N1 Rocket and INSANE Soviet Plans to beat Apollo 11 to the Moon

[@Lagul_4]

(Gets notification) *happy Soviet noises*

[@coffeecatto3375]

Uraa uraaa xD

[@maxon17]

@@coffeecatto3375 Есссс Есссс

[@HeadsetHatGuy]

i broke the 69 likes

[@HeadsetHatGuy]

@Charlie Carroll lmao

[@HeadsetHatGuy]

@Charlie Carroll -i am the destroyer of 69 likes-

[@TheBeardyPenguin]

Loving this series ShadowZone, the bell is well and truly CRUSHED! ☭☭☭

[@BasedAlaric]

Beardypenguin is a communist?! What!?

[@kurade1096]

@@BasedAlaric drinking commie tears

[@uhb0t]

привет мой товарищ товарищ

[@sfs_lead]

@@BasedAlaricfor all kerbal kind

[@teron281]

Pleas Continue this series it would be awesome to hear your thoughts and analysis of the energia rocket and Buran, maybe even the energia 2 ;) (yes that was supposed to be a thing, fully reusable too..)

[@ShadowZone]

Energia and Buran will show up in episode 8 ;)

[@munzlp]

@@ShadowZone im waiting

[@rajianee85]

@@munzlp still waiting

[@munzlp]

@@rajianee85 Yep

[@mariasirona1622]

@@ShadowZone im waiting

[@alexsv1938]

Well there is the upcoming Apple TV series called For All Mankind which takes the alternative history where Korolev lived and the Soviets landed on the Moon first.

[@soopahsoopah]

Yes, this is indeed a thing!

[@Torgonius]

Great job on this! Informative yet fun. You're very good at telling a story.

[@_mikolaj_]

"super secret STABLE Rocket"

[@Neukend]

thats why it is known as USSR in the west. Unstable Super Secret Rocket

[@TBone-bz9mp]

To answer your question, I have seen it theorised that if the inner six NK-33s had been deleted then the N-1 would have stood a better chance of working since it was the extra plumbing that caused most of the problems. Though I suspect a lot more would have to go right as well in order for the Soviets to beat Apollo 11. As for whether or not it would change the outcome of the cold war, I'm skeptical. The value of the Apollo mission was felt most in terms of technological and scientific discoveries made as a result of the program, which while undoubtedly fantastic, tell us very little about geopolitics. On the whole I would say probably not a great deal of difference, Nixon would probably still resign over watergate, leading to Carter in 76 and Reagan in 80, the Soviet economic system would probably roll on unchanged (if anything a moon landing makes that even more certain) meaning Chernobyl and all the rest probably happens on schedule. Though the butterfly effect is a thing so I'm probably wrong. The most interesting question is 'what does the US do in the aftermath?' remember that in reality a bare 56% of Americans supported the Apollo program, after the moon landing. Does losing mean the end for NASA? Or does it have the opposite effect? What then? Mars? Moonbase? A space shuttle that isn't a complete boondoggle? We can but guess.

[@Matt_Kab]

I guess it's time to watch the new TV show For all mankind

[@dwightmagnuson4298]

Did they have the real-time on-board computer that MIT built for Apollo? Without the instantaneous calculations that Drapers team provided, orbital mechanics solutions would not have been timely enough for space rendezvous or to land on the moon in a precise location.

[@odysseusrex5908]

The Space Shuttle was anything but a boondoggle. It accomplished incredible things, and gave us capabilities that will not be equaled before SpaceX's Starship becomes operational.

[@poruatokin]

@@odysseusrex5908 Err, yes it was. NASA's manned and scientific progress would have been 10 or 20 years ahead of where it is today if it had not been for the Shuttle. Nice concept but completely ruined by too much bureaucratic interference.

[@odysseusrex5908]

@@poruatokin No, your launch vehicle is not a tenth as important as what you do in space. Further ups and downs in capsules or flags and footprints would have been meaningless. The research accomplished on a real space *ship*, not to mention building the space station, are what was important. That said, the Shuttles should have been upgraded over time, the main engines especially, and the X-33 project should have been pursued. This was all financially possible, just not politically.

[@cmdrterrorfirma4244]

excellent details in this video! Great work.

[@Cnupoc]

Soviet Engineering - produces a highly sophisticated module that tracks engine output and shuts down paired engine in order to maintain stability. Soviet Engineering - improves on the highly sophisticated module by disabling it in the first 50 seconds, since it caused 2 failed launches, because of it's complex decision making.

[@longlakeshore]

The Soviet mistake was to copy NASA and build an all-up Moon rocket. Had they used Proton to launch 25 tons at a time they could have assembled a modified space station in orbit based on the Salyut airframe, docked a lunar lander and Soyuz module to it and sent the whole thing to the Moon with a crew of four. Proton was testing by 1965, Salyut had been in development since 1960, and the Soyuz module already existed. A lunar lander for two cosmonauts would be the only entirely new component. As with so many things the Russian mistake was to copy the Americans, copy the Americans, copy the Americans. Even the Soyuz module was a ripoff of a General Electric design.

[@HECKAKYH-ADEKBATEH]

They didn't copy USA, they were leading before and leading after (in orbitals), leaders do not copy. An example, where USSR "copied" was Buran, where they quickly understood how dangerous and pointless Shuttle-clone was and kept Energia launcher. N1 goals were to create stable large payload launcher to other planets, Moon was just its first checkpoint.

[@TrayTerra]

Absolutely love this series, and thank you so much for what you’ve done here! If you have merchandise, like a T-shirt or an ushanka or other, I would love to get ahold of some 😃

[@ilyazavalishin6872]

Спасибо за работу, проделанную над созданием этого ролика! Респект от русского коммьюнити :D

[@skafandreys]

Америка победитель ! Вам конец ! Уважаем за поддержку !

[@skafandreys]

Отправляйся в гулаг! В сибирию!

[@egor_l.]

КГБ уже идёт за ним

[@Peppppperr]

Wah..?

[@egor_l.]

@@Peppppperr KGB is looking for him

[@briandenley]

Excellent, informative video! Keep up the good work.

[@kkroeger5868]

Great show. The N1 has always fascinated me. It might not have worked, but it looked incredible!

[@abhinavmadhu9668]

For some reason it looks creepy idk maybe because it crashed everytime it crashed or the grill looking thing between stages idk

[@FireTome]

My wifi is so bad currently that even in 144p the video is buffering over 50%of the time, but that won't stop me from watching.

[@TomTimeTraveler]

What I found fascinating are some video clips of the LK that I have NEVER seen (The unfurling of the ladder as well as the "cosmonaut" climbing into the LK. I'd like to know his identity, especially if he was one of the cosmonauts training for a Soviet lunar mission. There were also several clips of the N-1 inside their version of the VAB. Are there more such videos you can show? Excellent work!

[@carloskarbat]

Because the Americans had Verner Von Braun, father of the V2 that the Russians copied, and also recounted Von Braun's experience in many V2s that exploded, the Rockets either Saturn V or N1 depended not only on a few things working well but more than 1 million things work fine, that's why 2 Shuttle exploded, because they didn't follow Von Braun's guidelines in creating NASA on safety and testing, they abandoned von Braun's standards

[@iljsg3390]

SSSR - Super Secret Stable Rocket Shadowzone - теневая зона

[@dosmastrify]

The crush the bell was weak. Though new is often better heh

[@Quizitax]

uᴉɐƃɐ

[@TomTimeTraveler]

Had the N-1 succeeded, it would have been interesting to hear the cosmonauts' description of the boost phase, comparing to Armstrong''s comment that, "the Saturn gave us one magnificent ride."

[@nktslp3650]

Amazing video. And what a mighty beard ! By the way, are you russian? It does sound like it. (You may want to put your text a little bit closer to the camera, maybe use a mirror for it because we see your eyes not looking at the camera, otherwise everything is perfect) Looking forward for the next episodes!

[@ShadowZone]

Thank you. No I'm not Russian! Thanks for the constructive feedback, I am still struggling with a good solution for the script placement. Currently, I just use on a printout taped to the bottom of the camera lens :)

[@ilikekspwaytoomuch4691]

@@ShadowZone what country are you from

[@chriskerwin3904]

He's Austrian I think

[@nktslp3650]

@@ShadowZone If you don't have money to invest you can use a piece of rigid and transparent plastic placed at a 45° angle on your camera, with your laptop screen laying on its back just under it. Type a very big font on words and use your mouse wheel to navigate on your text. If you are far enough from the camera which should be the case, the focus will completely mask the plastic sheet and you will be able to read your text directly while looking at the camera thanks of the reflexion ! You might want to add some cardboard on top of the camera to avoid any unwanted reflexions due to the plastic sheet and the ambiant light. It works like a charm!

[@Warriorking.1963]

That accent's a dead giveaway... he's Irish!!! 😂

[@ChiefSmackahoLLC]

I think the effects of the moon race on economy, national morale, etc. tend to be overstated. I believe the communist ideology and attached economy was already well and truly in a downward spiral by 1968-1970 and it took the remaining 15 years for the whole thing to finally eat itself. As for how a potential loss of the race by NASA would have affected American morale, the leadership would have just turned around and said, "well, we will beat you to Mars!" and then done the best they could technologically and economically to make good on it. I don't say this as jingoism or as an American, that's just what the mindset of many North American people was like at that time, even 20 years after World War 2. Edit for clarification: by historical accounts the average Soviet citizen by 1969 had long since lost faith in the idea that a Communist republic was what they wanted, just look at all the personal accounts and history during that era. How many books and articles have been published about tormented individuals desperately fighting or dying to try to escape the unlivable United States? Meanwhile, the USA at the time, despite the enormous costs of the NASA Apollo program, was seeing unprecedented prosperity with a massive growth in the technology sector and the middle class population. Many people were just automatically looking forward to the future. You can't affect any of those things just by reaching the moon and doing some science experiments alone; or by failing to do so. But you can just sit back and let decadence, regressive values ,and corruption take course. That's as simple as I see it. Ironically, decadence, regression and corruption are not things that can only harm a Communist republic.

[@HECKAKYH-ADEKBATEH]

N1 only competed with itself, it had NOTHING in common with Apollo. N1 goal was to create a launcher for reaching Mars and other planets.

[@Tuning3434]

Even if the sovjets would have landed on the moon itself, the Apollo project was way more capable and would have resulted in: a) better camera / newsreel footage (it already had the world's attention during pre-Apollo 11) b) a proper team of hero astronauts, by having planned more (or any) missions; c) way better scientific output. There is no doubt the huge amounts of moon samples the USA brought back would have made them the favorite of the scientific community; d) all three above will give sufficient material to downplay the sovjet accomplishment, and enhance the message that the NASA had the superior technology.

[@odysseusrex5908]

Basically, being first is not necessarily as good as being better. It just gets you headlines. That was a major problem with the Soviet Space program. Kruschev wanted propaganda victories, the Americans were involved in a long term research project. Nothing demonstrates that more than comparing Voskhod to Gemini.

[@andrewtaylor940]

Great piece. As for could the Soviet's have pulled it off? Probably not in the direction they were heading. The impossible to get around fault in their system was always going to be that 30 engine first stage of the N1. They might get lucky with a launch or two. But with the digital control technology of the 60's and 70's they weren't going to get consistent and safe manned launches off of that steaming heap of exploding Kerbals.

[@odysseusrex5908]

Well, that was very interesting. I never knew the Soviets had a direct ascent mission plan before they adopted Lunar orbit rendezvous, and I thought I was reasonably familiar with the history of their program. I need to go dig out that old Scientific American interview with Sergei Kruschev. It sounds interesting. I really like the picture you have in your intro. Good old fashioned Art Deco style. The picture on the T shirt is also fun. I have nothing good to say about Communism as apolitical and economic system, but I have to admit that they did have an excellent artistic sensibility.

[@HECKAKYH-ADEKBATEH]

Communism was designed in USA.

[@odysseusrex5908]

@@HECKAKYH-ADEKBATEH I think Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin would all beg to differ.

[@dmytron4186]

Thank's it's very interesting

[@GonkDroid0923]

8:23 I want that model of the n1 and the tower so bad.

[@MTd2]

It wouldn't change the fate of USSR. The oil crisis doomed everyone. What brought down USSR was that its allies all became prey to IMF, as they all needed credit for foreign trade. That increased corruption a lot. In the capitalist side, the actual total debts (government + household + private) never quit growing since then. We are just rolling debts. Out of the need to pay for oil, a debt "industry" was created. USSR went first, but we will eventually all hit the ground too.

[@ShadowFalcon]

That'd only be the case if all countries had a debt >100% of their GDP. Needless to say, they don't. For example, Denmark where I live, has a debt of a relatively paltry 34% of GDP (meaning, if suddenly all our debitors demanded we paid our debt tomorrow, we'd be able to do so).

[@vanillaofficial8398]

I like how the spaceships in the background of the intro soviet logo thingy look like the starship.

[@dionysus2006]

What other rocket has over 30 first stage full flow staged combustion cycle engines like the N1 and no launch escape system like the Shuttle? Elon knows. Thanks for the look back, hope we learned from it.

[@HeadsetHatGuy]

1:27 i don't know but this is funny to me

[@Sonofdonald2024]

Also could you do an episode on the Zond spacecraft? A pity the idea was abandoned just as it was perfected

[@dandeprop]

Nicely done. Please note that the Saturn V upper stage Isp was between +5 and +7 seconds higher than you state, depending on the stage in question and the mission elapsed time.

[@megaoof852]

Yay finally been waiting for this for too long

[@alfihalma4320]

You're comparing vacuum Isp with SL Isp at around 3:06. Saturn V was still worse than the N1 with 304 s of vacuum Isp.

[@pleonic]

Fascinating and hilarious. I had to crush the bell!

[@Mkkl3782]

10:06 the caption was a bit weird

[@pokkelsthefox1148]

Consider that bell destroyed xD thanks for all your effort, been looking forward to this vid all day

[@itsraventm]

check Tuning3434's comment, it describes how even if it did succeed, nothing would really change.

[@johnk1639]

Grid fins! SpaceX I’m looking your way 😀

[@Sonofdonald2024]

Great content. I was just saying tonight about how I could not find any good documentaries on the Soviet space programme when I found your channel. Also you should watch 'For all mankind' TV series to see Soviets winning the space race :)

[@fractalelf7760]

Hah - wearing the same t-shirt while watching by chance - great video series!

[@Methoverbitches]

Wow that was a well done video

[@Zhounderr]

I love this series, And I think I am learning Russian at the same time :)

[@darracqboy]

There is actually a tv show on Apple TV about what if the soviets landed on the moon before the Americans and the space race never ended?

[@bix2001]

Whats is it called?

[@seanbaskett5506]

I sincerely think that Russia could have got to the moon first. I love Sergei Korolev, but had he listened to Glushko and went with hypergolic propellants, I think they could have had a much better shot. This propellant combination was already very well understood by Glushko. Sure, they would have rendered parts of Baikonur/Tyuratam uninhabitable for decades when a couple blew up, but Korolev was too cavalier with his abhorrence of hypergolics. Look what America did in Gemini. All Hypergolics. Our lunar lander? Fueled by hypergolics. Russia could have/should have beaten us.

[@ChaosComesForYou]

Thank you, very interesting video! Also: your Russian like music for my ears, спасибо товарищ!

[@egeunal5153]

Супер секретная советская ракета

[@ilikekspwaytoomuch4691]

Who else would think N1 heavy (3 block А's being together) would be a good idea

[@dosmastrify]

How many engines would that be?!?

[@rundownpear2601]

dosmastrify too many

[@ilikekspwaytoomuch4691]

@@rundownpear2601 i think not enough engines. WE NEED MOAR

[@benbaselet2026]

With a lot of struts and boosters... YES!

[@LeonardoDaVinci01]

Nice!

[@jamiehewitt428]

That tshirt is awesome

[@diabeticalien3584]

1:02 That was the funniest part of the episode. Either that or I find lots of things funny lol

[@Afrocanuk]

But seriously, if the Soviets had tried to land a man on the moon given their technology at the time, chances are he would be still there.

[@themanwithnoname8241]

Only block A stage wasn't tested separately on the ground. All the others were tested successfully.

[@Michael_Scott_Howard]

Why does Russia use a modified R-7A intercontinental missile first made in 1957 to lunch humans in space in 2020?

[@walking_sketon]

I love the intro

[@carlsmith2641]

We would have been like “ oh yeah we didn’t even care about the moon hey look we’re going to mars now lolololoolololololololoololololloololoollollol

[@SchneeflockeMonsoon]

Could you do a tutorial video on basic ksp events, for new beginners? Making aircraft, reaching a perfectly circular orbit, docking, reaching other bodies without encounter vectors or maneuvers, etc.?

[@ChiefSmackahoLLC]

HI, are you looking for these tutorials in Russian language in particular? Otherwise all of the existing tutorials (hours upon hours worth) still apply to Kerbal Space Program versions even today. Aside from ShadowZone, Scott Manley, and others, all have older but still 100% accurate tutorials on the subjects you spoke of. Just search around. Keywords to search "KSP Aircraft basics", "KSP orbit circularization", "KSP docking". As for reaching other bodies without encounters, the game does not map gravity 1:1 with other orbital bodies (no multibody or n-body physics in KSP's engine), so you need at least some idea of when a orbital gravity SOI (sphere of influence) change will happen according to the conic sections (colored rings) displayed on the map. In other words, you _need_ an encounter to "change the focus of gravity" although there's not a clean way of handling that in real life, KSP just swaps you from one SOI to another. Here your gravity is in relation to kerbin, then 1 second later it is now in relation to Mun, or Minmus, or whatever. This is, incidentally, why KSP does not support Lagrange points.

[@mariasirona1622]

There's also Mike Aben

[@donwanek]

Is the irony lost on anyone that competition stimulated our capitalist success? (from the Soviets). I love what the Soviets accomplished with the tools at their disposal, it also shows what humans are capable under any system, any conditions. Sadly the lack of real longterm vision and depth of their engineering and industrial 'bench' doomed them. No viable system. Apollo landed twelve men on the moon, had more missions planned. We drove on the moon. We literally lost interest. Our moon missions were not 'one-off' successes. I really wish they had succeeded and brought an utterly different perspective to the process. Still, it wasn't much of a race but healthy competition.

[@snowboarder7772]

The moon? = a really good acquisition for atlas 5 now (well done Boeing , Lockheed Martin)

[@gravitationalassist379]

What if they just never implimented Control of Rocket Engines?

[@kornaros96]

Too many engines. Nowadays control systems, are more capable of handling this beast.

[@keiyakins]

If the Soviets had beaten us to a crewed moon landing, we would have redefined the goalposts to Mars. I mean, we'd moved it several times before that.

[@1joshjosh1]

Damn it I ran out of Soviet episodes all in one day

[@rikvermar7583]

FACT - a pigeon has flown higher than the N1 - and survived

[@JapriAjmi718]

Why is nobody talk about the appearance of the kraken on the mun

[@M0NSTER_D0SE]

Man I love your videos, you should definitely start streaming on Twitch, I simply can't get enough of this Ksp meets history

[@MultiCatRain]

This guy is amazing

[@aviator1918]

@ShadowZone can you give me the link to N-1 rocket and also to Soyuz 11A511 with Soyuz spacecraft inside?

[@matthewcwkeech]

Watching this after watching For All Mankind on Apple TV

[@populistrevolution5197]

Would have been safer, faster and cheaper by using x2 R7 each with x5 NK15 to merge in orbit the soyuz & LM with the propellant tank

[@g-gon8869]

Coming again #shadowzone its been a year now since the last CCCP video. Still waiting.

[@Matmamtmamtmamtmamtm]

You should put the transcript just above the camera lens, in possible, it would make it less obvious :)

[@BezKartuza]

Она так и не полетела... Королёв умер, а остальным космос пофигу оказался.

[@iljsg3390]

Обана русский! Какими судьбами? Я думал я один смотрю этот канал из русских

[@swisstraeng]

translated : She never flew... Korolev died, but the rest of the world didn't care about space.

[@swisstraeng]

@@iljsg3390 translated : Obana is Russian! What destinies? I thought I was the only one watching this Russian channel

[@BezKartuza]

@@iljsg3390 Ты не одинок)) Привет из Нижегородской области.

[@iljsg3390]

@@BezKartuza привет из Республики Башкортостан

[@burggerbig102]

The thrust comes off from the first stage looks so cool

[@antoniomaglione4101]

Not a chance. The computers were not up to the tasks, not one of them. I believe the failure was caused be the work structure of the bureau, competing instead of cooperating. Glushko refusing to design the engine was the seed of the failure. Second reason, wanting to go on the Moon for cheap, without a test stand and all-up testing. If the first and second stage wouldn't fail, the upper portion would. Reignite an orbital engine is not a trivial task, getting the turbopumps spinning again is rocket science! Than there is the lunar contraption, designed out of an overabundance of vodka. The poor astronaut should have made two complex Eva's without training, simulations, and clear translation paths? And provided the lander wouldn't tumble? And the space suits working flawlessly? The designers, in principle, are all good, the conditions, were not.

[@eekee6034]

That all seems about right to me. What bothers me is that now, American government and corporations are set up so their departments compete instead of cooperating. As much as technology fascinates and excites me, and as much as I benefit from science, I've chosen to base my hope for the future on God's Kingdom instead.

[@BezKartuza]

Прикольный такой акцент. Жаль конечно, что по русски почти не говоришь. А по английски я чёт не очень понимаю :D Но в целом то конечно всё равно интересно твои видосики смотреть.

[@LeonardoDaVinci01]

I have no idea what you just said, but ShadowZone likes it!

[@qhxoexcci]

He is saying that shadowzone has a cool accent which he does you can tell shadowzone put effort into it

[@selensewar]

@@LeonardoDaVinci01 and that he doesnt rerally understands english, but likes this place anyways.

[@zhengxu1186]

the crazy multi small engine N1 was succeed by heavy falcon

[@Ribarlan]

Only Americans consider Moon landing as "the end of the space race", because suits them.

[@cheaptaco7479]

We were on Pluto already!

[@anupriye5109]

7:12 watch "for all mankind" (series by apple) to know the answer

[@kommandantgalileo]

bring this back

[@nofrackingzone2.057]

Death trap? I think so comrade!

[@JeffreyCornish]

You have some excellent film that I have never seen before! Cbacebo!

[@Atomnyi]

In My video about programming game Eles Heart(break) Ive spoked in encglish about soviet AI guided Marsokhod that was planned for Mars-96 mission.

[@abbaszaidi8371]

Spasiba!!!! Must learn Russian in my lifetime....

[@Andrey_Ivanov194]

Not enought AGAIN!

[@monkeypants6764]

Hi shadow your awesome

[@benbaselet2026]

balls?

[@zeloveushka502]

Еще раз!

[@ollieiguess.]

that "again" though

[@KSPUnitedYT]

R u gonna put a craft link? Ps love ur vids

[@ShadowZone]

after the series is complete, I'll do a "how I built the Soviet vehicles" video and release all of them at once on KerbalX

[@KSPUnitedYT]

ShadowZone Thank u so much! :)

[@RonzRocketz]

Maybe the Soviet grain quota reports would be more accurate if they landed on the moon first?

[@Atomnyi]

N1 - was a mistke and step back. USSR could win moon race if We adoped 2x launch of UR-500 Proton rockets. Auther did not told a word, that few Soyuz spacecraft saccessfully orbited moon under the names of Zond 4-8 and LK-1 was also tested in orbit. All of those where launched with UR-500 Proton rocket. So, 2-3 Proton moon landing plan was next. 1st Proton with LK-1 lander, second - with Lunar Soyuz. It was possible to add 3rd launch of Proton - for launching fuel and booster to the Moon. All Protons would laucnh in e period of 1 month. Then all components of Lunar mission would randevouz on orbit and dock. And that plan was proposed, but not supported. All the needed tech was ready. USSR could won, but made a mistake by redirecting all affort on N1. USA would repeat SOviet mistake by diverting all funds to disasterous Space Shattle project. There also was a project of a bigger rocket based on Proton tech - UR-700. It used same toxic propelants, engines and systems, but was bigger. It was less risky and relied more on already developed tech. Work on UR-700 led to the birth of Energia rocket system - that is the best heavy rocket for this time.

[@slordmo2263]

Very interesting theories....learned a few things.... and I thought the US plan was complex (which it was!!)... but think of ALL those engines that had to work....that's part of the problem.... the control and computing power (speed) needed was just NOT there, even for the US... The more I learn of Soviet technology, I am impressed, it seems reliable, and bulletproof, BUT only if it's kept simple.... (take the AK-47 rifle vs. the M16..for instance... it's more robust than the M16.... and the M16 is good, but more temperamental) Also, alot of the Soviet space 'feats' were just that, just enough to look good.... the US HAD to make it work 'right'...

[@rad9511]

at 10:07 google thought again (in russian) was "sue yes your ass"

[@itsraventm]

when you have to plan on engines failing, you need to rethink your design

[@ShadowZone]

On the other hand, if you don't plan for the eventually, its way worse design.

[@alexander7374]

@ShadowZone On 11:56, you say "American Won The Space Race" No, space race is not just to put man on the moon, it's also about every other achievement. So the correct word should be "American won the Moon Race",not the "Space Race". You also didn't tell us that If the N-1 wouldn't been canceled, the fifth launch will be succesful, due to MASSIVE Improvements of the engines (The same engine that lifted Antares rocket, and exported to American Aerojet engine company), and evantually at the end, the engine has a very succesful career being used not just by Russia but by it's long time rival, United States.

[@itsraventm]

What? The "Space Race" refers to the cold war and the competition of who will land on the moon first. As for the "fifth launch," no, it wouldn't be successful. The first stage maybe, but everything else was so ludicrous that it would simply never work. Also, it doesn't matter how good the engines are if you can't control them. Also, the Antares blew up because of the engines.

[@alexander7374]

@@itsraventm No, Space Race is a competition to make a lot more achievement in space technology beating the rival, So trying to make more achievement than the rival, Not just "Putting a man on the moon" i mean, yes putting a man on the moon is significant, but it is more than just that, Sputnik and Gagarin was also very Significant, Venera 7, Salyut-1, Mars 3, First spacewalk, Mir, and many other. Not just "Landing a man on the moon" "The Space Race refers to the 20th-century competition between two Cold War rivals, the Soviet Union (USSR) and the United States (US), to achieve firsts in spaceflight capability." . And the N-1, The First stage would work, and you sayed "Maybe the first stage would work", if the first stage would work, other stage that has Lesser amount of engines and also simpler, will be worked too. Can't control, who sayed it can't control, it can be controlled, but the fifth launch didn't happen, so no success launch of the N-1. And you know who made the Antares blew up? The AJ-26 engines, and that's the Upgraded Nk-33 engine by the Aerojet Company. Proof that the Soviets won the Space Race: 1957: First intercontinental ballistic missile and orbital launch vehicle, the R-7 Semyorka 1957: First satellite, Sputnik 1 1957: First animal in Earth orbit, the dog Laika on Sputnik 2 1959: First rocket ignition in Earth orbit, first man-made object to escape Earth's gravity, Luna 1 1959: First data communications, or telemetry, to and from outer space, Luna 1. 1959: First man-made object to pass near the Moon, first man-made object in Heliocentric orbit, Luna 1 1959: First probe to impact the Moon, Luna 2 1959: First images of the moon's far side, Luna 3 1960: First animals to safely return from Earth orbit, the dogs Belka and Strelka on Sputnik 5. 1961: First probe launched to Venus, Venera 1 1961: First person in space (International definition) and in Earth orbit, Yuri Gagarin on Vostok 1, Vostok programme 1961: First person to spend over 24 hours in space Gherman Titov, Vostok 2 (also first person to sleep in space). 1962: First dual manned spaceflight, Vostok 3 and Vostok 4 1962: First probe launched to Mars, Mars 1 1963: First woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, Vostok 6 1964: First multi-person crew (3), Voskhod 1 1965: First extra-vehicular activity (EVA), by Alexsei Leonov,[19] Voskhod 2 1965: First probe to hit another planet of the Solar System (Venus), Venera 3 1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the Moon, Luna 9 1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10 1967: First unmanned rendezvous and docking, Cosmos 186/Cosmos 188. 1968: First living beings to reach the Moon (circumlunar flights) and return unharmed to Earth, Russian tortoises and other lifeforms on Zond 5 1969: First docking between two manned craft in Earth orbit and exchange of crews, Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5 1970: First soil samples automatically extracted and returned to Earth from another celestial body, Luna 16 1970: First robotic space rover, Lunokhod 1 on the Moon. 1970: First data received from the surface of another planet of the Solar system (Venus), Venera 7 1971: First space station, Salyut 1 1971: First probe to impact the surface of Mars, Mars 2 1971: First probe to land on Mars, Mars 3 1975: First probe to orbit Venus, to make soft landing on Venus, first photos from surface of Venus, Venera 9 1980: First Hispanic and Black person in space, Arnaldo Tamayo Méndez on Soyuz 38 1984: First woman to walk in space, Svetlana Savitskaya (Salyut 7 space station) 1986: First crew to visit two separate space stations (Mir and Salyut 7) 1986: First probes to deploy robotic balloons into Venus atmosphere and to return pictures of a comet during close flyby Vega 1, Vega 2 1986: First permanently manned space station, Mir, 1986-2001, with permanent presence on board (1989-1999) 1987: First crew to spend over one year in space, Vladimir Titov and Musa Manarov on board of Soyuz TM-4 - Mir And, can you tell me list of US Achievement in space, this is the US Achievement in space: 1966: First Orbital Rendesvouz, Gemini 8 1966: First Orbital Docking, Gemini 8 1969: First Man On The Moon Now, yes the Soviets maybe had lost the "Moon Race". But not the other part of the space race. (I know "Moon Race" Was the part of the space race too, but there are many other big parts too, not just "Moon Race") Just see, American only do one thing great on the space race: Landing a moon on the moon. (Even thought it has done more thing than just putting a man on the moon, try to compare to the Soviet achievements, see the different!) While Russia: First Satellite, First Humans, and many more. So who won the Space Race? Just see it by yourself... But for me, Humanity won the space race, we all the same humans, we all do great things together, Not for Russia, Not For The United States, but for us, Humans!

[@sidharthcs2110]

USSR won the moon race. Americans won the manned moon race

[@alexander7374]

@@sidharthcs2110 Agreed!

[@odysseusrex5908]

@@sidharthcs2110 Nobody was racing to the Moon in 1959. The challenge to race was issued in 1962.

[@GT-he4jt]

They should not use cord anymore

[@shriramvenu]

development of the N1 was fundamentally underfunded. They never had enough time or money to do proper testing

[@frankoldmanwoods8605]

Why do you have a Soviet millatry ushanka

[@hoomee37]

Damn Stereotypes