3 ms·

Although this is getting very nitpicky, while I'd agree a perigee above ground would count as an orbital _trajectory_, an orbital flight is usually considered a

Although this is getting very nitpicky, while I'd agree a perigee above ground would count as an orbital _trajectory_, an orbital flight is usually considered as one that completes at least one full orbit around the planet.

sebzim4500 2y ago
By that logic Gagarin did not reach orbit, so I don't think that's a common definition.
- tsukikage 2y ago
  Do you have a source for that? My understanding was that he completed a full orbit.
  - sebzim4500 2y ago
    The insertion burn finished at 06:18 UTC and they started the deorbit burn at 07:25 UTC, while the period of the target orbit was 89 minutes.
- m4rtink 2y ago
  There was also another issue - Gagarin did not land with the capsule, but ejected during the landing as expected & both the and the capsule landed under (separate) parachutes. This was because the capsule landing speed was higher than what could be achieved if only the kosmonaut parachuted down, making the landing safer. But the FAI guidelines for for space records at the time were based on normal aircraft flights & expected the crew to board the craft & only disembark on landing. So soviets just lied about Gagarin landing with the capsule up until 1971: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_1#World_records https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_1#World_records Also the orbital booster used (R7) was also still an active ICBM (even sometimes holding combat readiness with a live nuke on top on the same launch pad) so that was IIRC secret as well. :)
- chippiewill 2y ago
  I think in a very technical sense you could say it wasn't an orbital flight because he didn't quite complete an entire orbit. Most people call his flight a complete orbit anyway though as his landing point was quite close to his launch point (unlike virtually all other sub-orbital flights).

3 ms·

Although this is getting very nitpicky, while I'd agree a perigee above ground would count as an orbital _trajectory_, an orbital flight is usually considered a

by chippiewill 2y ago

sebzim4500 2y ago
By that logic Gagarin did not reach orbit, so I don't think that's a common definition.
- tsukikage 2y ago
  Do you have a source for that? My understanding was that he completed a full orbit.
  - sebzim4500 2y ago
    The insertion burn finished at 06:18 UTC and they started the deorbit burn at 07:25 UTC, while the period of the target orbit was 89 minutes.
- m4rtink 2y ago
  There was also another issue - Gagarin did not land with the capsule, but ejected during the landing as expected & both the and the capsule landed under (separate) parachutes. This was because the capsule landing speed was higher than what could be achieved if only the kosmonaut parachuted down, making the landing safer. But the FAI guidelines for for space records at the time were based on normal aircraft flights & expected the crew to board the craft & only disembark on landing. So soviets just lied about Gagarin landing with the capsule up until 1971: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_1#World_records https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_1#World_records Also the orbital booster used (R7) was also still an active ICBM (even sometimes holding combat readiness with a live nuke on top on the same launch pad) so that was IIRC secret as well. :)
- chippiewill 2y ago
  I think in a very technical sense you could say it wasn't an orbital flight because he didn't quite complete an entire orbit. Most people call his flight a complete orbit anyway though as his landing point was quite close to his launch point (unlike virtually all other sub-orbital flights).