Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Accuracy of Soyuz vs Apollo landings

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Accuracy of Soyuz vs Apollo landings

    Watching a program about Scott Kelly, Jeffery Kluger (Lost Moon, Apollo made a comment along the lines of how returning from space has never been acurate and required large spaces, which is why the US used the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans, and the Soviets/Russians used Kazhistan.

    But IIRC, Apollo had the opposite problem, and a think a TindallGram suggested deliberately offstting the landing spot away from the carrier to make sure the capsule did not land on it.


    So why was Apollo so much more accurate than Soyuz? Was it because of the small number of missions and, given time, the accuracy would have degraded with a larger sample?

  • #2
    Originally posted by WilliamTi View Post
    Watching a program about Scott Kelly, Jeffery Kluger (Lost Moon, mathway Apollo
    made a comment along the lines of how returning from space has never been acurate and required large spaces, which is why the US used the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans, and the Soviets/Russians used Kazhistan.

    But IIRC, Apollo had the opposite problem, and a think a TindallGram suggested deliberately myanimelist offstting the landing spot away from the carrier to make sure the capsule did not land on it.


    So why was Apollo so much more accurate than Soyuz? Was it because birthday wishes of the small number of missions and, given time, the accuracy would have degraded with a larger sample?
    according to wikipedia Soviet spacecraft were designed with automation in mind; the Lunokhod 1 and Luna 16 were both unmanned probes, and each Soyuz spacecraft had been designed to minimize risk due to human error by having fewer manual controls with which human operators would have to contend during flight. while the Apollo spacecraft were designed to be operated by humans and required highly trained astronauts in order to operate.The Apollo vehicle also relied on astronaut piloting to a much greater extent than did the Soyuz machine". and thus apollo can make alterations according to the situations while soyuz is doomed in unprecedented situations due the automation.
    Last edited by violetevergarden; 05-09-2019, 01:53 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      I can't figure it out either, but methinks the ballistic coefficient of Apollo + it's computer systems allowed better controlled reentry than Soyuz.

      I am horrible at algebra, perhaps you are better and can parse the attached document better than I for nuggets of wisdom in this regard.

      Google-fu failing me, I can't find anything similar in a language I can understand regarding Soyuz TTRockStars.
      Last edited by Robert26; 08-10-2019, 11:45 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        The Apollo vehicle also relied on astronaut piloting to a much greater extent than did the Soyuz machine.
        geometry dash

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Robert26 View Post
          I can't figure it out either, but methinks the ballistic coefficient of Apollo + it's computer systems allowed better controlled reentry than Soyuz.

          I am horrible at algebra, perhaps you are better and can parse the attached document better than I for nuggets of wisdom in this regard.

          Google-fu failing me, I can't find anything similar in a language I can understand regarding Soyuz TTRockStars.
          An excellent find. Key technical problems for the AGC were

          The calculations are iterative and the system has finite accuracy
          The flat out speed of the AGC was about 64KIPS.*
          Program changes in the flight rated ROM take months to make and install.

          We know Soviet era computer hardware was behind the US. There were some English pages on USSR flight computers but I can't recall the web address. They did have digital machines but also analogue computers wired to solve certain navigation problems and drive a control system that could use them. The digital machines seem to have been physically bigger. Like early US airborne processors they may have used spinning drums for main memory

          *That's the speed of a pocket calculator, not a phone.

          Comment

          Working...
          X