Why are the Russian cosmonauts still making terrestrial landings?

[El_Smasho]

I can see where a ground landing would be your first idea, as seen in the Jules Verne book Earth to Moon, but once the astronauts landed in the water, why didn’t Russians say “We can do that!” There’s the simple idea that even in a slowed landing any rock or tree could shred your craft. And you might land on a yak herder.

[chukhung]

Perhaps the Russians saw what happened to Gus Grissom’s Mercury capsule and thought, “We can do that, but maybe we don’t want to…”

From this site, http://www.discovery.com/exp/libertybell7/story.html

Grissom became the second American in space on July 21, 1961…Grissom…splashed down into the Atlantic Ocean 302 miles from Cape Canaveral and just three miles shy of the bull’s-eye. Getting ready to leave the capsule, Grissom removed a pin from the plunger that would detonate the hatch and adjusted his suit.

Unexpectedly, the hatch blew off before the rescue helicopter had latched onto the capsule. Water started to pour in, and Liberty Bell 7 began to sink. Grissom climbed out the door and swam away. Now too heavy for the helicopter to lift, the capsule began to sink to the bottom of the ocean floor, three miles down.

Although rescuers didn’t realize it at the time, Grissom himself was close to drowning. He had forgotten to close off a valve in the belly of his spacesuit, and air that was helping to keep him buoyant was escaping.

[Whack-a-Mole]

Remember Russia/former USSR was never much of a naval power. Huge country but not much coastline. They chose at the outset to do land landings instead of ocean landings and it is now what they know. Why change as long as it’s been working for them?

[Terminus_Est]

Yah, they’re still using Soyuz capsules, which are designed for terrestrial landings.

[Spiny_Norman]

• landing on terra firma reduces the size of the retrieval operation considerably.

No aircraft carrier, frogmen, helicopters with hoists etc. - just fly out with choppers to secure the site and bring the cosmonauts back to base, then send a terrain-going truck with a crane to pick up the capsule. After all, it’s not going anywhere.

For a country with large tracts of sparsely populated land, it makes absolutely perfect sense.

[Nanoda]

It’s cheaper and easier. Instead of a bunch of carriers, destroyers, etc, you need a few dozen guys and some decent off-road vehicles. I laughed when I heard reported on the radio that the recent re-entry was off course and (IRRC) “it took 5 hours to locate the capsule”; historically, it could be days before you give up eating freeze dried beef and granola bars.

[Rob_V]

But what must that LANDING feel like?! Anyone know what kind of shock absorption Soyuz capsules have? I’ve always wondered about this.

[mangeorge]

I can’t believe nobody’s mentioned yet that the US also does (did) terrestrial landings. Just not at quite as steep an angle as Russia.
Peace,
mangeorge

[Skillet38]

There’s lots of nice photos of the Soyuz, including live shots of it’s landing with retros firing and parachute deployed at this site

there is a link there to an official ruskie cite with even more photos. I’ll say this, the Soyuz landing module looks like hell after it’s made it’s way to earth. check it out

[aahala]

I would say its two reasons.

Secrecy, which since the collapse of the Soviet Union is not as important, but that’s the way the program was setup. Reduce to the minimum US knowledge of the program and its possible failures.

The second reason is that Russia did not have bases spread out thruout the world to the extent the US had. So the ability to retrieve from a water landing was less, while the land mass was greater than the US.

[peepthis]

Cecil speaks on “Why did cosmonauts land on land while astronauts landed on water?” To wit,

What’s so great about coming down on land? It’s just that hard landings were better suited to a country with lots of territory, not much money or hospitable ocean access, and a craving for secrecy. The U.S., on the other hand, had a long coastline, money to burn, and the characteristically American impulse to make a big production out of everything.

The Russian space center is located in central Asia in the midst of a huge unpopulated grassland. Landing nearby seemed like the obvious thing and was only slightly more challenging technically than landing in water. Both U.S. and Russian spacecraft slow themselves with retrorockets to start their descent, then open parachutes once they reach the atmosphere. The difference is that the Russian craft fires another smaller set of retrorockets just before touchdown to soften the impact. I’m told it’s still a bumpy landing, although all the cosmonauts seemed to have lived through it. (The two fatal accidents known to have occurred during the Soviet space program both happened during re-entry, but neither was attributable to touchdown on land. One involved loss of oxygen following improper detonation of explosive devices separating the capsule from its orbiter and the other a tangled parachute.)

The best part about it is that the recovery operation is dirt cheap. According to space engineer and author James Oberg, an authority on the Russian space program, a Russian recovery team typically consisted of maybe 20 or 30 guys with helicopters and halftracks, compared to the vast fleet that we money-is-no-object Americanskis used in the days before the space shuttle. The drawback is that if you miss your intended landing point, you could be in for a long wait. Astronauts who overshot in the early days might have to wait a couple hours to get picked up; cosmonauts have been known to wait a couple days. One hopes they brought a copy of War and Peace to while away the time.

[Tim_T-Bonham.net]

Haven’t we (USA) followed their lead and switched over to terrestrial landings?

I can’t remember the last landing that was a water landing.
Once we switched over to the re-usable shuttle system, all the landings have been on land (successful ones, at least).

[mangeorge]

Am I missing a fine point of the space program here? I think it’s been a long, long time since a splash-down in the ocean.
All landings have been landings, in the shuttle, as mentioned by t-bonham@scc.net. Haven’t they? The shuttle looks sorta like a boat, but I doubt that it floats very good.