Talk:Soviet rocketry

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Crownoffire.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2019 and 2 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lilbambam55, GTR34S.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

N1 Rocket[edit]

There is not a single mention of the N1 rocket. It's an important part of Soviet scientific history in general, being their first attempt at creating a vehicle to carry humans to the Moon among other things. Some information about it could be shared in the 'space age advances' section. Rime7 (talk) 00:45, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rocket-powered aircraft[edit]

Russia's WWII development of Rocket-powered aircraft seems to be a well-kept secret until now. Please see that page; much of what's here seems to belong there, too. JustinTime55 (talk) 20:57, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Soviet rocketry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:53, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Space Age Advances[edit]

There are multiple inaccuracies with this section. A list of some of the more obvious ones includes: - The R7 did not use UDMH propellant - The R7 only had five engines, not 20 - The RD-107 was never a monopropellant engine, nor did it use kerosene merely as a coolant

Really the whole section needs re-written. To anybody not conversant with the actual history of Soviet rocketry it would be very misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.208.195.53 (talk) 11:23, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:13, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:07, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jet aircraft information in an article about Rockets[edit]

Have been carrying out a review of this article and one issue I am struggling with is the amount of jet aircraft information, which does not appear to relate to Soviet rocketry. I suspect that someone has mixed up the word “reaktivnyy” which means “reactive” in Russian and is commonly used to denote "jet propulsion". However in the 1930s and 1940s "reactive" was normally used to describe both jet and rocket propulsion. In particular the sections on Andrei Tupolev, Pavel Sukhoi & Development of MiG aircraft do not appear to have any connection with Soviet rockets. I also note they are all referenced from one source, which is behind a paywall. I also note that their are already extensive other wiki articles on these subjects, ie Andrei Tupolev, Pavel Sukhoi, MiG 1, etc. Had a quick look and it does not look like it would be worthwhile to transfer any of this information to other articles. Was thinking of removing any Jet aircraft information from this article, unless it relates to rocketry. Thoughts? Ilenart626 (talk) 13:32, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No comments received so will remove Jet aircraft information from this article, unless it relates to rocketry, for example Andrei Tupolev, Pavel Sukhoi & Development of MiG aircraft sections Ilenart626 (talk) 09:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:55, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rating of German contributions to early Soviet rocketry[edit]

I'm addressing here what I already stated as talk in the article German influence on the Soviet space program. It is mainly about the sentence "However, after 1947 the Soviets made very little use of German specialists and their influence on the future Soviet rocket program was marginal." with a reference to Siddiqi. At the first glance this may seem logical and proven as there was no direct involvement of German engineers in Soviet development and testing after the launch of the V-2 rockets in Kapustin Jar in October 1947 when they were isolated on Gorodomlya island. However, there are many indications that German concepts and ideas were well received after 1947, severely contradicting Siddiqi's conclusions (p. 84):

  • December 1947 with a first German presentation of G-1 concepts in Podlipki
  • December 1948 with a second German presentation of G-1 concepts in Podlipki
  • April 1949 with a visit of minister Ustinov and Korolev to Gorodomlya
  • October 1949 with another visit of Korolev on Gorodomlya (Siddiqi p. 81)
  • Presumably even a later Korolev visit in 1950 or 1951 reported by Werner Albring, Gorodomlia, p. 172: "Some time later Gröttrup told me that Mr. Korolev had come to the island again and had visited him in his office. Korolev seemed very depressed and when they parted he behaved as if they were seeing each other for the last time in their lives. Gröttrup suspected that Korolev must have had great difficulties." The history tells us that Koroljov had many failures with the R-2 in Oct to Dec 1950. None of the 12 launched R-2 reached the target (Uhl, p. 178-179).

Why should they have gone there without any technical interests? Not for holidays on a cold and distant island, for sure. Other sources, such as Olaf Przybilski's analysis and Mark Wade's detailed summary of the rocket concepts, tell a contradicting story that the Soviets adapted many concepts from G-2 and G-4, also on the engine side the ED-140 concepts going into the RD-107 design. Why fully trust Siddiqi on this matter and disregard other insights? SchmiAlf (talk) 10:05, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This issue is already covered in the “Historical analysis” section of the German influence on the Soviet space program article, which covers the various viewpoints on the German influence. I actually think the whole “German” section of this article could be reduced in size, no need to repeat what is already covered in the main article.Ilenart626 (talk) 13:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As you were starting the rewriting of this article here several months ago - with many delections which also had quoted valid references - I'm continuing the discussion here on this article which has much more views than the new one which you created. In addition there are similar occurrences of - at least partially - unmotivated changes in Soviet space program.
My objection addresses especially the quote from Siddiqi, p. 84, which you reverted after I deleted it for good reasons with the arguments in my talk above. Neufeld - which you also used as a reference there - describes it rather different: "The Germans played a central role in that process, including the further development of the missile and its rocket engine, but after 1948 they were increasingly frozen out and set to work on theoretical designs that were never used." This gets much closer to the historical truth. Most probably, we will never be able to completely proof which ideas of the German team in Gorodomlya were absorbed by the Soviet engineers because Stalin's Soviet Union deleted all indications of German participation in its rocketry activities. Stalin wanted its developments as completely Soviet-backed. Any of the Soviet engineers (Boris Chertok!) and historians (Alexander Romanow in Korolev's biography) had to follow this rule. After 1990, some secret documents became accessible ... among them Ustinovs 1951 memorandum On the use of German specialists where Dmitry Ustinov summarizes the work of the German specialists to Lavrentiy Beria (see talk in German influence on the Soviet space program for all details). This document is another argument why Siddiqi's final hypothesis is wrong. This is quite astonishing as he knew it better in describing the details of the German work in 1948 to 1950 on pp. 81-82, quite in line with Ustinov's memorandum and various CIA reports covering the interrogation of German rocket scientists after they returned to Germany in 1952 and 1953 (British operation Dragon Return). Yet the similarities between the Gorodomlya G-4 design ([1], you should consider it as a reference as well), originated 1949, and the Soviet R-7 Semyorka (launched 1957) indicate some German influence. But the Germans did not develop R-7 - this was driven by Korolev's NII-88. SchmiAlf (talk) 11:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SchmiAlf you need to stop quoting from Mark Wade's online Encyclopedia Astronautica as it is an unreliable source as noted here. It stopped being updated years ago and space historians have noted errors which have not been fixed. This has been identified in a number of Wiki talk pages, including Talk:Encyclopedia Astronautica#Reliable Source and Talk:Space Race#Encyclopedia Astronautica not reliable. In particular, I have already highlighted to you on Talk:German influence on the Soviet space program how Encyclopedia Astronautica includes inaccurate information on German input to the Soviet space program, as detailed in Talk:Valentin Glushko#Still needs work, however you persist in quoting this unreliable source.
You are also arguing that “… Siddiqi's final hypothesis is wrong…”. If you do a google search on “best books on soviet space program” you will see that Siddiiqi’s “Challenge to Apollo” is consistently rated as one of the best sources on the Soviet Space program, for example:
”This really is the bible for anyone seeking to know about the USSR’s Space Program in detail. Siddiqi’s research is forensic and utterly exhaustive and includes all manner of original Russian language sources as well as interviews with many a Soviet space veteran and scholar.”
Your main support that Siddiqi’s final hypothesis is wrong and should be removed from this article is the unreliable Encylopedia Astronautica and Przybilski’s article “The Germans and the Development of Rocket Engines in the USSR”. The only review of this article I could find was by Sidiqi himself, where he noted that Pryzybilski’s views are provided “…without much convincing evidence…” (page 22). So which view should we rely on, a single article which know one has reviewed which lacks convincing evidence, or “the bible” of the Soviet space program? To discount Siddiqi’s final hypothesis you would need to provide a lot more convincing reliable, peer reviewed sources.
To cover both points of view of German influence the main article already covers this under German influence on the Soviet space program#Historical analysis. There is no need to cover Pryzbilski’ opinion in this article as it would be WP:UNDUE. Ilenart626 (talk) 04:53, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware so far that Siddiqi' opus is the "bible of the USSR's Space Program" as rated by Google searches. But this alone is not a quality argument or proof of correctness. Neufeld's statement is closer to reality - and the neutrality of Neufeld's summary which was published more than 10 years after Siddiqi's opus should not be disputed. This is the reason why I have added his statement explicitely. In regard to this Siddiqi's statement is midleading (and contradicts his previous statements on pp. 82-83) but I did not delete it to stop the edit war. SchmiAlf (talk) 10:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed the Neufield reference and I believe it is basically the same as the Siddiqi analysis. The full Neufield quote on page 58 (no idea where you got page 84, the article is on pp 49-67) is below:
“As a gross generalization, one can say that the initial transfer of Third Reich knowledge, both in the eastern occupation zone and in the USSR, was a success, but afterwards the value of most of the German teams quickly diminished as a result of the Stalinist policy of isolation and secrecy, compounded by linguistic difficulties, differences in engineering cultures, rivalry and resentment from indigenous engineers and scientists, and the inefficiencies and disincentives of the planned economy. In the rocket sector, Stalin ordered that Soviet teams begin by copying the V-2 (as he did also for the American B-29 bomber and Fat Man plutonium bomb). The Germans played a central role in that process, including the further development of the missile and its rocket engine, but after 1948 they were increasingly frozen out and set to work on theoretical designs that were never used.”
The Siddiqi analysis is more detailed on pp 83-84, refer to German influence on the Soviet space program#Historical analysis for a summary, which also includes details from Neufield. The main difference is that Neufield states “….after 1948….” and Siddiqi states “…from 1947….” Therefore I have combined the two statements, including your wording, as follows:
” The involvement of German scientists and engineers was an essential catalyst to early Soviet efforts. In 1945 and 1946 German expertise played a central role in reducing the time needed to master the intricacies of the V-2 rocket, establishing production of the R-1 rocket and enable a base for further developments. However, after 1947-48 the Soviets made very little use of German specialists as they were frozen out, worked on designs that were never used and their influence on the future Soviet rocket program was marginal.[1][2]” Ilenart626 (talk) 15:43, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I heavily doubt that your merging of statements is a correct quotation because they are significantly different and opposite. Siddiqi states that the German influence was marginal after 1947. Neufeld states that they were increasingly frozen out after 1948. There are many indicactions that the cooperation even lasted until the end of 1949 with multiple visits of high-ranking Soviet experts in Gorodomlya. Even if it was one-way flow of concepts as the Soviet did not inform the German team on any test results or further Soviet planning, the Soviet might have absorbed a lot of ideas. This is a given (widely known) fact which is not considered by your renewed reverting change. What is your driving agenda behind this violation of Wikipedia's neutral point of view (NPOV)? SchmiAlf (talk) 16:38, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You need to stop selectively quoting, note that Neufeld states “…but after 1948 they were increasingly frozen out and set to work on theoretical designs that were never used.” You conveniently left out the last section that their designs “were never used” ie they had no impact on future Soviet rockets. You also ignore Neufield’s first sentence where he states “… but afterwards the value of most of the German teams quickly diminished…”. In other words, Neufield is saying their influence after 1948 was minimal, the same as Siddiqi’s “marginal”. You then go onto say that the Soviet “might” of absorbed a lot of ideas, which is pure speculation on your part.
In answer to your last question, my agenda for my last edit on this article was to try and reach a consensus with yourself. However I also want to keep fringe theories out of Wikipedia, which I believe you are pushing. As I have already highlighted to you, other editors have stated here the following:
“…nationist German historian who claims that all of Russian rocket inventions were made by captured Germans. There is no documentary evidence at all that Germans designed the KS-50, ED-140 or RD-105 engines or had anything to do with the R-7 packet rocket design. This is just stated without proof in the articles and books by this historian… Russian documentation multiple eyewitness accounts all claim that the Germans worked on the R-1 project and were completely isolated from more advanced missile projects, for security reasons. The Germans who worked in the Soviet Union were almost all debriefed by the CIA and some by von Braun. Yet none of these claims about inventing later rocket and engine technology appeared until the 1990s, after technical details of those missiles were made public by Russian sources. I fear these conspiracy theories will be dragged into wikipedia, and we will never hear the end of it.”
I believe this discussion has dragged on long enough, I do not intend to reply further.Ilenart626 (talk) 18:56, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is obvious: The godfather of the rocketry bible may must not be disputed. It can't even be that somebody else might have a different analysis. For sure, he did a great job in investigating and describing secret USSR developments. But his conclusions may be challenged by technical experts. In addition, the German ideas were translated into Russian with claiming Russian authorship. SchmiAlf (talk) 11:51, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As stated in Talk:German influence on the Soviet space program#Reverted SchmiAlf‘s contraversial edits there are good reasons to remove the following statement: "However, after 1947-48 the Soviets made very little use of German specialists as they were frozen out, worked on designs that were never used and their influence on the future Soviet rocket program was marginal."
It contradicts Siddiqi's own findings (pp. 80-83) (which are well outined in the paragraphs above) and "melts" Neufeld's statement (p. 58, mid) "after 1948" with Siddiqi's "after 1947" (p. 84)) without further proof. Hence, the deleted statement is also a violation of WP:SYNTH rules. SchmiAlf (talk) 08:31, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See my reply on Talk:German influence on the Soviet space program#Reverted SchmiAlf‘s contraversial edits for my reasons for reverting. Ilenart626 (talk) 23:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

German influence[edit]

The statement in the lead: "… though after 1947 their influence was marginal" and the statement "However, after 1947-48 the Soviets made very little use of German specialists as they were frozen out, worked on designs that were never used and their influence on the future Soviet rocket program was marginal." in the Soviet_rocketry#German_influence section are based on the lead of German influence on the Soviet space program. Following the dispute already mentioned in the topic above a survey Talk:German influence on the Soviet space program#Survey was opened by the moderator. Please participate in the survey and vote for your preferred option! SchmiAlf (talk) 15:54, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've again revised the above mentioned "marginal statements" in the lede and the Soviet_rocketry#German_influence section as these conclusions are not backed by the majority of sources and facts which are mentioned in this article further below. Comments should be added to RFC on last sentence of Lede with all pros and cons of the dispute. SchmiAlf (talk) 15:17, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above mentioned RFC is still open. In the meantime I've added details for the disputed view of space historians to Space race and replicated here within the German influence section of this article (with further details which were present in this article before mid of 2022). Siddiqi (2000)'s restrictive argument ("after 1947 their influence was marginal") in the Lead (also of this article) is still disputed in RFC on last sentence of Lede. Please help with you comment to get out of the frozen conflict. SchmiAlf (talk) 09:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SchmiAlf, for the last 12 months you have pushed a fringe theory which overstates the German influence on the Soviet space. I note that I am not the only wiki editor with these views, in this discussion DonPMitchell called it a conspiracy theory and this discussion on Talk:R-7 Semyorka#Censored article: great shame. @DonPMitchell and @Mark Lincoln discuss the “myth” of German involvement.
Anatoly Zak concluded that the "German ideas and concepts developed by Gröttrup's team on Gorodomlya did influence Soviet designers and accelerate their efforts" This is a classic example of WP:SYNTH. Zak’s website in the German contribution in the Soviet rocketry: Myth and Reality section summarises both arguments for and against German contribution, which he summarises as “As it often happens in history, the truth might lie in between: Germans did not designed Sputnik or its rocket, however the ideas and concepts developed by Gröttrup’s team on Gorodomlya did influence Soviet designers and thus accelerated their efforts.” In other words, Zak’s website supports the original wording in this article, as supported by Siddiqi (2000).
As you now appear to be supporting Neufeld, I have replaced the conclusion with option C of the rfc, which incorporates both Neufield and Siddiqi, including the suggestions from Caeciliusinhorto-public. I suggest you stop trying to expand your fringe theory to other wiki articles until the rfc on the talk page of German influence on the Soviet space program is complete.Ilenart626 (talk) 12:47, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the reference to Christoph Mick which is used for backing the statement "the Soviets made very little use of German specialists and their future influence on the Soviet space program was marginal". This reference is a two-pager excerpt of Christoph Mick's "Forschen für Stalin" (see here) and includes the sentence "The task they were assigned was to provide the Soviets with German know-how, but not to improve on it" which might support @Ilenart626's claim. However, this generalized summary is different from Mick's original conclusion on pp. 203-204 (italics and underline added by me):
The German rocket group was primarily needed for the technical documentation and replication of the V2 and guided anti-aircraft missiles. It also helped with test launches and was involved in the production of V2 rockets from German parts. But it was also commissioned to develop new projects. Although these were superior to Soviet designs in some areas, they were not realized for well-known reasons. Chertok agrees with German participants in the missile project that the Soviet designers would have developed ballistic missiles on their own, but probably with some delay. The rocket that launched Sputnik into space in 1957 was a purely Soviet development. The most ambitious German project, the R-14, had a launch mass of 40 tons, while the launch mass of this rocket [R-7] was 267 tons.
While Mick was correct with the weight of the Sputnik rocket, he was incorrect with R-14 which had a weight of 70 tons. And there is even more doubt on this statement (based on Chertok's Soviet-centered view) when looking at the astounding similarity of the four R-7 boosters and the R-14 design (w/o warhead) as compared here. Moreover quoting Anatoly Zak in this context is rather questionable because his central concluding statement in Myth and Reality is as follows:
As it often happens in history, the truth might lie in between: Germans did not design Sputnik or its rocket, however the ideas and concepts developed by Gröttrup’s team on Gorodomlya did influence Soviet designers and thus accelerated their efforts. "The work of the captive German scientists and technicians served as a yardstick against which Soviet accomplishments could be measured, and the Soviets were capable of extracting those developments useful to their program and of discarding others which they had already surpassed," concluded a US historian [Ernest Schwiebert].
More arguments of German non-marginal contributions are provided in the talk page of Space race. SchmiAlf (talk) 09:47, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Siddiqi 2000, p. 40,63,83-84.
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference Neufield was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Discussion with Asif Siddiqi about German influence on the Soviet space program[edit]

With Neopeius‘s permission the details below have been copied from Talk:Space Race#German influence on Soviet space program regarding his discussion with Asif Siddiqi about German influence on the Soviet space program.

SchmiAlf I have had a lengthy discussion with Asif, and he has also provided me full copies of articles we have been using for citations. Based on these, I plan on proposing new language that will probably please Ilenart626 and may well satisfy you, as well. With Asif's permission, I will also relay what he said to me verbatim (this is obviously not citable scholarship, but he has as much right to be heard as we do.) :) --Neopeius (talk) 17:42, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strike that last. I find I am out of time for the weekend. I'll just tell you my thoughts:
1) The current language under Soviet rocket development is thoroughly inappropriate (and I'm sorry for not catching this before). Nearly half the verbiage is dedicated to the Germans, which makes it look like the Soviets hardly had their own program. It needs a complete rewrite. You can reference my R-1 (missile), R-2 (missile), and R-5 Pobeda articles for what I think are pretty good summaries of the early history of Soviet work. Mentioning the German involvement in Germany from 1945-1947, and the marginal work done in the USSR till 1953 is fine, but it honestly should not be more than two sentences, and more work done on the Soviet side.
2) I have a copies of Siddiqi's 2001 "Rocket engineers from the Glushko Design Bureau" and his 2009 article "Germans in Russia: Cold War, Technology Transfer, and National Identity"—if you need them, email me at gideon@galacticjourney.org. The former details the contributions of Baum (the second highest paid employee in Glushko's OKB for a time). He concludes: "In sum, there is evidence to suggest that the Soviets benefited from the German contribution [to rocket engine design] much more than they have admitted so far, but much less than some recent German accounts [such as from Przybilski] have claimed."
3) At the end of a longer message, Asif concluded with:
"1. German technology (V2, rocket engines, test stands, guidance systems) were absolutely crucial to the foundation of the postwar Soviet missile program. There's no way that the Soviets do anything without that.
2. I know I differ from Przybilski on the interpretation of the contribution of German expertise in the 1946-51 period. Besides a few significant things, I don't think it was that important. I will say that while I don't agree with Przybilski (he depends almost entirely on post-facto German memoir material), I am glad that it's out there for people to decide."
In the body of his email, he says that, while German innovations were incorporated into the R-2, the R-3/R-5/R-7 were wildly different designs, starting with their change in propellants.
Long story short: German influence on initial program, profound. On rocket engines, not inconsiderable, but probably not profound. On post-R-2 designs, negligible.
So a rewrite of that whole section would:
A) Reduce the German content while expanding the Soviet content
B) Reflect Asif's scholarship, which I think is solid, though a side note to Przybilski, if there be any space, might be okay. I doubt this article is the place to go in depth into this discussion, however. There just isn't room, and it takes emphasis away from the main point—the Soviet ICBM is a Soviet invention "free of the fingerprints of German designers".
Thanks for bringing me in to offer my opinion. I'm sorry I don't have the energy to do the rewrite myself. --Neopeius (talk) 19:14, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thankyou Neopeius your input and Asif’s comments are highly valued. Would suggest that your above comments be copied to Soviet rocketry and German influence on the Soviet space program talk pages, with the Soviet rocketry being the article that goes indepth into this discussion. I should have some time available over the Xmas break to work on an update referencing the articles you mentioned. Then summaries can be included in this article, Soviet space program and similar articles, that point back to Soviet rocketry. The German influence of the Soviet space program can then be the main article to include Przybilski’s view. What do you think? Ilenart626 (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not opposed, I'd be obliged and grateful if you copied them there. You have my license to do so. And I agree. Even Asif says it's good to represent that view, even if it is a minority. And who knows? Maybe when SchmiAlf publishes his article, it'll be convincing. :) --Neopeius (talk) 06:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ilenart626 (talk) 08:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the article, as detailed above, including copying summaries from R-1 (missile), R-2 (missile), and R-5 Pobeda articles. If other Editors have no objection, I believe expanding this article from summaries of R-7 (rocket family), Soyuz (rocket family), Kosmos (rocket family), Proton (rocket family) and Vostok (rocket family) would also be worthwhile. Ilenart626 (talk) 15:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, an interesting interpretation of history: The Soviets captured 11 German V-2s, launched them, copied it as R-1, built a longer R-2 for doubled range (5,000 kg heavier, not 500 kg as you say) and then launched the Sputnik with R-7. There was no Operation Osoaviakhim, no Germans for seven years in NII-88 (Podlipki and on Gorodomlya Island). Great success! Stalin would have dreamed on it. Far ahead of the US which got more than 100 V-2s, could rely on hundreds of German scientists (such as Wernher von Braun but did not manage to become the first in space. So simple! SchmiAlf (talk) 09:59, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the reference of the R-2’s mass Siddiqi 2000 on p.57 states “The corresponding increase of dry mass was only about 500 kilograms….” Zak’s R-1 article gives an empty weight of the rocket of 4,015 kg and his R-2 article states the structure had a weight of 4,528 kg. So the approximate 500kg increase in the R-2 obviously relates to the dry weight; which the editor who added this to the R-2 article in the past did not make clear. Will fix in this article and the R-2 article. Thankyou for your comments that help improve this article! Ilenart626 (talk) 14:20, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Soviet_rocketry&oldid=1212919812"