The Abandoned Soviet Zvezda Moon Base 

smart

That exactly is the problem. The cosmonauts up there only have another 5 years of oxygen.

Agree

@@Stevie-J - Impossible! Russians NEVER run out of vodka.

@@21stcenturyscots deeveloped new sort of Vodka, now from stardust ; )

- It appeared brighter because your eyes sight was a whole lot better back then. - And why is it that nobody ever remembers seeing the much bigger *Sputnik 2* with a dog pilot 2 months later?

@@mydogbrian4814 Better eyesight might have played a role, although I pass my 2nd class Commercial Pilot medical still. Another factor may have been (1 it's altitude... at perigee it was only 134 miles up and the ISS is at 254 miles. I don't know where Sputnik was in its elliptical orbit when it passed over East Tennessee that night. #2 factor might also have been the general reflectivity of Sputnik. It was a polished aluminum ball that was highly reflective which may have made it look brighter than ISS Although ISS is a bejillion times bigger than the Sputnik satellite, it just may not reflect as well, or the angle of the sun hitting it the two or three times I've seen ISS just wasn't optimum for my point of view as compared to when I spotted Sputnik. "Curiouser and Curiouser", cried Alice.

@@SKYGUY1 - Did you consider all the air pollution in the stratosphere? > After 9/11, jet traffic was grounded & some 10,000 jets stopped flying. I was stunned how crystal clear the sky became 2 days after the grounding. - I'll never forget how much high air pollution there must have been pumped into the sky by planes flying across, landing & taking off from the 4 large airports around the Chicago's suburbs.

@@mydogbrian4814 that was from the chemtrails they've been spraying for decades

@stephenbartram7377 - Not chemtails but *Contrails.* Which are leanier vapor trails from jet engin exhaust at cruising altitude. - There a 3 diferent types depending on the amount of moisture in the air.

Just more click bate

My point in my comment although went 4 humor.

yeah report this video as click bait

"Abandoned Soviet Moonbase Plans"... how's that?

The title should be "The Abandoned PLANS for a Soviet Moon Base."

amazing how trying to not destroy the earth with toxic chemicals breeds innovation. America won but at a cost. plenty of people died from being exposed to hydrazine. Also the fumes from the rockets where toxic with it being mostly ammonia and hydrogen cyanide. Scary stuff

Thank you for taking the time to share this information and make us all just a tad bit wiser.

- The whole debate of "woulda, shoulda, couldal" about the *N-1* is a mute point. - The Soviet "one man" *LEM* was a joke. To Western observers who seen the prototype in 1990, it was so primitive inside, that its controls of floor levers & panel knobs reminded one journalist of a 1900 steam locomotive's. - The main reason for Soviet secrecy on just about everything about their early space hardware was its primitive nature. - We were initially assuming they had giant 3 stage Titan type rockets, when infact they were using multiple clusters of strap on upgraded V-2 engined boosters, who's only innovation was doubling the fule pumps to increase thrust by a factor of 2. - Even if the disasters of the *N-1* launches were avoided. The rushed landing of an untested one manned *LEM* to beat the U.S. would have been.

@@jasonbowman6931 Jason, from your mouth to God's ears. Unfortunately it's only a little bit about pride, and is largely about money. Once you've tried the war business, no other business comes close, not even the illegal drug trade. But you need a scarecrow, and North Korea is a tiny one - whereas USSR / Russia scarecrow potential can only be bested by a bona fide alien invasion.

Hi Alex, probably the best translation into English of "чистоплюй" is 'sissy', or in modern parlance (in the UK at least), "girl's blouse". :-)

I recall someone once saying. That the $ spent fighting in Vietnam could have payed for what we saw in the movie 2001.

- I hated it! The idea that an atomic blast wood magicaly propel the massive 2000 mile diameter Moon to visit a new planet every week was too much fantasy for me to swallow. And in; *- 2029* & not even an abandoned *Porta-potty Alpha* on the Moon.

There are bases there, we just not supposed to talk about it, No Shit.

@@jamesmcdow945 And just how are we supplying these secret bases if you can't launch any rocket without SkyNet satellite detection?

I liked that show too - at least the first year. I always called it "Space 1999... Marked down from 2995". 😁

Not too good for the lungs either apparently, when they took their suits off.

As autonomous systems become more prevalent, I would see a subterranean outpost. That said, I would rather see a permanent high orbit space station thats leveraged as a waypoint for further exploration.

The moon dust problem has been practically solved though - the new Artemis-gen suits use electric fields to actively repel dust particles via nanotubes woven into the suit's fabric. Mars dust is also problematic as hell though and the method may not work as well there.

@@randompheidoleminor3011 electrostatic repulsion 😂

so basicly its like extremely fine shattered glass which is electrostatic in nature

While I couldn't detect the slowed speech, it certainly would help

@@onlyonewhyphy compared to his older content this is positively slow. Still fairly quick for the average speaker though lol

Meanwhile I've always been watching these videos at 1.5 speed :-)

Totally

Its literally the same and perfectly normal as always if your that slow the problem is you bro

There's a comment from a person who saw it in this comment section. And that person is now a pilot. Their conversation in the comments is pretty cool.

Canadians and Europeans say it like that just like aluminum

Sam with pivot

@@jeremylawrence8886 we (canadians) do not pronounce it as heard in the video

He has made this error in a few videos now. Each time someone or multiple people point it out in the comments but he hasn’t read them yet, apparently.

@@jeremylawrence8886 as a European living in Canada, I’ve never heard chassis pronounced as it is in the video anywhere other than Dark docs channels. Chass-ee is correct.

@Jon Acheson *- All true about the Soviet N-1.* > But that was also one of the 3 main reasons why the U.S. didn't go with the bigger *Saturn NOVA* class rocket. - The *Saturn 5's* size was the biggest that could be made without spending large amounts of additional money on new production facilities, test stands, and logistic transport systems, all exasperated by the time constrained set by Kennedy to accomplish the miracle by 1970. - That was the reason why *von Braun* reluctantly agreed to the *Moon Rendezvous* approach of a manned landing prematurely. - Because, after the Direct Landing method by *NOVA* fulfilling the President's mandate, it would have been easy to upscale moon landing payloads by 60% by then switching to the *Lunar Rendezvous* method for *larger 5 man Comand Modules & bigger 4 man LEMs.* And *Cargo LEMs* for building a moon base. - And it was because the millitary was always obsessed with "taking the high ground." It always was, on both sides of the world from day 1 of the Space Race.

If I recall, every N1 launch failed due to their control system simply not being able to handle a failure. So single engine out caused the control system to fail too. The Americans also had the advantage that the early work was paid for with military money and the N-1 was largely developed as a response to Apollo. The F-1 development was largely done before the Saturn was fully conceived. They focussed on solving combustion instability, which they largely succeeded in. While the soviets focussed on metallurgy, which they also succeeded at.

Bs you think a country like Russia doesn’t have unlimited resources and money

@@letsburn00 The *N-1* failed because it was a plumbing nightmare. With a cluster of 30 engines in the first stage. And because they couldn't afford the test stands to test fire the complete first stage. So they did it in smaller working clusters, which worked fine. - This is a good illustration of compounding problems when you disregard the engineering *Scaling Factor.* - As things get bigger negligible factors become big problems. - Nature knows this. - That's why you don't see 50 lb. Pumpkins growing & hanging down on trees. - The third *N-1* launch failed because the safety systems aboarted the launch some 5 seconds after all engines started. However one engine failed to shutdown, tipping the stack over.

@@ronanmcconnell6788 - Well they had the resources, but not the money! That whole system collapsed in 1989 because they were all thinking like you are.

Dogs want to pee on a tree ( and say this is mine ), men want to pee on the moon. How much we've advanced...

You notice they never said how they were going to land those heavy loads. They were having enough trouble trying to figure out how to get 200 tons of anything there let alone to the surface of the Moon.

@@fukhue8226 probably they would use reverse thrust rockets to counter most of the Moon's gravity. This gravity is much lower than Earth's so would require less fuel them an Earth landing. What will they do once there? I'm guessing they've done analysis on the moon and so far it's not been economic to use it for anything. So far...

We could easily do more than that right now. The only thing actually stopping us would be the enourmous cost. If we didnt spend billions upon billions defending israel, we could of easily colonized the mooon.

We’re close, very close. The first SLS launch is happening this year (knock on wood), and Starship/Super Heavy production is ramping up and very close to being ready to launch, really only awaiting FAA approval to conduct orbital launch operations. We should have never left the moon, but every day we are closer to setting up our permanent presence there. Have faith hahah

@@MattJ519 I like your gumption!

@@TierNone_LarperatoR (Edit: Oh look at that, the person I replied to deleted his comment, luckily I took a screenshot lol. His original comment was, “Nasa (sic) is too worried about gender now. It is never going to happen.” Just so people know the context.) That is one of the dumbest attempts at a straw man argument that I have ever read, good job brother. Not only is it just ridiculous and completely irrelevant, it’s also just not true lmao

What would you like to do there?

@@vondahe Grow weed.

Yeah, or "The Abandoned Soviet PLANS FOR THE Zvezda Moon Base

Or made of Cheese.

@@harrisonbergeron9764.....a cheese slice? 🤔

Only on that one side

Yes, flat as hell. They drilled right out the other side, and were lost in space.

I'm sure it didn't. I wouldn't have, either.

It flew just fine, but sideways only and with bit too high acceleration

Recently something similar happened with a Space X rocket.

Similar to the 27 engine spacex nightmare.

Actually a race us better. Nothing makes blood flow like a competition. The same way America and China's coming tech race will benefit humanity.

It was only the rivalry that got things as far as they went.

Meh, cheap. It is probably to national debt generated per day.

The whole world was in the grasp of a mass astro-futurist delusion. This world of moon bases and orbiting space stations was thought to be incredibly imminent. The truth was that Apollo, using mostly ballistics, and a fair degree of good luck, was at the absolute limit of what material science and computing could achieve in 1967-72 and the Space Shuttle somewhere beyond what could be safely done (and its luck ran out: twice). We are not really massively further on now.

(NASA admits we cannot go beyond low earth orbit, look it up. Never been to the moon, never will.)

if you go to the channels tab on his profile page you can see the list, he's pretty good about including them on all channels

@@WhuDhat Thank you very much for that info. I was only missing one of his channels. ✌🏽

Cringe

Not to mention great mining possibilitys because of low gravity and zero environmental problems. You could even put all the heavy industry and power generation there and reserve earth for commence and living.

@@molybdaen11 Yes good point! Apparently the moon is full of useful minerals.

Yes exactly, putting a mining colony/space port would be a good ideas , sinse moon's low gravity and no atmosphere would make it to launch spaceships and it has valuable resources like titanium and helium 3 , titanium makes a good spaceship building material and helium 3 would be good for reactor fuel and a few other minerals etc, so the moon has great potential to be a base

It was actually an idea. I think even constructing part of the ship there if I remember right.

Exactly.

Damn spell check. Social Darwinism.

Spellcheck, I know..... What the hell is a social drawing,? Anyway.....

- You are correct on the general wanting a ring side seat for the launch. But all the techs died because of correcting last minute glitches in the rocket's system & his impatient to get it launched.

@@mydogbrian4814 Thanks for your clarification. In any case, what a jerk, huh

@@vinnylamoureux1187 Most Russians think that way. & yes he was.

I think he is just using semantics. The V2 is a rocket and not a vehicle. Since he used the word vehicle throughout the video.

@@slickspace4863 …they are both vehicles AND rockets, regardless of their payload. It is well-documented - if not recognized - that the Germans were the first to send an artificial vehicle into space. I believe he is simply mistaken and we ought to recognize the lack of wiggle-room here.

@@JeddieT okay... Just an explanation for why the creator might have used his terminology the way he did in the video. Thanks though

@@JeddieT "___an *artificial* vehicle into space." As apposed to what? A *natural* one into space? - Since everybody here is hung up on semantics. *Sputnik* was not a vehicle. It was a satellite. The *R-7* rocket was the vehicle that thrust it into orbit.

@@mydogbrian4814 …Thank you Brian Dog, for your clarification! Indeed, Sputnik was in fact a satellite, and I hope our above transgressor is taking notes. As for the “artificial as _‘opposed’_ to what” question, check out the Chicxulub Crater, yes, the one created by the asteroid responsible for ending the dinosaurs’ long winning streak. It was so explosive, it is known to have ‘launched’ earth, stone, rock, and any number of once-living things into outer space. So, there’s that.

It's Gouda

I allways wondered, thx 🧀🌙

Just send the astronauts with a bunch of crackers and they won’t starve.

Frumunda cheese... As in frumunda your toenails...

From between your toes

Hmm, Huntsville. Is that anywhere near Gadston? Or the Saturn-1 display at the I-65 rest stop?

Or see a REAL Saturn V at Johnson Space Center in Houston - then you don't have to enter a shit hole welfare state like Alabama.

@@mydogbrian4814 yes on I 65 north . You’re not that far away

@@walterscogginsakathesilver6246 - Actually I'm in Chicago suburbs. But I've got family living in AL.

@@mydogbrian4814 Awesome I got family in Chicago and Live in Birmingham. Best of luck my dog Brian

That is why they could not be. These attributes were natural part of the system itself.

I remember an article decades ago, as the USSR was just beginning its long slide beneath the surface of history, on the state of Russian science. It opened with a description of a group of American physicists visiting a Soviet lab. They were astonished! The Americans hooked a lot of their stuff together with electrical tape, the the completed projects often looking like something that had been built in someone's basement -- looks didn't matter, results did. The Soviets, on the other hand, had these magnificently machined brass fittings connecting their tubes. The Soviet projects looked like works of art! What the American scientists didn't realize was that the administration had not budgeted enough money in the line item for buying electrical tape, otherwise the Soviet scientists would have used that instead as the faster, cheaper alternative. HOWEVER... the line item for brass connectors had not been touched for several years, which is why they used brass fittings instead of electrical tape. After talking about other idiosyncrasies in the Soviet system (like the time a very important science research building burned down because the city's firefighters did not have the security clearances needed to enter the research grounds), the article ended with a Soviet joke. To truly understand this, you have to know that Soviet citizens coming in from abroad would pack suitcases brimming with rare western goods, like Levi blue jeans, to sell or give to family and friends. So it was not uncommon to see travelers carrying heavy packages through the airport. My Russian wife (may God keep her close) would tell me about times she had to go to the Black Sea on business, and would come back to Moscow with her suitcase filled with caviar -- not the stuff you could buy in Moscow, but the *good* stuff the locals would keep for themselves. The joke starts with a man stopping another man in the airport who was carrying a pair of very heavy suitcases. "Your pardon, comrade, but could you tell me time?" The second man put his suitcases down, pulled his sleeve back, and announced that it was 1530 hours here, 1130 hours in Moscow, the moon was in its waning quarter, and a lunar eclipse would occur in 2 months, 7 days, 23 hours, and 17 minutes. The first man was amazed. "Where did you get that watch? Is it Swiss?" "NO!" the second man replied. "This is the latest example of the superiority of Soviet craftmanship over anything the West has to offer!" With that, the second man struggled to pick up the suitcases and continue on his way. "Thank you, comrade! And if I may ask, what is in the suitcases?" Without pausing, the second man called back over his shoulder, "The batteries!" Soviet science was very good. Their biggest problems were with the batteries.

@@jkcarroll I live in Hungary. We were unlucky enough to experience the soviet type socialism. I fabricated electric circuits because we had no acceptable guitar amplifiers and I played in a band. First lesson! Never use soviet transistors and Integrated circuits. They were trash. Unreliable noisy parts what performed far below the specifications. Let me answer with another soviet joke. Why didn't conquered the soviet microelectronics the world? Because it was too big to get out through the factory's gate.

@@dorzsboss You deserve Soviet re-occupation and a lifetime supply of exclusively Soviet transistors and integrated circuits.

@@mirianvanidze3280 Nobody deserves that. Fortunately the chance of it is zero.

when asked years ago what kind of rocket they needed for space travel they said a rocket twice the size of a v-2...the u.s.quit ..the russians went ahead and built one!! lesson do not give up so soon!

first dog killed in space

Yes Kerry, but what a great place to hang your hat! The Russians didn't perfect their 1st stage engines until 1975. So in the long run we flew past them especially when it came to the sophistication of the Electronics. If you look at the inside of their Moon Lander it looks like a submarine. Ours looked like the inside of a UFO!

@@fukhue8226 it just go to show that "necessity is the mother of invention", so many new technologies were developed for the Apollo missions, that we use everyday, if one puts in enough effort almost anything can be accomplished, now things fall into the private sector, look at Elon Musk, he set his mind on going to Mars, and although there are all kinds of obstacles, he doing what only the most wealthy nations could do before. his companies are developing every new technology that is needed, and doing it with style, both Bezos dildo rocket, and Elon Musks rocket are what we thought would exist in the future when we were kids. A few countries now have plans on going back to the moon, China, Isreal, India, US, couple others I can't remember right now.

"He was very successful in asking your mother out on a date - wiped the floor with me. Guess the only thing I can hang my hat on is the minor fact that she married me, we had you kids and that we remain happily married to this day. Gee, I hate being a loser..."

Hahaha!

Don't know if it is new science or something that could have been done in the past and just wasn't due to cost, but I recently saw a video on nuclear energy that proposed using liquid helium for reactor coolant instead of water. Obviously, transport would be an enormous cost, but i believe that video or something else I read stated it was 1/8th the weight of water, so that would help. Potentially, with lead lining for the living quarters to shield them, the coolant could actually be circulated and used to regulate temperature as well. Lead being heavy as hell would offset the cost savings of the helium vs water. Whole idea might be totally crazy, so if it is, don't flame me too much, I'm just a guy who likes interesting science stuff, not an actual scientist.

@@johns9652 Lead? With all the health issues associated with it?

@@thomasrobinson182 This is purely hypothetical anyway, so yes, lead, sealed in the walls. The only real danger of lead is ingesting or inhaling it. I used to do lead and asbestos removal. The reason there are so many health issues associated with lead is paint and water pipes. Lead paint was used because it lasted longer and held up better in damp conditions like bathrooms. There is 0 initial problem with doing so. The problem comes 30 years later when the paint starts to peel, and little Johnny discovers that if he puts a little lead paint chip in his mouth, it has a sweet taste. So he does it more, and ends up with PICA. Same goes for the lead water pipes. You don't get much adverse effect from them when they're new. But water pipes corrode from the inside out, and lead starts flowing through the pipes. There are theories some of the crazier stuff that happened in Roman history was contributed to by the fact they drank from leaded wine cups. Pewter knickknacks and chess sets and other game figurines used to be a highly collectible market, till lead was banned. But you could still play with a pewter chess set as long as you don't put the pieces in your mouth and wash your hands thoroughly after handling the set, especially prior to eating.

@@johns9652 they also wore lead in makeup and straight up added lead salts to the wine to sweeten it along with drinking and eating using lead utensils. It may not have been the cause but it didn't help anything.

Probably need to bring shuttles worth of water to the moon base and have cryo freezing machines to cool the steam down again or have the pipe exposed outside so the cold outer space can cool it fast

Jimbo 0117, you just described nature. We all fight, from very small creatures to the high flying raptors. We will never stop fighting. That 0117 in your name, does that mean you are related to or a fan of the Master Chief in Halo?

@@bondgabebond4907 I don't think that the behaviors of the rest of this planet's species should be a yardstick for how we conduct ourselves. And as far as we know, we're the only sentient species on this planet as well. So at this point I think we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard

@@jim2lane We should do that, but probably never will.

Gotta eliminate communism and all those whose narcissism leads them to megalomania

@@bb5242 capitalism breeds just as much narcissism - if not more.

Yeah, he should have said "reached orbit. Sadly all the V2 landed "On the wrong planet."

Hi Frank... I suppose this was addressed to me. Not sure if I missed someone else's comment about it. Here is a quote from my comment... "At that time it was the only man-made object to see in space." I didn't say it was the first vehicle to be launched to space. Only that it was the "ONLY MAN-MADE OBJECT TO SEE IN SPACE". Hope that clarifies what I was saying.

duetchland uber alise

The American Moon Base concepts were worried about them (micro-meteoriods) but Apollo not so much due to the short term of the missions.

- No need to adapt Russian plans for a moon base. We had plenty of our own in the Post-Appolo proposals. But, Congress wasn't interested.

@@mydogbrian4814 True, true.

@@mydogbrian4814 Which is why it’s rumoured that the billions that went missing from the Space Program. Went into the Black Projects, like the Aurora by Lockheed Skunkworks

@@exist - You mean, like the deep cover *DARK STAR* project?

@@mydogbrian4814 There were many black box projects.

Mango juice is better

@@Mercy384 only when you add orange juice

So part of the reason nasa didn’t establish anything permanent on the moon is cause it would cost a fortune.because there’s no atmosphere all the dust/debris on the moon is extremely fine crystal structures like aluminum oxide which are extremely sharp and abrasive. It grinds down metal, eats through Kevlar, and gets in machinery. There’s no economic gain to stay on the moon. You’d either need to find a way to be self sufficient or acquire really cheap transportation to supply it. Besides all research that could be done on the moon can be done on the ISS for a fraction of the cost. Wouldn’t learn anything new that we didn’t know after the first couple moon landings. Btw the Kevlar space suits they wore almost popped on the heels of their feet from the soil shredding the material away so you’d have to get new supplies up to space to maintain mobility.

@@aidanatkinson7717 The moon has a lot of ressources. Like rare earths, helium 3, metals and hydrogen for fuel. Ok, they is no oil to be found which might be the reason america is not interested :)

@@molybdaen11 alright then why hasnt any other private company or country done something like mining the moon yet, cause its has no economical incentive oil be damned. besides if you were to actually mine rare earth metals, harvest helium 3, and "hydrogen" fuel you'd need a massive infrastructure to make it feasible and timely. small scale would produce very little and would take more time then it'd be worth, especially in the investment for the future where technology can improve making the money you spent a waste with no return. Idk why you mentioned hydrogen, because of the moons gravity it contains very little even embedded within the regolith itself meaning that you'd have to find ice and use electrolysis to create oxygen and hydrogen as fuel for leaving which once again requires massive infrastructure if you were to do it there to feasibly ship out resources.

@@aidanatkinson7717 Well, because a few jears ago they found massive ice in craters on the south pole. As you said, you can use that to get hydrogen and oxygen, usable for fuel and breathing. I agree that a moon base with reasonable size would be expensive. However there are ways to reduce cost. For example by using space tenders to change orbit of comming and going rocket's from earth or by using electronic catapults to get ore in low lunar orbit. Also keep in mind that many ressources are running low on earth like rare earth's and others are impossible to get in large numbers like helium 3. Its also much more cheap to launch rocket's from moon then from earth because of the low gravity and laughable atmosphere. This would enable us to get deeper into the solar system like the asteroid belt or Mars. And last there is much energy to gather on the moon. You could build big solar farms or even atomic reactors there without having to care about the environment. That's the end goal: a clean earth and all heavy production on the moon.

So you weren't born or havnt been born yet aha your a time traveller

fantástico.

@@datapusher- Don't know where you you've been for the last 50 years. Draper lab on the MIT campus was working on the first inertial guidance systems for the USAF in the 50's. His lab contracted with NASA to build the on board Apollo guidance computers -- including all of the hard-wired memory... Nineteen (or so) were built.

Yeah the Soviet space program was decades behind, that’s why the Soviets reached space first, send the first satellite, man, woman, and dog to space before the US. The Soviets also were the only ones to land probes on Venus. That totally screams being behind the US.

@@edgynuke5007 Can you read? I was talking about the essential need for solid-state electronics.

Apparently gender pronouns and figuring out which historical figure was racist is more important.

Why?

@@nobbynoris Science

ok.........

It’s all a lie

- Mars is the same. The soil is toxic to plant life.

A lot of the methods they intended to use to make their bases involved nukes and blasting. Would have been a death sentence for any colony before it even started.

How do you even know if those nuke the moon surface projects weren't just cause of trigger happy gun nut was in charge and all he wanted to do was abuse his position of authority and make it seem like bombing the Lunar surface was an effective way to "soften the ground".

@@apollosungod2819 cause the us government as well as others spent years and did a lot of tests and studies to determine the efficiency of nuclear mining techniques. A lot of serious minds thought it was feasible for a while...then they found out about ground water contamination and called it quits for good.

shenanigans arent ussr exclusive.fool

@@trillrifaxegrindor4411 ok

Lost the technology??? you mean that since we never even went, and it was all BS that it would be embarrassing to get there now and find out the truth.

@@doghouse416 Yep! Exactly what I mean. I must have stated it too subtly.

It's called helium. There's big deposits on the moon

Bingo.

Of course there's a base. It's on the dark side so no one can see it.

That's because those darn lizard people won't share it.

And how do you conceal all the nessesary rocket launches? The heat signature alone would give a launch away.

@@molybdaen11 Again, for all we know, they’ve probably had anti-gravity technology since the late 50’s and that technology would never leave heat signatures.

Ahh you do realise how long it would take a missle from the moon you could pretty much go oh here it comes eat sleep wake up ok are ground units ready...k take a break not here yet

@@miguelcastaneda7236 The idea of a missile base on the Moon was not really for offensive/first strike power, but to have a counterstrike reserve that would be effectively invulnerable to a bolt-from-the-blue surprise attack launched from the Soviet Union, so that even if a nuclear Pearl Harbor managed to wipe out the U.S. bomber and ICBM force (and in the late 1950s the submarine-launched ballistic missile counterforce was a promising but not yet realized idea) and Washington DC there would be a stock of missiles on the Moon away from the "ninety minute war" ready to enable MAD.

Cheaper to just orbit nukes and tungsten rods around earth and just as effective.

If they used those resources to build hundreds of nuclear missiles but instead used them on space programs they would have more resources to work with to go to space and more

- Yeah but can it do Donald Duck?

He isn't mispronouncing chassis; it's a pronunciation variant, as you will see from Merriam-Webster online: "chas·​sis: ˈcha-sē , ˈsha-sē ; also *ˈcha-səs* " [emph. added] For me, his uncommon pronunciation even _proves_ it is human speech. TTS would certainly opt for the much more common pronunciation.

- No, he said correctly that it was the first into space & (intentionally) put into orbit. - Your V2 reaching space was an accident due to a malfunction of its guidance system. - Hitler's directive was to build a lower trajectory but longer range, hypersonic ballistic bomb delivery system. He & the Nazis didn't care about reaching space.

@MyDog Brian, no, what he said was: "... becoming the first vehicle to be launched into space, and the first to be put into orbit." Those are two independent clauses. The first clause is false, as others have noticed. The second is correct.

@@mydogbrian4814 Your listening comprehension is terrible. Go listen again. He makes two different claims.

@@scotte4039 And here I thought this was a discussion about space endeavors & not a nit picking grammar usage forum. OK, yous iz right.... oops!

@@mydogbrian4814 facts are important. The claim made in the video, as stated, is inaccurate.

Correct on all points! But then there's the little matter of NASA admitting we never went to the moon. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-DpPMoIv1lxI.html

Yes a lot of this you tube stuff can be picked apart. But they got you again didn't they.

@@electriccoconut Who got me?