- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
The unmanned craft was due to make a soft landing on the Moon’s south pole, but failed after encountering problems as it moved into its pre-landing orbit.
It was Russia’s first Moon mission in almost 50 years.
Russia has been racing to the Moon’s south pole against India, whose Chandrayaan-3 spacecraft is scheduled to land on there next week.
No country has ever landed on the south pole before, although both the US and China have landed softly on the Moon’s surface.
No report on whether or not Russia was attempting to use repurposed anti-ship missiles like the ones they use to attack schools and hospitals here on Earth.
You must log in or # to comment.
The US should put a lander together out of trash for shits and giggles and have it land perfectly.
Or just land people in a few years. They’re working on a several hundred ton lander right now!
A 1979 TV show about a guy who put together a junk spaceship to salvage junk from the moon: Salvage 1.
My teenage self found it entertaining at the time. Hmmm, now where did I leave my parrot? I wonder if he could help me find a copy…
They are doing it with the artemis mission
What’s the problem. It was a lunar lander. It landed on the moon. Mission accomplished.
Nobody walked away from that landing, so it definitely wasn’t a good one. The fact that there was nobody to walk away from the landing is a mere technicality.
I now have flashbacks to computer games in the early 80’s.
“This is all the West’s fault!”
I always suspected that it was just a missile painted like a rocket.
It launched on a soyuz, which has an extremely long history. It first launched in 67. All rockets back then had icbm roots or aspirations. But for a long time all icbms use solid propellent for better long term storage rather than liquid propellant like soyuz.
I hear you saying that they’re very similar platforms. I’m saying that the neccesary differences that would make it a scientific rocket were simply missing, an empty shell, a smokeshow.
What differences? The difference between icbms and rockets to launch to space is usually the time it takes to get the rocket ready to launch, and how long it can be stored for.
Scientific instruments, sufficient navigation technology, communications
That’s on the satellite itself, not the launch vehicle. As far as I know, there’s no commonality between the lander and the multiple reentry vehicle upper stages of rockets. Here’s more about the lander: https://youtu.be/XM8bJsqCLYQ
Obviously it was not a moon rocket, but a Drone aimed for Kiev.
It seems that a dish washer’s controller isn’t suitable for moon landing after all.
Comments exactly what I expected. Disappointed how many people here are knee jerk celebrating the failure. Feels like being in a room full of Republicans when someone says anything about Mexico or Islam.
I hope they fix their shit for Luna 26 for the sake of science and human discovery.
You know normally I would applaud them. Happy when China has a success. Screw Russia though. This was a propaganda mission to get a win. The fact that did it in a rush to beat another country is typical of their philosophy. There was little science in this but mostly just dick waving.
I still haven’t ruled out that Putin was trying to invade the moon.
Well your intention is admirable but childish.
Nobody gives a fuck about Russia’s scientific endeavours when they’re re starting the biggest military conflict in Europe since WWII and threatening everyone with a nuclear conflict.
Most probably any scientific progress that could be made will not be used for mankind’s progress but for the current militaristic propaganda.
All of Apollo took place during the Vietnam war. Somehow I think you’d feel differently about that.
You’re correct about the Appolo missions, but don’t tell me the Space Race was about science. It’s was fully politically motivated also. Without the Cold War nobody would have put the money and effort in so the Moon landing could happen in '69.
There are a lot of other missions that happened for pure scientific reasons but I don’t think this is one of them.
Ignorance to the actual Nazis in Ukraine and their military is also severely childish.
Removed by mod
I thought Russia said they would not share any of the science.
The russian wording on the mission failure is something to behold. Luna-25 “ceased its existence”.
I’m surprised they aren’t denying it ever existed at all.
Testing a new lithobraking maneuver.
Special crashing operation.
It didn’t fail! It was an attack, and it was a great success!
There will be no arguments over whether they got there…
Whoops 👀
This crash feels so symbolic it correlates with their economy and their president ego.
Thats the end for Ross kosmos.
