The unmanned craft was due to make a soft landing on the Moon’s south pole, but failed after encountering problems as it moved into its pre-landing orbit.
It was Russia’s first Moon mission in almost 50 years.
Russia has been racing to the Moon’s south pole against India, whose Chandrayaan-3 spacecraft is scheduled to land on there next week.
No country has ever landed on the south pole before, although both the US and China have landed softly on the Moon’s surface.
No report on whether or not Russia was attempting to use repurposed anti-ship missiles like the ones they use to attack schools and hospitals here on Earth.
Testing a new lithobraking maneuver.
Special crashing operation.
Well, hopefully India has more success.
Whatever scientific data humanity would gain from such a success is in no way worth the decade of triumphant screeching from Hindu nationalists that would result.
There’s gonna be nationalistic screeching no matter what, like I’m sure it felt in the 30 years after the US moon landing
Just bring up China’s Chang’e success
Tbh the only way to win an interaction with a Hindu nationalists is to not interact.
But would it be worth it if Russia did the same?
(Though, this isn’t mentioning they targeted the moon because all their missions to other planets ended in total failure. This one did at least make it to it’s target, so that’s better than Russia has done in a long time. Their space program, along with their government and military, is a joke.)
There are fascists among Russian nationalists, but they are not the people in power (e.g. darling martyr for western media, Navalny, is one). In India, the fascists are much more powerful. On that basis, I think the Russian ones would be bothersome but not as much so. Much better for it to be China, but they can’t do everything.
I suppose that depends on your opinions on the relative annoyingness of Russian nationalists vs Hindu Nationalists.
Given that most Russian nationalists post in Russian and aren’t heavily present in English spaces, I find the Hindu nationalists to be more annoying.
So purely because you think they’re annoying… and you’re on hexbear where 90% of the comments are a stupid image instead of anything meaningful. Alright. I guess you’re probably an expert on annoying at this point so you’re opinion must be valid, right?
hexbear where 90% of the comments are a stupid image instead of anything meaningful.
I find this characterization strange, we’ve got emotes and we use them, but the clear majority of comments on most threads are still text-only. Seriously, go to Hexbear and pick a thread.
Yes, I am the solitary Truth Decider. That’s exactly what I claimed.
On the way to landing on the South Pole…
It seems that a dish washer’s controller isn’t suitable for moon landing after all.
They should’ve upgraded it to the Logitech G F710
If a dishwasher had any chip capable of processing anything at all it would be suitable, which is pretty funny.
Most modern dishwashers have some kind of processor, and yes they’d be perfectly capable of handling the necessary computations.
I take it you haven’t seen the guy that got Doom running on a dishwasher?
Good news:
moon’s no longer haunted
TIL when a non-USA country lands in space, that place becomes haunted, but USA brings good capitalism everywhere it goes…
Haunted bybthe specter of comunism.
America good, rest of the world bad
Least delusional Anglo
This is off-topic, but I keep seeing Anglo being used (maybe I just keep running into your comments). Is it suppose to be insulting like in the context of your comment? Is it descriptive? How do you know if someone is an Anglo online? Do you feel like it has any negative connotations being used? Feel free to answer any of the questions or none at all lol, curiosity got the better of me.
Atleast 70-80% of internet users on internet in general are guaranteed to be from Anglosphere countries. Yes, it is insulting for the white hivemind that looks down upon rest of the world with ~7 billion people.
Huh, I was forced in my early years to be raised around very conservative and racist individuals so your use of the word and validation for it’s usage feels very much like my childhood experience. To each their own though, the commonality is just interesting to me when I saw your first comment.
You weirdo, it’s in reference to a famous meme
The Soviets were the last to land on the moon (other than China).
NASA has been too busy pissing money into the Shuttle and SLS industry subsidy programs. I think they have a couple micro lander projects on the go though, slated for next year or the year after.
The US should put a lander together out of trash for shits and giggles and have it land perfectly.
Or just land people in a few years. They’re working on a several hundred ton lander right now!
They are doing it with the artemis mission
Well, I mean NASA pulled a spare mars rover out of their R&D testing labs, modified it’s toolset a bit, and sent it to Mars for a second soft landing (didn’t they use a sky-crane for both rover deployments?). I’d say that takes a bit more skill than landing on the Moon. But I don’t play Kerbal Space Program enough to know how much
A 1979 TV show about a guy who put together a junk spaceship to salvage junk from the moon: Salvage 1.
My teenage self found it entertaining at the time. Hmmm, now where did I leave my parrot? I wonder if he could help me find a copy…
On the remains of the
sovietrussian oneNot coincidentally none of the space agencies out there that are capable of this would find it worth their time to launch a mission just to teabag another nation.
just to teabag another nation.
Gestures broadly at the space race of the 1950s
None of the space agencies in the 1950s would be capable of landing gently on a crashed spacecraft.
In the 1950s they had the interest but not the capability. Today they have the capably but not the interest.
Special lunar operation.
The russian wording on the mission failure is something to behold. Luna-25 “ceased its existence”.
I’m surprised they aren’t denying it ever existed at all.
You shouldn’t be, I’m quite certain Roscosmos has never denied or hid anything about something that was always open.
“This is all the West’s fault!”
This but unironically. In general though, there is nothing more galling than liberals complaining about Russia. You made it this way. This is on you. First you destroy the soviet union, then you reconfigure the politics and economy of Russia, and then you have the audacity to complain about the very thing you caused.
Ah yes, well known liberal checks notes George Bush.
Russia cannibalised itself after the Soviet Union fell, didn’t need any Western help there.
The bourgeoisie cannibalised Russia. Liberals from the west insisted that Russia and the rest of the Soviet republics would be ruled by the bourgeoisie. This was the whole point of the Cold War. At huge expense to its own citizenry the west conducted a series of proxy wars and led an arms race to make it as difficult as possible for workers to control their own destiny.
As expected, false scarcity and extreme inequality followed, and to justify or explain this inequality, the bourgeoisie used from the usual ethnic and sexual minority scapegoats. With your weird understanding of history, you’re obviously American, so none of this should be hard to understand. You have people dying on the streets, the government won’t even raise the minimum wage, but the news about the evils of Mexicans, blacks, trans people, etc. never stops.
The USA was attempting to destroy the USSR from day one. Despite being an extremely intelligent and educated person, you were never told that the USA actually invaded Russia within months of the October Revolution. Liberals are such a fucking joke.
“The USSR destroyed itself.” Give me a break. The USA’s entire existence derives from stealing land from indigenous people and enslaving and exterminating them. Because the USSR dared to declare that it was an anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, and anti-capitalist project, the USA dedicated everything to its annihilation. But thankfully the story isn’t over. China never broke with Stalin.
My guy, China is the least socialist place on earth. It is so capitalist and so unequal. You pay to use the roads, you pay to use the hospitals, you pay for any schooling past middle school, if you don’t have a city residence permit your pension is 5% of those that do.
Have you ever been?
Capitalism is when you pay for things, and the more you pay for things, the more capitalister it is. When atoms exchange valence electrons, for example, that’s capitalism right there. Entrepreneurship has been woven into the fabric of reality since God, the great investor in the sky, created it.
What’s funny is that the US ruling class doesn’t pay for anything—they’re so rich and powerful specifically because they’re stealing from everyone else (including you)—yet nobody would argue that the US isn’t a capitalist hellhole in terminal decline.
I have to wonder—if China isn’t a socialist country, why is every student there compelled to study Marxism? Isn’t it extremely dangerous for a country masquerading as socialist to expose every single student under its sovereignty to Marxist texts?
If socialism isn’t from each according to his means to each according to his needs then what the fuck is it?
deleted by creator
The quote is “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs,” Mr. Marxism expert.
Was capitalism built in a day? Do you think that Xi can just press the communism button and make everything instantly perfect everywhere? That’s not how it works. China is currently doing the USSR’s (and Stalin’s) NEP, but they’re doing it so much harder than Stalin ever did. They are literally hanging the capitalists with the rope the capitalists are selling them. Once the forces of production are built up to a point where everyone’s necessities are met—and once the USA is no longer in existence—it will become possible for the world to move forward into the next stage of history.
Also I like how you didn’t answer the question about Marxism being taught to Chinese students. Because there is no answer. Because you are wrong 😉
Political Liberal not “social liberal”
Bush was a capital L Liberal Capitalist
You mean economic liberal? Bush was far from politically liberal.
Liberal as in the tradition of John Locke, not the American vernacular sense
In the sense of “liberal” as used in political philosophy or how the word is applied to party names in most countries around the world, yes Bush was a liberal. Americans tend to use the word differently though, since both major US parties are pro-business liberal parties, of a sort. This maybe applies a bit less to the Republicans today than in did in GHW Bush’s day, although by how much is still up for debate.
Please lookup the Shock Doctrine and educate yourself
I’m not reading a pop politics book for you. Go read The Gulag Archipelago.
“I’m not reading pop politics, go read literal fiction”
I have. But unlike a book about Boris Yeltsin’s systemic hollowing out of the russian economy and the facilitation of this by the Americans, its hardly relevant.
Although if we are bringing up the gulag archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn is not on your side on the issues. Especially not issues like the yeltsin government, the west’s influence on Russia and Russian sovereignty.
If that’s your takeaway, you haven’t.
You really thinks that if I don’t think the gulag archipelago is about the yeltsin government then I haven’t read it? That’s just sad dude. That’s just really, really sad.
I don’t care about antisemitic noblemen. His book is fake, and he’s lucky he wasn’t killed.
lol fuck you I’m not eating vegitables. you go eat a pop tart
“Excuse me but my book was spawned at the beginning of time with no creator and thus no bias or agenda, and is a crystal of pure truth, and yours is poopy tankie peepee”
The one written literally decades before the events in question?
Liberals: the downfall of USSR/Russia
LO fucking L
“You made me do this” is literal abuser logic.
Don’t compare committing a violent coup against them with not having dinner ready you cynical piece of shit
Alright, I’ll bite. Whom do you mean by “them” and what coup are you referring to?
That’s not what they fucking said and also the comparison is senseless.
The soviet union destroyed itself because it was an unstable pile of dogshit.
Most thoughtful liberal political analysis.
Man, we needed you decades ago. Imagine how much money we could have saved on thr cold war. All that threatening to destroy the planet for nothing. The genocides we did? Judt big oopsies
deleted by creator
Homophobia
updoots to the left, fellow gentlesirs!
mfw liberals say they’re better than conservatives because bigotry
Obviously it was not a moon rocket, but a Drone aimed for Kiev.
The Moon looked too much like a kindergarten. The lander got confused.
The moon needed to be de-nazified.
Is Moon NATO member?
The moon was standing there, MENACINGLY!
The moon was encroaching on our sovereign territory.
I wonder what happens to the spacecraft now. I guess it’s just stuck there right?
The act of lithobreaking is inherently destructive.
Yup, no way of getting it back
I always suspected that it was just a missile painted like a rocket.
It launched on a soyuz, which has an extremely long history. It first launched in 67. All rockets back then had icbm roots or aspirations. But for a long time all icbms use solid propellent for better long term storage rather than liquid propellant like soyuz.
I hear you saying that they’re very similar platforms. I’m saying that the neccesary differences that would make it a scientific rocket were simply missing, an empty shell, a smokeshow.
What differences? The difference between icbms and rockets to launch to space is usually the time it takes to get the rocket ready to launch, and how long it can be stored for.
Scientific instruments, sufficient navigation technology, communications
That’s on the satellite itself, not the launch vehicle. As far as I know, there’s no commonality between the lander and the multiple reentry vehicle upper stages of rockets. Here’s more about the lander: https://youtu.be/XM8bJsqCLYQ
It didn’t fail! It was an attack, and it was a great success!
This crash feels so symbolic it correlates with their economy and their president ego.
Go back to reddit.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Russia’s Luna-25 spacecraft has crashed into the Moon after spinning out of control, officials say.
The unmanned craft was due to make a soft landing on the Moon’s south pole, but failed after encountering problems as it moved into its pre-landing orbit.
The spacecraft was scheduled to land on Monday to explore a part of the Moon which scientists think could hold frozen water and precious elements.
Roscosmos, Russia’s state space corporation, said on Sunday morning that it had lost contact with the Luna-25 shortly after 14:57pm (11:57 GMT) on Saturday.
“The apparatus moved into an unpredictable orbit and ceased to exist as a result of a collision with the surface of the Moon,” it said in a statement.
Russia has been racing to the Moon’s south pole against India, whose Chandrayaan-3 spacecraft is scheduled to land on there next week.
The original article contains 174 words, the summary contains 141 words. Saved 19%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
