4 ms·

The main reason why they failed is - they pushed testing into production, just like MySpace, because their funding and leadership disintegrated at the beginning

The main reason why they failed is - they pushed testing into production, just like MySpace, because their funding and leadership disintegrated at the beginning of the program. See my other reply in this thread.

shmerl 9y ago
Sure, their management was erratic. But the bottom line, their combination wasn't technically reliable (why, is already what you are saying).
- Florin_Andrei 9y ago
  This meme of the "inferior Soviet technology" needs to die in a fire. It's soothing for the fragile Western conservative ego, but it's just not true - not, at least, with regards to space. The failure of the N1 program was a leadership issue, period. Just like America trailing the Russians at first was a leadership and lack of focus issue. One team kept winning, then they lost their captains and their funding. Meanwhile, the other team got great leaders and awesome sponsors and started busting their collective ass really hard around the same time - and the wheel of fortune suddenly turned. Funny how that works, isn't it? What's strange is that the true events sound a heck of a lot more "american" (work hard and reap the laurels, or slack off and be a loser) and yet you keep hearing the same bullshit all the time as to how "the Russian stuff was just inferior". It's not true. And it's not a good story to tell your kids.
  - shmerl 9y ago
    > This meme of the "inferior Soviet technology" needs to die in a fire. Technology turns out to be inferior, when quality control is superseded by political agenda. It should be quite obvious. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe > The failure of the N1 program was a leadership issue, period. Surely leadership failure is a key factor, but there was also an economical one. Space race was very expensive.

shmerl 9y ago

Sure, their management was erratic. But the bottom line, their combination wasn't technically reliable (why, is already what you are saying).

Florin_Andrei 9y ago
This meme of the "inferior Soviet technology" needs to die in a fire. It's soothing for the fragile Western conservative ego, but it's just not true - not, at least, with regards to space. The failure of the N1 program was a leadership issue, period. Just like America trailing the Russians at first was a leadership and lack of focus issue. One team kept winning, then they lost their captains and their funding. Meanwhile, the other team got great leaders and awesome sponsors and started busting their collective ass really hard around the same time - and the wheel of fortune suddenly turned. Funny how that works, isn't it? What's strange is that the true events sound a heck of a lot more "american" (work hard and reap the laurels, or slack off and be a loser) and yet you keep hearing the same bullshit all the time as to how "the Russian stuff was just inferior". It's not true. And it's not a good story to tell your kids.
- shmerl 9y ago
  > This meme of the "inferior Soviet technology" needs to die in a fire. Technology turns out to be inferior, when quality control is superseded by political agenda. It should be quite obvious. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe > The failure of the N1 program was a leadership issue, period. Surely leadership failure is a key factor, but there was also an economical one. Space race was very expensive.