See Inside a 50 year old Soyuz Capsule - 1960's Soviet Space Technology 

And he made it!! That was quite unexpected for me :-)

Right now, I need to guess these too, but I'm currently learning Russian so hopefully in a few weeks I can understand the name of the butttons

@@nkolchenko f

Space is so gay!!,, !

The good ol' soviet technology.... More electromechanical, than digital stuff... I bet it still could run nowadays!

Wow, thank you!!!

Where do most of the Soyuz capsules go after they fly? I feel like they would be in more museums since there are so many of them. Do they go to a storage facility? Do most of them go to a "aircraft graveyard"?

@@grahammckemy1390 Don't know what happens to the actual capsules, but the control panels and electronics are reused.

What model did they switch over from the analog gauges to the modern day glass cockpit?

Cool knowledge Ilya dorokhov.!!👍

Not only read, but also understand. Not bad.

He did get the OKC part wrong... it's actually OKS ;)

Well at least he knows the numbers perfectly :)

@@ModEscharPlays Well considering N on the other side it may be OKC for real! (actually, it surely is OKC - I'm only unsure if it is Cyrillic or Latin alphabet :-D - here in Serbia we are using both, but we are never mixing them -- if that is the case it is OKC or (ОКЦ) definitely)

It's amazing how Spartan the technology was, and realize miniaturization was in it's infancy, so there really wasn't a whole lot going on as far as data collection. There was an American character actor in the '60's who played a "Mexican cosmonaut" who's favorite part of space travel was the blast off, "cuz you got to get blasted to up in one of them things". Wonder if Soviet Cosmonauts might've been privy to the good stuff?

It is very fancy - for the time! Beautiful tiny Globe - 7:58 , extremely complicated and gorgeous programmable dual timers and clock - 9:58 or just pretty blue - teal-ish parts of spacesuits! - 10:52

@@ericmuschlitz7619 That was Astronaut José Jiménez, a character played by Comedian Bill Dana

I look inside and I simply can't imagine anyone but the most hardcore, hardass, balls of steel types actually getting inside, waiting while they wrench the hatch closed, and saying, "Ok, now light this thing up!" (With respect to Valentina Tereshkova, who flew in a Vostok, I imagine she was cut of the same cloth, but I don't know how to say "woman with balls of steel" in English.) I'm claustrophobic just watching the video.

@@jackster8976 Soyuz 1 is an incredible story, so I wrote it down in the wall of words below in case you're interested. The success of the ongoing Soyuz program today really argues against any criticism based on safety or engineering. Col. Vladimir Komarov is a hero of mine. He died alone when his Soyuz 1 capsule hit the ground and burst into flames just north of the Kazakhstan border in Russia. (One day I intend to visit the Komarov monument there and share a good bottle of vodka with my hero.) That was IMO not a matter of poor or inadequate technology or engineering. It was a politically driven human sacrifice, and Komarov walked into it knowing exactly what was going to happen. Every Soviet Cosmonaut knew. The large number of system faults aboard Soyuz 1 were all known issues that were being addressed by the design engineers, but the Soviet premier Leonid Brezhnev ordered the launch to proceed in time for the 50th anniversary of the Soviet Union. He would either have a new hero to present in the 1967 May Day parade or a dead hero to inspire the Soviet people. He didn't care which. They only needed a little more time to fix the issues that killed Col. Komarov, but Brezhnev would not wait. They hadn't even tested all the systems by the time they launched. All the Soyuz Cosmonauts knew the machine wasn't ready for flight, and so did the engineers. Their protests are well documented. Due to Komarov's remarkable skill as a pilot and engineer, he nearly saved himself. Despite major failures in nearly every system, he was able to orient the tumbling capsule to the correct angle for a re-entry burn, and he successfully fired the retro-rockets. He re-entered, and his descent was normal most of the way. Unfortunately, his main parachute got tangled up and didn't deploy properly. His back-up parachute got stuck in the deployment tube, so it couldn't deploy either. I've read two explanations for that failure of the back-up parachute. 1. The inside of the tube had been given a layer of heat-resistant paint that the parachute engineers didn't plan for, so it didn't fit properly. The technicians who packed that parachute had to force the chute into the tube with a big mallet. 2. Because only one of the two solar panels had deployed on reaching orbit, and that one was not effective due to the constant tumbling of the spacecraft, preventing Komarov from orienting it toward the sun, he was essentially flying on battery power, which was depleted during descent. (That much is documented.) There wasn't enough power to trigger deployment of the back-up chute. A third explanation I've read is that the back-up chute simply became entangled with the tangled main chute. Col. Komarov agreed to fly his suicide mission because if he refused, they would send his backup in his place, his best friend, Yuri Gagarin, who was the first human in space and a MAJOR soviet hero. (Gagarin would have gone.) Gagarin pleaded personally with Brezhnev to give them time to finish working out the many engineering problems, but Brezhnev wasn't having it. Komarov's death ruined Gagarin. It ended his career, and there was talk that Brezhnev was ready to have him "disappear" because he was so public with his personal protests made directly to Brezhnev, often in front of important people, causing him huge embarrassment. Gagarin went into a deep and prolonged depression and drank heavily (yeah, even by Russian standards). Within 2 years he was dead too. He had sobered up and accepted an air force assignment as a fighter pilot, and he died in a training accident. (Conspiracy theorists think it was no accident, but an assassination ordered by Brezhnev. I don't buy it, but I won't argue about it.) The other fatal Soyuz flight happened in 1971 (Soyuz 11), when an air valve got stuck open when the landing module separated for re-entry. It was supposed to close automatically, but the exploding bolts that separated the modules fired incorrectly. However, the possibility of this failure was known, and the crew was advised to close the valve manually. For whatever reason, they didn't, and all the air in their capsule escaped into space. Not a story of heroism, just a known issue that wasn't addressed properly. (That's what brought down the Space Shuttle Columbia - a known problem that hadn't been addressed.) The Soyuz remains the safest and most successful manned spacecraft ever, as is the R7 booster that puts it in orbit. It continues in service today as the primary space vehicle in the Russian space program. Recently it even became the first spacecraft to execute an inflight launch abort, returning the two-man crew safely to the Earth. There has never been a safer manned spacecraft ever than the Soyuz atop an R7 booster (now called the Soyuz booster). In fact, there have been over 1680 total Soyuz flights, and over 140 were manned. ~40 Americans have flown at least once on the Russian Soyuz, not counting the three who flew in orbit only as guests aboard Soyuz 19 while it was docked to their Apollo spacecraft in 1975. The Soyuz spacecraft in use today contain newer electronics, bigger solar panels, and seats that accommodate taller passengers, but the actual Soyuz spacecraft itself has been changed very little. I think their 1960's technology was absolutely rock solid, and Komarov understood it better than anyone. I think he knew it would be a great machine if they'd been allowed enough time to finish their engineering work. However, their political system was an absolute catastrophe, and he knew that too. Col. Vladimir Komarov was killed by that political system. (If you're wondering, I'm an American, a former Apollo kid, so I'm not just spewing pro-Soviet or pro-Russian propaganda. Since the late 1960s, space was the one place where we could truly be friends with the Soviets and cooperate on research and development. I wish we'd extend that same friendship to China today.)

Inside the Commander's Hatch

I’m sure. I wonder if they’d sell me one.

And there are also 3 Buran shuttles rotting in hangars

Даниил Архангельский That is very sad and yet all too true. While they were heavily influenced by our space shuttle in many respects, the Buran was still an impressive Soviet achievement with many of its own unique aspects and even speaking as an American it is very painful to see so much of the Soviet space program relics simply left to rot when they should at the very least be preserved in museums for future generations to enjoy and learn about - mere photos simply do not carry the same emotional impact as an actual spacecraft standing before you.

HO LAM YIU I somehow highly doubt they’d sell you that, and seeing as they’ve got valuable equipment with various metals etc, I don’t think they’d want to.

HO LAM YIU They’ve got traces of toxic materials, valuable metals, valuable equipment. They shouldn’t sell them, if they get rid of them at all, it’ll be to a museum.

eluadyl me too but I didn’t cry lol.

A Heinlein quote comes to mind: "Narby had no particular respect for engineers, largely because he had no particular talent for engineering."

the earth is flat! this is a disney fake!

When I try to do music or a sport or something, really start to learn what's involved, I get more and more respect for the people who do it well.

@@bennyhill5938 X-D

I like to imagine the Canada Arm on the shuttle was held together with Robertson screws 🔩

shameless self dox going on here XD

Merrin proof of the ball earth " Theory"

@@dirkdiggler1242 Can't tell if being sarcastic or just plain stupid

In Black Ops Zombies map Ascension, it's on the control panel of the lunar landers

Every Soviet/Russian manned spacecraft had those until 2002. Modern ones use maps on computer screens to preform the same function.

Apparently they also have a Concord _and_ a Tu-144 on display you can go inside, too.

@@johnbrown9181 Those are in Sinsheim a few kilometers away. The two museums belong together, though.

That sounds like a cool experience, must've been neat to see up close!

Hi Yaroslav! I am an astronautics buff from Radebeul, Germany. Question: Why has Roscosmos passed the chance to construct a radically more modern version of Soyuz? (I've seen some designs on their web page - but until now all projects have failed to materialize. When Space X takes over taxi service to the ISS in 2019 - I am afraid the Soyuz will not survive for long...)

@@11moonshot actually, Roskosmos actually IS working on a new spaceship now, and there were a lot of projects in the past indeed. They even speak about some solid dates of first tests as far as I know. Will they achieve them is another matter, but some work is in progress, as far as I know. I'm sure (and heart some rumors) that nobody in Roskosmos took Space X project for serious until its first successes. As for me, I'm deeply worried about it, because it would be dumb AF for people, who sent Gagarin to space, to be kicked out of the business because of rusty way of thoughts... Anyway, man, I'm just an ordinary internet nerd, rumors are all that I can operate, and if you wanna some official info, you are to dig through Roskosmos official press releases. And I would like to see what will they come up with.

I was there

Roskosmos will always be around. Russians will refuse to fly with Space-X capsule (which got tested today btw)

@@11moonshot Because they don't need a new spaceship. They don't have where to use it. For ISS they can use old Soyuz. The Moon program is frozen. And even they still can't finish any new rocket, that can carry larges spaceship than the Soyuz. But they need to show the picture, that they do something(it's the political stuff)

Did you see my comment on the last video it's a idea for a video

Scott Manley no words can describe how much I love watching your videos! You have been my main inspiration for KSP and starting my RU-vid channel! Thanks so much for being awesome!!!

Grab yourself Cmdr Chris Hadfield (CSA), he should be able to explain almost all the hardware and instruments of the capsule. Would be even more awesome with some co-host, like Fraser Cane, Tim Dodd or so.

4:15 I missed the live chat but would you mind explaining " sensors would detect they were close the ground "... radar? utilizing Doppler effect?.. my interest is piqued, Sir.

@@densealloy It's based on gamma radiation, which is also why the instructions on the capsule advise you to not stand in front of the heatshield while helping the crew get out... I don't know how gamma ray backscatter detection works exactly, but it's got an isotope such as Cobalt-60 producing high energy gamma rays that, once it's close enough, illuminate the ground and what gets scattered back triggers the soft landing rockets and releases the parachute.

10 out of 10 great place to be.

bob jones arkhangelsky to be correct

bob jones this is wonderful when people study foreign languages or at least know how to read signs))

If Scott ever put a foot into Moscow Space Museum, he may have an excitement overload. artsandculture.google.com/streetview/memorial-museum-of-cosmonautics/rgHMfWhWLKyUNw

bob jones ahahaha that's nice one!

In soviet Russia, men WITH huge balls fly IN tiny balls.

They are usually newer than this one

Modern Cosmonauts are bigger too.

*sigh*

+Luke Freeman Because you're a voyeur with psychopathic tendencies?

Green Rabbid Rabbit me too me too

I did plenty of research ahead of time on what to expect.

НАГР for "нагрузка" - load

May be charging current? Because charge should be in Ah or Wh.

Sooo...you are annoyed that you can't be first? :D

randomnickify lol

My main problem with premiere is that it doesn't save "watched" status for me.

how can you comment on something thats not releast yet ?

@@Jaybuilderjay you can comment while it is waiting be it hours or minutes

What else do you expect, so many of them have flown over time that nobody knows if this one really did. In some old Soviet archives, there should be a list.

Old slotted screws were much more resilient than the modern versions. Hardware from the 40's and 50's was surprisingly robust.

Probably made without planned obsolescence in mind

AMEN to that!

@@christheother9088 the slotted screws on soviet gear tend to be soft as fuck and get dickered when you take a modern screwdriver to them. Maybe the soyuz got better stuff but you never know.

The phylips screws where to «American» for the USSR at the time, torks ones where to new and Robertson ones are pretty rare outside Canada. This leave the good old slotted ones.

The craft is on display, but there's a perspex window covering the hatch which I got them to temporarily remove so I could stick cameras inside.

@@scottmanley Thank you. Oddly, it's not mentioned on wikipedia page's list of attractions. I also didn't find it on chabotspace.org but now I see that it's under the exhibit "Going The Distance: Our Reach Into Space" at their site