Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mlyle 458 days ago
> The real space race, having the ability to nuke any point on earth, was clearly won by the Soviets.

The US and the Soviets had operational ICBMs at pretty much the same time-- dueling milestones from 1957 to 1959.

Then the Soviets pulled ahead with capabilities in LEO, which showed they also probably had "better" ICBMs.

Then the US caught up and surpassed them.

Then both stagnated; Russia did a slightly better job in choosing priorities for human spaceflight; the US did a better job with probes and unmanned spaceflight.

3 comments

> Then the Soviets pulled ahead with capabilities in LEO, which showed they also probably had "better" ICBMs.

In the US the story is that because Soviet nukes were more crude than the US versions, which made them heavier and bulkier so the Soviets had to build their rockets bigger to have enough range. When the focus shifted to putting a man in orbit having a larger rocket to start with was an advantage and allowed the Soviets to achieve a number of firsts.

I do agree that declaring the race suddenly over with a man on the moon was a case of taking the ball and going home.

> I do agree that declaring the race suddenly over with a man on the moon was a case of taking the ball and going home.

See, I would characterize this differently-- after the US reached the Moon, Russia pretty much gave up-- gave up on the N1, Zond, etc.

They kept working on the N1 until 1974. Last crewed landing on the moon was 1972.
Wouldn't the 'US did a better job with probes and unmanned spaceflight' depend on when you want to plant the flag that the space race ended? If we go with what in the US we define as a man on the moon, the Soviets I believe were putting probes all over the place. The soviets were landing probes first on bodies in the 60s. While the US focused on the moon.

I guess that depends on what you define as the bounds of the space race. If we go to the fall of the Soviet Union, yea, I completely agree with your last statement. After we landed on the moon, we did start getting serious about probes and had a bunch of wins there with voyager and such.

> Wouldn't the 'US did a better job with probes and unmanned spaceflight' depend on when you want to plant the flag that the space race ended?

I was talking about post-1970 stagnation.

Russia basically scaled everything waaaay back post 1970. You have Venera as a significant first/win, parity for a little while on Mars, and then the US unrivaled in the outer solar system.

From what I understand the US outnumbered the soviets in sheer number of missiles though. Early 1960s politicians fearmongered about soviet missile capacity in order to justify a huge expansion in military capabilities while the soviets lagged behind in raw numbers.
Both sides grossly overbuilt their nuclear missile capabilities. The maintenance costs forced them into partial disarmament treaties in the 80s and 90s.