 fps) on the parachutes, and the rocket would slow it to 3-5 m/s (~13 fps), so impact would have been survivable, if not pleasant, if the rockets didn't activate for any reason.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
6
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Great diagram!! $\endgroup$
    – Organic Marble
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 0:44
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ "Mechanical altimeter" - So a stick that pokes into the ground? $\endgroup$
    – Markus Appel
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 10:08
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Hey, it was good enough for the Apollo LM... $\endgroup$
    – Russell Borogove
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 10:56
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @MarkusAppel Presumably. But, being certified for space flight, it would have been a very expensive stick. $\endgroup$
    – David Richerby
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 14:55
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Hopefully any surface soft enough to avoid triggering the altimeter would be soft enough to safely land on without the rockets. $\endgroup$
    – Russell Borogove
    Commented Jun 17, 2019 at 15:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.