R-7 Semyorka i just learned that Russian R-7 rocket family is the oldest

[Pawelk198604]

R-7 Semyorka i just learned that Russian R-7 rocket family is the oldest still in active service

[deadshot462]

"Don't fix it if it ain't broke" I suppose.

[General Rarity]

And the Soyuz Spacecraft's design from the 60's that is launched on it is still in service today... amazing tech those Ruskies make.

Look at our (USA's) longest serving manned spacecraft, only 30 years and 2 major accidents, but 135 flights. Kind of disappointing... Apollo was a good design, and Orion is basically Apollo: 21st Century I guess.

Edited September 27, 2014 by General Rarity

[Kryten]

That date might actually be behind Terrier-based sounding rockets; I can't find a firm date for the first launch.

[cantab]

"Don't fix it if it ain't broke" I suppose.

And if it is broke, fix it, don't throw it out and start over. The Soyuz line has had several modifications and upgrades, making today's craft quite different to those of the 60s.

[xenomorph555]

R7 isn't just the oldest space rocket, it was the FIRST space rocket dating all the way back to sputnik. It has carried out some of the most prestigious missions (sputnik's, vostok's, luna's, venera's, etc) and many more. With over a 1000 launchs I think. R7 in my opinion is one of the most beauty full rockets ever designed (all variants) and I feel a sense of greatness about them, I would be sad to see them go

[PTNLemay]

Looks a lot like the Soyuz launcher, I find.

EDIT:

Wait, these are being retired? I didn't find any such mention on the wikipedia article, when was it announced?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-7_(rocket_family)

(and some random pretty pics I found of it)

Edited September 28, 2014 by PTNLemay

[mythbusters844]

R7 in my opinion is one of the most beauty full rockets ever designed (all variants) and I feel a sense of greatness about them, I would be sad to see them go

Agreed. The R-7 just looks so pretty for some reason. I mean, look:

And at Baikonur, they have an awesome way of transporting the R-7s to their launch pads.

[Kryten]

That's a Soyuz. 'R-7' is it's ultimate ancestor, a missile retired about 50 years ago. It's like calling Delta IV 'Thor' or Atlas V 'SM-65'.

[Javster]

Agreed. The R-7 just looks so pretty for some reason. I mean, look:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Soyuz_TMA-9_launch.jpg/598px-Soyuz_TMA-9_launch.jpg

And at Baikonur, they have an awesome way of transporting the R-7s to their launch pads.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ec/Soyuz_TMA-16_launch_vehicle_being_transported_to_pad.jpg/1024px-Soyuz_TMA-16_launch_vehicle_being_transported_to_pad.jpg

Although you can't deny the vertical transportation used by NASA and ESA is awesome too!

[xenomorph555]

Wait, these are being retired? I didn't find any such mention on the wikipedia article, when was it announced?

They haven't announced anything, I'm just saying they eventually will be retired.

That's a Soyuz. 'R-7' is it's ultimate ancestor, a missile retired about 50 years ago. It's like calling Delta IV 'Thor' or Atlas V 'SM-65'.

Technically they are still under R-7 designation, the first stage is basically the same and the upper stages are what define the "variant" of the R-7. In this case R-7-Soyuz.

[Tech Support]

How does ESA transport it's Rockets ??

[Kryten]

=Technically they are still under R-7 designation, the first stage is basically the same and the upper stages are what define the "variant" of the R-7. In this case R-7-Soyuz.

R-X is a designation for a missile system, and isn't applied to space launchers; the designation for each rocket is a GRAU number.

How does ESA transport it's Rockets ??

Vertically, but with a rail system instead of a crawler; Like so. I'm pretty sure that's also how ISRO does it, and it's how the Chinese do it for some launches (mostly of Shenzhou).

Edited September 28, 2014 by Kryten

[Camacha]

That is why Soyuz is so successful; they kept polishing and improving step by step, making it an incredibly well balanced system by now. It has its limitations, which is why new systems are developed, but if I was going to space I would want it to be a Soyuz, simply because it provides the biggest chance of making it back alive.

It reminds a little of the Porsche 911. That thing has also been tweaked and tweaked so that, even despite starting out with less than ideal circumstances, it is by now near perfect.

[PTNLemay]

@ Camacha

Just be aware that the Soyuz is usually sent up to the station packed with extra supplies, this makes the interior freakishly cramped.

And what's worse is that the flight can sometimes take up to 6 hours to reach the station, or... it can take over 24 hours. They recently announced that they'd be switching over to the 6-hour flight plan, but most of them up till now have been very long transfers to save on fuel. So, yeah, it'd be way too claustrophobic for me, personally.

[Kryten]

That's only the descent module; the orbital module's generally opened soon after orbital insertion.

[Camacha]

@ Camacha

Just be aware that the Soyuz is usually sent up to the station packed with extra supplies, this makes the interior freakishly cramped.

I have done road trips with a lot less space than that - and I mean that in the most literal sense. I am not claustrophobic, so as long as I can wiggle enough to prevent a sore butt I am fine (and microgravity goes a long way to prevent that anyway). But no matter, space flight is a dangerous hobby, so I would still prefer safety over comfort. No use having leg room while burning up.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Camacha

[PTNLemay]

That's only the descent module; the orbital module's generally opened soon after orbital insertion.

Oh... right the Soyuz has 2 of those bubble compartment things. My mistake. That's good, I was wondering how in hell they could survive for 24 hours (or maybe it was 36 hours, I'm not sure) strapped into that tiny volume of space.

[xenomorph555]

Oh... right the Soyuz has 2 of those bubble compartment things. My mistake. That's good, I was wondering how in hell they could survive for 24 hours (or maybe it was 36 hours, I'm not sure) strapped into that tiny volume of space.

Meh that's plenty of space to survive in for 24 hours, people seem to have forgotten the good old generation 2 spacecraft era (gemini and voskhod). Back in those days pilots were crammed into much less space with another pilot and had to go for a week or more, 2 weeks on Gemini 7 I believe.

[Kryten]

You really wouldn't want to be stuck in a Soyuz DM specifically for 24 hours though, given the toilet's in the orbital module and the russians don't go for NASA's 'absorbency garments' during launch.

[Camacha]

Meh that's plenty of space to survive in for 24 hours, people seem to have forgotten the good old generation 2 spacecraft era (gemini and voskhod). Back in those days pilots were crammed into much less space with another pilot and had to go for a week or more, 2 weeks on Gemini 7 I believe.

Exactly. Living with two men shoulder to shoulder in about the space of the front seats of a smallish European car. They live, breathe, eat, poop and (not) shower together. They had to shove spent toilet paper behind the seats. All this for two weeks on end. Now that is basic.

You really wouldn't want to be stuck in a Soyuz DM specifically for 24 hours though, given the toilet's in the orbital module and the russians don't go for NASA's 'absorbency garments' during launch.

I will gladly poop my pants for a ticket to space.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Camacha

[xenomorph555]

You really wouldn't want to be stuck in a Soyuz DM specifically for 24 hours though, given the toilet's in the orbital module and the russians don't go for NASA's 'absorbency garments' during launch.

Depends, if it were an LEO flight I guess not, but if we were doing Zond then F YEAH I'll sit in that thing for 9 days. To go to the moon is worth cr*ping myself.