Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On this date, 60 years ago, Yuri Gagarin became the first man in space aboard Vostok 1. 

7 years later, he was killed in a crash of a Mig jet aircraft along with another Soviet air force personal named Vladimir Seryogin in what has been claimed to be mysterious circumstances.

After doing some research on him I have come across two rather interestings facts. The first is that he was only 5ft 2in [157cms] tall.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Gagarin#Death                                                           Presumably I would have thought that this may have been due to the confines of the Vostok space capsule, but I find no record of that. Is my assumption correct, or did he just happened to be a shorty?

The second revelation is more interesting and came to my attention with the following article.....https://phys.org/news/2021-04-three-man-soyuz-flight-honouring-gagarin.html My query follows from the following....Yuri Gagarin

That seems to infer that he was supposed to have landed in his capsule, and the parachuting ejection was an emergency scenario. Have I read this correctly?

 

Anyway 60 years since the first man in space, is without doubt a great milestone!

Edited by beecee
Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know if it was a Cold War thing, but the 50s and 60s were exciting years for Aerospace.
Unmatched since.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think military pilots, and thus many astronauts, tend to be shorter than average. (anecdotally, the pilots and astronauts I’ve met tended to be on the shorter side)

Fitting into the cockpit/capsule, and I suspect being shorter might hep you deal with high-g maneuvers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, swansont said:

I think military pilots, and thus many astronauts, tend to be shorter than average. (anecdotally, the pilots and astronauts I’ve met tended to be on the shorter side)

Fitting into the cockpit/capsule, and I suspect being shorter might hep you deal with high-g maneuvers.

Yes, women, being typically shorter, apparently handle high g's better than men.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Yes, women, being typically shorter, apparently handle high g's better than men.

 

1 hour ago, swansont said:

I think military pilots, and thus many astronauts, tend to be shorter than average. (anecdotally, the pilots and astronauts I’ve met tended to be on the shorter side)

Fitting into the cockpit/capsule, and I suspect being shorter might hep you deal with high-g maneuvers.

Makes sense, still 5ft 2 Inches is short, short!

Found some more info with regards to the second query and the emergency which I was unaware of...

https://www.euronews.com/2017/02/16/five-reason-why-yuri-gagarin-is-a-legend-of-space

extract:

"Gagarin almost died during the mission.

Nobody was very sure whether Gagarin would survive his flight, and the story goes that he came close to losing his life during the descent phase. Before landing, Gagarin’s capsule was supposed to easily detach from the main spacecraft. However, some of the cables failed to release as they should. This meant the astronaut’s capsule had an extra unit attached to it during its descent. The capsule whirled uncontrollably and the interior temperature rose, meaning Gagarin nearly lost consciousness and barely managed to eject out of the capsule as planned. He eventually parachute d down safely from an attitude of 7km".

end extract quote:

So the ejection was planned, although it went ahead with some difficullty due to the failure of the detachment mechanism.

extract:

4) "Gagarin was chosen because he was a short son of a potato farmer.

Soviet cosmonaut selection criteria were a little different to those used today. Firstly, his size. The capsule in Volstok 1 was very small, and so Gagarin’s 1m57cm height made him a strong candidate. Gagarin was so short that he used a cushion on his seat when he flew his fighter jet in order to see better. Secondly, his background.

During selection, Gagarin found himself up against Gherman Tiova, a son of a school teacher known for quoting poetry. It was decided that the average citizen of the Soviet Union would be more likely to relate to, and celebrate someone like Gagarin, who was the son of a potato farmer".

 

Edited by beecee
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, swansont said:

Fitting into the cockpit/capsule, and I suspect being shorter might hep you deal with high-g maneuvers.

This makes a lot of sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, joigus said:

This makes a lot of sense.

A slight digression: I read years ago a pilot ejected from an EE Lightning jet that wasn't fitted out for him and he lost his legs because he was too tall for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StringJunky said:

A slight digression: I read years ago a pilot ejected from an EE Lightning jet that wasn't fitted out for him and he lost his legs because he was too tall for it.

Not so much of a digression. If I were to be thrown out of a jet at high speed, I'd rather be a Bilbo Baggins type than a Gandalf type. Even better an ant, for all kinds of physical reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard of this incident Stringy.

The Lightning was a 'rocket with a saddle', and while it had a rather cramped 'office' by American standards, it did use the excellent Martin-Baker Mk.4 ejection seat.

I have heard of a vertical ejection where the pilot broke his legs on landing.
Take a look at the picture ...

The dramatic story of a nose-diving plane as pilot escaped death by seconds in Hatfield - HertsLive (hertfordshiremercury.co.uk)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MigL said:

gotta do something to pass the time while in lock-down.

Been there, done that. 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MigL said:

I've never heard of this incident Stringy.

The Lightning was a 'rocket with a saddle', and while it had a rather cramped 'office' by American standards, it did use the excellent Martin-Baker Mk.4 ejection seat.

I have heard of a vertical ejection where the pilot broke his legs on landing.
Take a look at the picture ...

The dramatic story of a nose-diving plane as pilot escaped death by seconds in Hatfield - HertsLive (hertfordshiremercury.co.uk)

 

That could be it and my memory has altered it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MigL said:

gotta do something to pass the time while in lock-down.

 

19 hours ago, beecee said:

Been there, done that. 😉

Count me in. We could do worse. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 4/9/2021 at 2:36 PM, beecee said:

7 years later, he was killed in a crash of a Mig jet aircraft along with another Soviet air force personal named Vladimir Seryogin in what has been claimed to be mysterious circumstances

It's quite well understood that his plane crashed due to valves being left open that should have been closed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, IDNeon said:

It's quite well understood that his plane crashed due to valves being left open that should have been closed. 

I'll accept the official explanation thank you....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Yuri_Gagarin

Wrapped in secrecy, the cause of the crash that killed Gagarin is uncertain and became the subject of several theories.[5][6] At least three investigations into the crash were conducted separately by the Air Force, official government commissions, and the KGB.[7][8] According to a biography of Gagarin by Jamie Doran and Piers Bizony, Starman: The Truth Behind the Legend of Yuri Gagarin, the KGB worked "not just alongside the Air Force and the official commission members but against them.

The conclusion of the committee was the following: due to the changes in the air environment during the flight (the details weren't specified) the crew made an abrupt manoeuvre resulting in a spin. Despite the crew's efforts to reinstate the engine in a horizontal direction, the aircraft crashed in the ground resulting in the death of the pilots. No deficiencies or technical errors in the plane were found. The chemical analysis of the remains and the pilots' blood didn't find any external chemical substance

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 

And for your info, I don't indulge or entertain conspiracy theories, nor do I lie. 

What I said....

7 years later, he was killed in a crash of a Mig jet aircraft along with another Soviet air force personal named Vladimir Seryogin in what has been claimed to be mysterious circumstances

Edited by beecee
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was quoting what was the official Soviet/Russian report that stood from 1968 to 2003 that an air vent was accidentally left open and Gagarin blacked out.

I didn't care enough (until now) to look up the declassified (as of 2003) report and subsequent computer analysis. So now the official report is that his plane was knocked down by backwash.

Testimony attests to this. 

I see no reason to doubt it.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.space.com/amp/21594-yuri-gagarin-death-cause-revealed.html

 

Russian Times source:

http://rt.com/news/gagarin-death-truth-revealed-674/

Computer modeling shows Gagarins jet was flipped over by a heavier jet's back wash.

I don't know about it entering a spin. Only Wikipedia says that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, IDNeon said:

I see no reason to doubt it.

Other then of course that the USSR was renowned in operating under a veil of secrecy, as does Russia to a lesser extent probably.

I see know reason to doubt those facts re secrecy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, beecee said:

Other then of course that the USSR was renowned in operating under a veil of secrecy, as does Russia to a lesser extent probably

Nothing the US doesn't also do.

Cynicism can only get one so far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, IDNeon said:

Nothing the US doesn't also do.

Cynicism can only get one so far.

Facts tell a different story from your rather fanciful hopes and dreams. We followed all manned US space shots in every detail from Sheppard and Glenn, through to Apollo 11, including the near tragedy of Apollo 13. The USSR never did that and Russia would still not do it under any circumstances.

Edited by beecee
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, beecee said:

Facts tell a different story from your rather fanciful hopes and dreams. We followed all manned US space shots in every detail from Shepard and Glenn, through to Apollo 11, including the near tragedy of Apollo 13. The USSR never did that and Russia would still not do it under any circumstances

The US picks and chooses what it makes public just as the USSR did and Russia does now.

US chose to make Astronauts fairly public but there are STS missions that are highly classified and we know next to nothing about.

The US keeps somethings public to distract from other things. 

Russia likes to brag about its undersea capabilities while the US bragged about its space capabilities. 

The US is extremely tight lipped on its submarine capabilities and especially Sonar abilities. 

Russia is pretty brazen with the same capabilities even showing off its new types of towed sonar arrays.

Arguably what happens under the ocean is more important than space.

There's not a lot more to be gained geopolitically from space.

There's a lot at stake in the oceans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IDNeon said:

The US picks and chooses what it makes public just as the USSR did and Russia does now.

US chose to make Astronauts fairly public but there are STS missions that are highly classified and we know next to nothing about.

The US keeps somethings public to distract from other things. 

Russia likes to brag about its undersea capabilities while the US bragged about its space capabilities. 

The US is extremely tight lipped on its submarine capabilities and especially Sonar abilities. 

Russia is pretty brazen with the same capabilities even showing off its new types of towed sonar arrays.

Arguably what happens under the ocean is more important than space.

There's not a lot more to be gained geopolitically from space.

There's a lot at stake in the oceans.

So you do indulge in conspiracy nonsense!

We, the world that is, as I stated, had ring side seats for all manned NASA space flights...in fact so open and above board, that by Apollo 13, the public had become rather blaise about such adventures. 

The USSR and Russia of course, were no where near as open and frank.

In fact from recollection, we had very postumous knowledge about some Russians that have perished in space, unlike the openess and frankness of NASA.eg; the Challenger and Columbia disasters, at the exact time they happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.