Question Kapustin Yar location.

[Notebook]

Can any one give me the Lat/Lon for Kapustin Yar base?
I have 48.5N, 45.8E.

Not much there in Google Earth, so I think those co-ordinates are a bit wide.

Many thanks, N.

 

[Urwumpe]

Can any one give me the Lat/Lon for Kapustin Yar base?
I have 48.5N, 45.8E.

Not much there in Google Earth, so I think those co-ordinates are a bit wide.

Many thanks, N.

I think you should read more about when and how Kapustin Yar got used for launches.

The coordinates are perfectly right, but you have only very very small launch complexes there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapustin_Yar#Launch_pads

 

[Kozak]

EDIT: Already answered.

 

[Notebook]

Thanks Urwumpe, the map in the links page is very useful.

Better not ask about Svobodny then...

N.

To DarkWandere:- The google images are a bit variable in that area, thanks for the link.

N.

 

[SiberianTiger]

Kapustin Yar is not anywhere like Cape Canaveral, for instance. It is an enormous test range. Launch sites for different kinds of rockets and missiles are spread sparsely across it.

 

[Notebook]

So it seems, if you have the space why not use it!

I got the name from a book I just bought "Jane's Space Recognition Guide".It is one of a few in the Launch Sites section I didn't recognise.
Didn't know about Alcantara in Brazil either.

N.

 

[SiberianTiger]

So it seems, if you have the space why not use it!

I got the name from a book I just bought "Jane's Space Recognition Guide".It is one of a few in the Launch Sites section I didn't recognise.
Didn't know about Alcantara in Brazil either.

N.

The first line from this book's review makes me scratch my head:

HOW soon after the US landed astronauts on the moon did the then Soviet Union make its first, robotic landing?

Something tells me that the information inside may be surprisingly inaccurate. Or maybe the reviewer did not bother to read the stuff.

 

[cjp]

For more accurate coordinates: see Wikipedia. Most of it seems to be southeast of the city.
Wikimapia often makes it easier to find things.

 

[Urwumpe]

Something tells me that the information inside may be surprisingly inaccurate. Or maybe the reviewer did not bother to read the stuff.

I suspect the latter. That the USSR had been first in "soft"-landing on the moon, should be known if you write about spaceflight.

 

[Notebook]

The first line from this book's review makes me scratch my head:



Something tells me that the information inside may be surprisingly inaccurate. Or maybe the reviewer did not bother to read the stuff.

The entry on page 57 starts:

"Luna 16 was the first success out of six Soviet attempts to land an automated craft on the Moon and return a soil sample to Earth - though it was too late to beat the Apollo 11 and 12 missions"

It then gives more information on the structure and an image of Luna 16.

Specification:-
Manufacturer: Lavochkin
Launch Date: September 12 1970
Initial Lunar Orbit: 110Km circular, 70 inclination
Launch Site: Baikonur, Kazakhstan
Launcher: Proton D-1-e
Launch Mass: 5727kg
Body dimenions: 4m x 4m
Payload: TV stereo imaging sytem; remote arm and drill for sample collection, radiation detector.

Page ends with:-
"The reentry capsule returned directly to Earth and made a ballistic entry into the atmosphere on September 24. The capsule landed about 80Km south east of Dzhezkazgan in Kazakhstan.

I'm not sure how to take that review, its a bit incorrect?

N.

---------- Post added at 19:23 ---------- Previous post was at 19:06 ----------

Just noticed this bit:-

There's a heap of other fascinating facts, including the sad fate of Laika, the Russian dog sent into space: a thermal error in Sputnik 2's cabin baked the poor mutt in orbit

Anyone who can write that stuff is not to be trusted.

 

[tblaxland]

The entry on page 57 starts:

"Luna 16 was the first success out of six Soviet attempts to land an automated craft on the Moon and return a soil sample to Earth - though it was too late to beat the Apollo 11 and 12 missions"

No mention of Luna 9?

 

[Notebook]

Yes, has Luna 9 entry as "First soft landing on the Moon, first pictures from lunar surface".

The section is titled "Selected Historic Missions", guess you'd need a bigger book if they weren't selected.

N.

 

[SiberianTiger]

On Sputnik-2 / Laika part,

Anyone who can write that stuff is not to be trusted.

This part, however, is mostly true. Laika died because of heat buildup indeed, some hours after orbit insertion. Not sure there had been any boiling, though.

It's necessary to say that it was not a malfuction, but rather a functional incapability of the satellite known even before launch. The designers just has not time to implement a heat dissipation system into the Sputnik 2 (it was the first habitable spacecraft ever, right?) because Khruschev demanded the launch would commence in a ridiculuosly short time after his word (about a month or so). Korolev proposed a somewhat more rational development term for this spacecraft, but he was outweighed by the authority.

So in a way, Laika was the first true victim of the space race. But her fate is not different from any dog's who was locked in a car on a sun-lit parking lot. Just a bit more publicity.

 

[Notebook]

Its just the term "mutt", could have been phrased better.

Tenous link:-

N.