Talk:Salyut 1

April 2008

The craft is described as being "99 m³ in interior space" and have "pressurized (100 m³ total)"

Can't have a bigger pressurized volume bigger than the ship itself. Anyone with correct figures?

(Diego bf109 (talk) 01:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC))

Im guessing two door airlock could cause this. But its just a guess with no idea what i am talking about. --Ssavilam (talk) 16:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyediting

Clarification needed:

The Salyut program followed this with five more successful launches out of seven more stations.

I think this is saying that seven space stations have been launched to date (By whom? The Soviets? The Russians? The Americans? All nations combined?), and that five of them were Salyuts. But it’s not clear at all.

Heritage of Salyut is still in use on the International Space Station.

What does this mean? Maybe the author was trying to say that the ISS incorporates technologies that were developed during the Salyut program. It could also mean that the ISS is built out of Salyut parts, or a number of other interpretations. Nate Silva (talk) 19:55, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Notice Salyut program is a wikilink; if you click on it, you will read about the Soviet Salyut program. There were a total of eight Salyut stations; six were launched and manned successfully; two were launch failures. Two of the six were military. These were all strictly Soviet-operated (before the fall of the Soviet Union) prior to the advent of the ISS; no international cooperation existed at that time (the Apollo-Soyuz project notwithstanding). There will be no more Salyuts launched. The US had its own program, Skylab which launched a single station which was used by three sequential (sortie) crews.

"Heritage of Salyut" refers to Mir-2 which became one of the ISS modules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JustinTime55 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Salyut 1/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Forbes72 (talk · contribs) 19:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

I'll look this over. Article seems a little short on text/sources, but I'll have a better idea after a more careful reading. 〈 Forbes₇₂ | Talk 〉 19:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

This article is coming along, but there's a lot of work to get this up to GA standards.

Captions

• Salyut program insignia what is the lettering? Leade says Salyut = Салют but the insignia says something else.
• clarify: Soyuz 7K-OKS (upper right) docking with Salyut 1 (lower left)

Infobox

• length here (20m) contradicts specifications section (15.8m)

Leade

• was the first space station launched into low Earth orbit by the Soviet Union should clarify it was the world's first space station, not just the Soviet's first station.
• Salyut 1's mission was later terminated, and it reentered on 11 October 1971. clarify: reëntered earth's atmosphere.

Background

• add inline link to N1 (rocket) and Soyuz (spacecraft) and explain the situation with the failed launches.
• who carried out construction? Mention Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Center, TsKBEM, etc.
• The basic structure of Salyut 1 was adapted from the Almaz with a few modifications maybe add more detail here? (i.e. An Exit Section with a passive Soyuz docking system and airlock was added to the front of the station. An Engine Section modified from that of Soyuz was added to the rear of the station. Soyuz solar panels were mounted to these two new sections.) [1]
• Skylab comparison is good, but also compare with the US' Manned Orbiting Laboratory (canceled 1969)
• Civilian Soviet space stations were internally referred to as DOS (the Russian acronym for "Long-duration orbital station") providing Cyrillic text here would be helpful. see how it's handled in the lead on Soviet space program.

Construction and operational history

• Salyut programme was managed by Kerim Kerimov who initiated the project? Did he have free reign to pick missions? (e.g. explain Vasily Mishin's role in green lighting the project)
• more info on operational history, dates of crew launches, etc. (c.f. Skylab#Operational_history and Skylab#Mission_designations)

Specifications

• failed verification. info appears to be copied from Salyut 3 instead of Salyut 1. Correct these.

Visiting spacecraft and crews

• add brief explaination of hard docking vs soft docking, wikilink to Docking and berthing of spacecraft.
• The crew were not wearing pressure suits, and it was decreed[by whom?] address the template here.
• Describe the mission(s?) that were scrapped after the death of the cosmonauts in Soyuz 11, and who made this decision.

Reentry of Salyut 1

• shorten section name per MOS:NOBACKREF
• Pravda reported... this section is WP:COPYPASTE from the source, and seems poorly phrased. No copyright issue, since it's public domain, but unclear what exaclty "radio-technical" or "Synoptic readings" mean. please rephrase WP:JARGON or at least explain it.

References

• Oberg, James (18 December 2016). "Have cosmonauts seen launches?" (PDF). This ref is WP:SELFPUB, but seems like James Oberg is at least an Subject-matter expert, so can you wikilink his name in the ref, so it's clear this is not a random blog? Prefer a third party source, but if this is not found elsewhere, I think it's OK.
• other thoughts: the launch of the station was a worldwide event. It would be good to include some information about how the event was covered in real time (e.g. here's a few articles from the NY Times [2], [3], and [4]) It would be interesting to get a contemporaneous Russian perspective on the events as well, but I'm less able to dig through old news archives in Russian language. Right now the article has 12 sources. That seems pretty thin. Are there some interviews with people involved? broadening the range of sources might help get more comprehensive coverage here.

Copyright issues

• One of the pictures, File:Salyut1 with docked Soyuz spacecraft.jpg, has some copyright issues to be sorted out see here.

Ongoing changes

• Since the nomination of this article, there seems to be some changes going on. (e.g. MOS:ENGVAR was changed from American to British English, changes to infobox parameters, etc.) These should be settled on the talk page before GA nominations passes.

Conclusion

@Soumya-8974: I generally think the content in this page needs significant expansion to be broad in its coverage. Current article is closer to B class than a GA. The list above includes my best effort at finding some of the places that would benefit from expansion. This is intended to give some specific suggestions on where you can add depth to the article, not a comprehensive checklist of everything necessary. The article is developing, but I don't think it's close to GA status yet. 〈 Forbes₇₂ | Talk 〉 00:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)