View Single Post
  #17  
Old September 19th 06, 11:55 AM posted to sci.space.history
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18,465
Default Luna 9, soft or hard lander?



wrote:


Still not the smoking-PrOP-M-deployment charge that I was looking for.
It's not that I distrust diagrams but we've all seen artfully
airbrushed diagrams (thinking mostly here of Venera and Luna cutaways)
which are just too neat and tidy. I sometimes wonder if the
zond-equivalent of Trotsky hasn't been removed to make the diagrams
more pleasing.



I've seen either a photo or video showing the block of honeycomb
material, and am still looking around for a photo showing it.
It might be on one of my videos about the Russian space program, as it
dates from the period just after the LK was revealed and when it was
still in storage rather than on public display.
I'll keep hunting.
As I said, the honeycomb was pretty beat up in the image or video.


I *could* imagine a slab of crushable material beneath each footpad, as
a means of reducing the jolt to the main legs which appear to be
articulated. Such a block might plausibly be missing from boiler-plates
and EM versions, but in the absence of photographs of such a thing I'll
mentally file it under 'perhaps'. For all we know the material may not
have been canonical aluminium honeycomb.



It sure looked exactly like it, with the cells aligned vertically.

Pat