Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager >> After Action Report



Message

CV60 -> Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/2/2015 10:00:57 AM)

As in my earlier NASA AAR, this AAR will demonstrate the use of BASPM, but from the Soviet perspective. This AAR will use some house rules to demonstrate some of the organizational and political problems that Korlev had to deal with. These are listed below

1) No hiring of Tiger Teams
2) Soviet Political Pressure-These rules are designed to reflect the difficulty that Korlev faced in trying to race to the moon, by injecting competing priorities in the USSR spaceprogram, with the commensurate diverting of resources from the lunar objective.
a. Q1 1955-Q4 1958
i. After the successful launch of any satellite by either the US or USSR, the USSR player roles a 6 sided dice. A +1 is added to the dice roll if the US is the first country to orbit a satellite.
1. On a roll of 1, there is no limitations on how the USSR player directs his program.
2. On a roll of 2-3, military concerns from the USSR leadership drive the space program. The USSR player must open the Vostok program and assign 4 SET personnel to the program until two successful Vostok uncrewed orbital flight test mission are successfully flown. This simulates the Zenit spy satellite program.
3. On a roll of 4-6, political concerns from the USSR leadership drive the Soviet program. The USSR player must assign at 4 SET personnel to the Sputnik 2 program until it is successfully flown.
a. Upon a successful Sputnik 2 flight, the USSR Player rolls a 6 sided dice again. +1 is added to this roll if the USSR has achieved three successful missions of different types before the US flies a successful orbital mission. For the purpose of this rule, an extended mission is a different type of mission than the basic mission configuration.
i. On a roll of 1-3, the USSR player must assign 4 SET personnel to the Luna 3, until it is successfully flown.
ii. On a roll of 4-5, the USSR player must assign 3 SET personnel to the Korabl-Sputnik 2 program until it is successfully flown.
iii. On a roll of 6, there is no effect, and the USSR player can run his program without restriction for the duration of the budget cycle (through Q4 1958).
b. Q1 1959-Q4 1963
i. At the beginning of Q1 1959, the USSR player rolls a roles a 6 sided dice. If at the end on Q1 1958 the US has achieved two or more achievements ahead of the USSR, than a +1 is added to the dice roll.
1. On a roll of 1-4, political concerns from the USSR leadership drive the Soviet program. The USSR player must assign 4 SET personnel to the Luna 2 mission until it is successfully flown.
a. After successfully flying the Luna 2 program, the USSR player must roll another 6 sided dice
i. On a roll of 1-4, the USSR player must assign 4 SET personnel to any manned program until they achieve two of the following goals ahead of the US: Man in Space; Man in Orbit; Spacewalk; Joint Manned Launch. (Check the “Goals Comparison” button in the Public Affairs Office to determine who obtained the goals first). The first time they achieve one of these goals ahead of the US, they may reduce the required minimum program manning to 3 SET personnel .
ii. On a roll of 5-6, the USSR player must assign 4 SET personnel to any program of his choice until he achieves a total of three more “firsts” in any category ahead of the US player. Upon achieving this, all restrictions are removed.
2. On a roll of 5-6, military concerns from the USSR leadership drive the space program. The USSR player must fly at least one successful Vostok uncrewed orbital flight test missions each year beginning in 1961. Additionally, beginning in 4Q 1962, the Soviet player must open the “Proton K” booster program and assign 4 SET personnel to the program. Two of the SET personnel must have the highest rated unmanned rocket skills in the USSR’s program, while the third SET member assigned must have the highest rated human-rated rocket skill in the USSR program. The fourth SET member assigned is at the player’s choice. This simulates the competition between Chelomei’s and Korolev’s design bureaus. After the SET personnel are assigned, the USSR player may subsequently train SET personnel to a higher skill level than those assigned to the Proton K program, without having to assign them to the Proton K program.
c. Q1 1964-Q4 1967
i. At the beginning of Q1 1964, the USSR player rolls a roles a 6 sided dice. If at the end on Q4 1963 the US has achieved four or more achievements ahead of the USSR, than a +1 is added to the dice roll. If at the end on Q4 1963 the USSR has achieved four or more achievements ahead of the US, than a -1 is subtracted from the dice roll.
1. On a roll of 1-2, the USSR leadership decides to make the lunar landing a priority. All restrictions on the soviet program are lifted. Any restrictions that currently exist from the prior budget cycle are also lifted.
2. On a roll of 3-4 political concerns from the USSR leadership drive the Soviet program. The USSR player must assign 4 SET personnel to the Mars M-69 mission until it is successfully flown.
a. After successfully flying the Mars M-69 program, the USSR player must roll another 6 sided dice. A +1 is added if the USSR was the first successful Mars probe
i. On a roll of 1-3, the USSR player must assign 4 SET personnel to either the Venera 6 program or the Luna 15 program. These personnel must remain assigned until these missions are successfully flown
ii. On a roll of 4-6, all restrictions are removed.
3. On a roll of 5-6, military concerns from the USSR leadership drive the space program. The USSR player must fly at least one successful Vostok uncrewed orbital flight test missions each year beginning in 1964. Additionally, the Soviet player must open the “Proton K” booster program and assign 4 SET personnel to the program. Two of the SET personnel must have the highest rated unmanned rocket skills in the USSR’s program, while the third SET member assigned must have the highest rated human-rated rocket skill in the USSR program. The fourth SET member assigned is at the player’s choice. These personnel must remain assigned to this program until the Proton K achieves an 85% reliability. At that point, three of the SET personnel assigned to the program must be dismissed, simulating their reassignment to other military research duties.
d. Q 1968 and beyond
1. No modification to rules, although any pre-existing restrictions remain in effect.






CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/3/2015 11:35:29 AM)

Introduction
As in my earlier NASA AAR, this BASPM AAR is to experiment using BASPM in teaching high school and college students about the space race. I am interested in comments from the community on this methodology and any suggestions for improvement, including but not limited to additional ideas for student deliverables, additional teaching objectives or other goals BASPM is suitable to illustrate. Please post any comments/observations/questions/suggestions in this thread.

My concept in this AAR is slightly different from the previous AAR. Although the AAR is still to teach students about the space race, I'm using the house rules above to demonstrate the difficulties the USSR had in executing an organized effort towards landing on the moon. The teaching objectives would be to
• Learn about the history of space exploration in the context of the "space race."
• Learn about basic principles of program management
o The difficulties in planning in the absence of an overarching goal


At the conclusion of the game play, the student deliverable would be to compare and contrast the BASPM campaign with this historical USSR space program, addressing the following questions:
• How did the lack of a clear goal by the USSR leadership effect your BASPM campaign planning and execution?
• How was the strategy you chose different from the historical USSR strategy? Why did you select this strategy?
• What was the outcome of your strategy? Did your strategy accomplish your goals at a reasonable cost?
As in my NASA AAR, this BASPM would be integrated into a semester-long course on the space program, with students encouraged to experiment with the game either before the beginning of the course, or on the first day. The actual game play would begin in the second week of the course. Students would play one game as the US and a second game as the USSR. Students would be required to play approximately 2 turns/day and record their observations in a log. I estimate that this level of play would take no more than 30 minutes/day. A proposed data log is below, and is loosely based on an OODA (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) loop, with the addition of having the student record budget expenditures for further analysis for their deliverable:

Q1 1955
Expenditures/Budget (Available/Expenditure/Balance)
Actions
Events
Analysis

In terms of the game set up, I am using a game setting of “Normal” to maximize the ability to explore the maximum range of US/USSR Space activities.



rommel222 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/7/2015 10:11:57 PM)

Greetings to All,
Looking forward to the U.S.S.R. campaign space race.
Let loose the dice I pray you[sm=innocent0001.gif]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/10/2015 12:30:42 PM)

Goal Setting
This AAR is slightly different from my earlier AAR. In the NASA AAR, the house rules allowed the player to set his own goals. In this AAR, I want to illustrate the difficulty in planning when higher authorities (in this case the Soviet leadership) may have inconsistent goals, or no goals at all in comparison to mine. In short, I am trying to simulate the position that Korlev found himself in in leading the Soviet space effort. Because of this roleplaying aspect in this AAR, like Korolev, my goal will be to land on the moon ahead of NASA. This means that quickly being able to develop and fly the missions is important. Of secondary importance is to do so safely. Like NASA, I want to lose no more than three astronauts in the endeavor. Finally, there is the cost aspect. The house rules I am playing under will require conservation of funds in case I need to fly additional missions for the military or for prestige purposes. Finally, there is prestige. As I am competing with the US, I want to get as much prestige as possible. However, it is a tertiary goal.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/10/2015 12:31:46 PM)

Initial Strategy

Unlike the American program, the Soviet program only has two programs capable of landing on the moon: The L-3 Soyuz LK and the LK-700 Direct ascent, as the Circumlunar Soyuz is only capable of making a manned pass of the moon. (Figure 1).
These programs are listed below with their associated costs, which assuming the program is open for 4 years (16 quarters), before achieving a flyable system, and personnel costs of $41.4 per employee.

• L-3 Soyuz/ LK Lunar lander -$44,914 +$4283/quarter +34 personnel (16SET, 15 Controllers, 3 Crew) =$114849.6 for 16 quarters.
• LK-700 Direct Ascent $35543+$3408/quarter +32 personnel (16 SET, 13 Controllers, 3 Crew) =$90609.2 for 16 quarters.

As in my NASA AAR, these figures are almost certainly on the low side. However, for simply ranking the relative costs of the programs, the above figures are probably adequate.
Aside from the cost, there are also the risks and benefits each program provides. These are summarized below: Both of the programs require three crewmembers. However, the LK-700 mission profile is both slightly safer and may be slightly quicker to develop, as it does not require a crew transfer/spacewalk prerequisite. However, the LK-700 mission also risks the entire crew on the lunar surface, instead of the single man being risked by the L-3/LK program. However, it does require the development of the massive (and expensive) UR-700 rocket. In contrast, the N-1 needed for the L-3 mission is a relative lightweight, and slightly easier to develop.



[image]local://upfiles/43164/7977D48F2C11461383557072C0DBE315.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/10/2015 12:34:06 PM)

Program Analysis

Aside from the cost, there are also the risks and benefits each program provides. These are summarized below:

• L-3 Soyuz/ LK Lunar lander
o Believed to have a only a moderate chance of success, due to the need to spacewalk, and the increased risk of failure with only one crewman on the lunar surface.
o Possibly slower achievement of initial operational capability, as it requires a spacewalk prerequisite
o Only two crewmembers, so it lowers human cost in event of failure. However, during the lunar landing phase, only one man will be on the surface so has the overall lowest maximum human risk, but possibly higher risk of failure at this point
o Needs a 15,530 kg payload rocket for a lunar landing (N-1 or UR-700)
o Significantly higher program cost ( $114849.6 v. $90609.2)
o Largest number of goals/prestige due to achievements (32)

• LK-700 Possibly the longest Development time
o Believed to have highest chance of success, due to a simpler mission profile (no spacewalk) and increased safety while on the lunar surface with two men
o Possibly quicker IOC due to no requirement for a spacewalk prerequisite, although developing the UR-700 may take additional time.
o 2 man crew, so it identical to L-3/LK in terms of overall human cost in event of failure
o Needs a 154,212 kg payload rocket for a lunar landing (UR-700 only)
o Significantly lower program cost ($90609.2 v. $114849.6)
o Lowest amount of goals/prestige due to achievements (23)

Using an Excel decision-making tool available at:
http://www.idea-sandbox.com/innovation-tools/
I do a cost/benefit analysis of the choices. The cost/benefit analysis indicates that the LK-700 direct ascent vehicle is the best choice for my program.



[image]local://upfiles/43164/69EB5640D0FA46F39C38D259DB962194.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/10/2015 2:07:24 PM)

Teaching Objectives

As in my NASA AAR, my concept is to play a campaign game from 1955-1970, this time as the USSR. The teaching objectives of the USSR portion of the exercise would be to
• Learn about the history of space exploration in the context of the "space race."
• The effect of competing goals on program management
o Resource Allocation for Competing goals
o Risk Management and Mitigation Strategy

At the conclusion of the game play, the student deliverable would be to compare and contrast the BASPM campaign with this historical US/USSR space program, addressing the following questions:
• How were your BASPM campaign goals different from the historical US or USSR space program goals?
• How was the strategy you chose different from the historical US/USSR strategy? Why did you select this strategy?
• What was the outcome of your strategy? Did your strategy accomplish your goals at a reasonable cost?



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/10/2015 3:29:54 PM)

Strategy and Schedule
The house rules give incentive for me to incorporate some military programs to the into my space program. Additionally, the Soviet program will need to fly some prestigious missions to get sufficient funds to fund the lunar program. Finally, the chance that some of my SET personnel will be taken to work on military projects means that I must have a degree of redundancy in SET personnel, particularly in the rocket/manned rocket programs. Based on this, a draft flight schedule is attached. It also includes training and booster milestones to help me manage and guide my program.




[image]local://upfiles/43164/FCA71E0F19114FBEAD505996B21BCCBD.jpg[/image]



rommel222 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/17/2015 1:38:04 AM)

Greetings to All,
A few of my colleagues are very impressed by the structure and depth of the AAR and the use political pressure on the Soviet space program using dice probabilities. We are looking forward to the continued progress.
[sm=character0267.gif]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/17/2015 3:46:23 AM)

Thank you. That is very gratifying [:)]. I've had a minor computer issue that has delayed me getting the AAR posted. Fortunately, I've just about got it resolved, and will resume the AAR by this weekend.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rommel222

Greetings to All,
A few of my colleagues are very impressed by the structure and depth of the AAR and the use political pressure on the Soviet space program using dice probabilities. We are looking forward to the continued progress.
[sm=character0267.gif]




CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/21/2015 8:40:04 PM)

Q1-2 1955

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$22,261.5 $724.8 $2,275.3 Q1
$24,386.8 $1,039.9 $1,960.3 Q2

Actions

Q1 Opened Sputnik program
Q1 Opened VAB, Mission Control
Q2 Expanded SET center to level 2, Opened Astronaut Center
Q2 Hire 4 Mission control personnel, 2 SET personnel




Events

NASA opens the X-15 and Explorer program.

Analysis

The opening of both the X-15 and Explorer program may give the USSR a chance to get Sputnik into space first, as the early diversion of NASA’s effort into two programs may make it difficult for NASA to adequately support both programs at this early stage of the race.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/21/2015 8:50:25 PM)

Q3-4 1955

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$22,547.0 $1,745.3 $1,254.8 Q3
$22,901.8 $2,145.3 $854.8 Q4

Actions

Q3 Opened R-7 Sputnik booster program
Q3 Hired 2 cosmonauts

Events

At the end of Q4, the Sputnik probe is at 61%% reliability and the R-7 as at 37%

Analysis
The rapid development of the Sputnik is a reflection of how simple a spacecraft it is. It basically was simply two radios and their associated batteries encased in a pressurized sphere. According to the game’s “Buzzopedia,” the Sputnik was developed in only 11 months, so my Sputnik development is progressing about as quickly as the historical Sputnik probe did. The delay will be in getting a booster sufficiently capable to lift the Sputnik into orbit, as the R-7 is only at 37% reliability, far short of where it needs to be.

Image, Sputnik interior (http://mentallandscape.com/S_Sputnik1.htm)





[image]local://upfiles/43164/E21E070E5FAA4B39BAD82D3B564CC684.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/21/2015 9:28:50 PM)

Q1-2 1956

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)
$22,856.5 $2,288.3 $711.8 Q1
$23,218.3 $2,724.3 $275.8 Q2

Actions

Q1 Hire 4 SET personnel
Q1 Hire 2 Cosmonauts

Events

At the end of Q2, the Sputnik probe is at 74%% reliability and the R-7 is at 61%

Analysis

Based on the rapid rate of advance in the R-7's development, it may be possible to fly Sputnik in Q1 1957. Historically, this is ahead of the USSR's timeline, as the first two R-7 flights were failures, and the first successful flight of the R-7 wasn't until August 1957. Of course, my first flight in the game might similarly be a failure[:D].

Launch of Sputnik 1



[image]local://upfiles/43164/D830E9DF386B4577BA680AF22E54CA58.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/21/2015 9:41:38 PM)

Q1-4 1956

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$22,856.5 $2,288.3 $711.8 Q1
$23,218.3 $2,724.3 $275.8 Q2
$23,218.3 $2,724.3 $275.8 Q3
$22,469.8 $2,724.3 $275.8 Q4

Actions

Q1 Hire 4 SET personnel
Q1 Hire 2 Cosmonauts

Events

At the end of Q4, the Sputnik probe is at 84% reliability and the R-7 is at 77%.

Analysis

Based on the rapid rate of advance in the R-7, it may be possible to fly Sputnik in Q1 1957. Doing so will allow the USSR to likely be the first into space. Under the house rules I’m playing under, being first to orbit a satellite makes it less likely that larger USSR military or political objectives will interfere with my/Korolev’s goal of going to the moon.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/21/2015 10:16:22 PM)

Q1-2 1957

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)
$22,469.8 $2,724.3 $275.8 Q1
$15,104.3 $3,398.5 -$398.5 Q2

Actions
Q1 Hired 2 cosmonauts, 2 SET and 3 controllers. Currently have 12 SET, 10 controllers and 6 cosmonauts
Q2 Opened R-7 Vostok Human-rated booster program and transferred SET personnel from the R-7 to the R-7 Vostok
Q2 Successful Launch of Sputnik

Events

At the end of Q1, the Sputnik probe is at 84% reliability and the R-7 is at 81%.

Analysis

Although I wanted to launch Sputnik in Q1, my controllers were not quite ready. In Q2, I have a small cadre of controllers who are marginally capable. However, the R-7 and Sputnik are both reliable at this point, so I risk a launch to maximize the chance of beating the US into space. The one glaring problem I have is funds. Launching the R-7 and opening the R-7 Vostok program is expensive, and I will only have $15,004 at the end of the quarter. This budget burn rate will be unstainable for very long, and makes any failure potentially crippling to my program. Fortunately, the launch is successful.




[image]local://upfiles/43164/FC619EBD0ADD4F0CAF726A08DF59E054.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/21/2015 10:28:03 PM)

Sputnik-The Aftermath

Under the house rules, after a satellite is orbited, the player must roll a die to determine the political fall out of the Satellite launch. Because the USSR was the first to launch a satellite, there is no modification to the dice roll. I roll a "2", narrowly missing the ability to run the Soviet space program unimpeded. Instead, military concerns predominate, and the USSR must open the Vostok/Zenit program. This is not a major setback, as my flight schedule included the Vostok program. The major impact will be on manning, as I have to man the Vostok program with 4 SET personnel. As I must still fly one more successful mission within the next 6 quarters to achieve sufficient prestige to maximize my budget for the next cycle, this diversion of SET personnel will hurt my efforts, by diverting resources.

In terms of teaching goals, a student should around this point be able to see the difficulties in planning when there is no centrally-agreed on goal. I, as a student playing the role of Korolev, must still try to reach the moon, while having to divert scarce resources to a military program, all while staying within my budget.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 12:08:22 AM)

Post-Sputnik Strategy

The requirement to open the Vostok program cuts significantly into my funds. I now have only $10,000, and six seasons before the budget review. Further, I have to get about 220 prstige points to maximize my budget. I have two possible missions I can fly to easily get this:

1) An extended duration Sputnik. This mission has the advantage of using the existing proven Sputnik design on an extended, 3 season long mission. The downside is that my flight controllers are fairly untrained. A successful, 3 season long mission is a bit of a crap shoot. Further, a successful mission only nets about 500 prestige, while an unsuccessful mission loses 375 points, which would cripple my budget during the 1959-1963 timeframe.

2) Sputnik 2. Although not developed, the Sputnik 2 is heavily derived from the Sputnik, so it should rapidly progress. As a one season long mission, it would give me the opportunity to train controllers and maximize the chance of success. The downside is that I will have to spend $2300 to open the program, seriously cutting into my available funds. However, if the mission is successful, I could shut down both the R-7 and Sputnik programs, and save some money. Additionally, a successful fight gives 2100 prestige, as well as accomplishes some additional scientific goals that the extended duration Sputnik does not.

Based on this, I decide to open a crash Sputnik 2 program, with the goal of flying a misson in 3 quarters. That will give time to train the controllers, and, in the event of a failure, to still try flying one more mission before the budget cycle is over. To save money, I slightly cut expenses in the SET and controllers, and end the Sputnik program. The R-7 Vostok program development is also curtailed to divert some employees to the Sputnik 2 probe development. While not an efficient use of resources, the military’s requirement to put 4 SET personnel into the Vostok program leaves me no choice.


[image]local://upfiles/43164/F33027C1F5B742C9915C0BB274E57D7A.jpg[/image]



rommel222 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 12:45:44 AM)

Greetings to All,
I love this AAR as it shows the difficult choices Korolev had to deal with. The original Sputnik was to have several scientific instruments but cuts were made to get weight down to hope for a successful launch with the "iffy" R7 rocket.
Looking forward to more progress
[sm=Cool-049.gif]




CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 12:50:16 PM)

Q3-4 1957

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)
$8,653.3 $3,792.2 -$792.2 Q3
$7,881.7 $3,771.6 -$771.6 Q4

Actions

Q3 Opened Sputnik 2 Program
Q3 Opened Vostok Program
Q3 Closed Sputnik Program
Q3 Reduced departmental salaries of Cosmonauts by 1%, SET personnel by 3% and Controllers by 2%.

Events

At the end of Q4, the Sputnik 2 probe is at 61% reliability and the R-7 is at 88%.

Analysis

The sharp reduction in available funds creates significant danger that I will run out of funds quickly, and lose the game. To save my limited funds, I don’t train several eligible cosmonauts, and cut departmental budgets.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 12:57:43 PM)

Q1 1958

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$7110.1 $3,771.6 -$771.6

Actions

NSTR

Events

At the end of Q1, the Sputnik 2 probe is at 71% reliability and the R-7 is at 88%.

Analysis

I should be able to launch Sputnik 2 next quarter. The Sputnik 2 design has rapidly progressed, due to its use of off the shelf technology. Historically, Sputnik 2 was made simply of a spare Sputnik satellite, a small science payload intended for the Sputnik 3/Object D mission and pressurized dog cabin modified from one used for suborbital flights.

Image



[image]local://upfiles/43164/49A2F42E5C254B7D895C73652623718A.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 1:36:39 PM)

Q2 1958

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)
$3648.1 $3,771.6 -$771.6

Actions

Successfully Launch of Sputnik 2

Events

At the end of Q1, the Sputnik 2 probe is at 77% reliability and the R-7 is at 88%, with an overall 82% system reliability

Analysis

The Sputnik 2 mission was successful, pleasing the Politburo and guaranteeing a maximum budget for the 1959-63 budget cycle. However, my budget situation is currently dire, with only $3600 remaining. The next two seasons will be very lean. From the teaching perspective, like Korolev, I was forced to take a risky flight before fully ready in order to meet political demands necessary to get the resources I need for the program.




[image]local://upfiles/43164/CFDFF7D15E2548F0B478D7D376B7DF1E.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 3:44:15 PM)

Q3 1958

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$1,276.5 $3,353.9 -$353.9

Actions

Close Sputnik 2
Close R-7

Events

At the end of Q3, the Vostok capsule is at 64% reliability and the R-7 Vostok booster is at 80% reliability.

Analysis

The R-7 and Sputnik 2 programs are immediately closed as a money-saving measure. This leaves only the R-7 Vostok booster and Vostok programs open. I have some funds left, so I embark on a training program for most the SET and cosmonauts, and some, but not all, of the controller personnel. The construction of additional SET facilities will have to be delayed until Q1 1959, when the new budget comes into effect.

The good news is that the Vostok program is rapidly advancing. I should be able to begin test launches in 2Q 1959, and manned launches by 2Q 1960, after my mandatory Zenit flights are completed. This is slightly ahead of the planned schedule.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 3:57:10 PM)

Q4 1958

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$ 522.6 $3,363.6 -$353.9

Actions

NSTR

Events

At the end of Q4, the Vostok capsule is at 69% reliability and the R-7 Vostok booster is at 83% reliability.
At the end of Q4, NASA begins Project Mercury. This, as well as the lack of an X-15 or Explorer launch, clearly indicates that the USSR program is ahead of the NASA program.

Analysis

At the end of Q4, I have barely enough to fund ongoing operations. I send a few more controllers to training, but I have just about exhausted my funds.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 8:28:54 PM)

Interregnum -1959

In my AAR, the Soviets successfully reach the necessary prestige to maximize the space program budget. For the 1959-62 budget cycle, there will be $10,000/quarter. According to the house rules, I must roll a dice to determine what the national priorities for the space program will be for the 1959-63 cycle. I roll a 2, directing that political objectives are to be my main focus, and the program must immediately put 4 SET personnel on the Luna 3 program. However, the Soviet program is still on the hook for flying two Zenit missions, due to the random event rolled at the conclusion of the 1957 Sputnik mission. So a total of 8 SET personnel are effectively being taken out of my direct control to support these mission.

Based on these events, the Soviet objectives for the upcoming cycle are to 1) Complete the Vostok program; 2) complete a series of Luna 2 and Luna 3 probes to gain additional prestige to reach the 9375 level, and maximize the program budget to $26,250 for the the 1963-67 cycle; 3) build the larger VAB and SET facilities; 4) Develop the Proton booster for planetary exploration in the 1963-67 cycle and 5) Develop the SET, Cosmonaut and MC personnel for the challenging 1964-68 LK-700 flight program.

In terms of meeting the teaching objectives, a student at this point should begin to understand some of the competing priorities that Korolev had to meet to keep his lunar program on track. Like Korolev, the Soviet player will likely be facing both budget pressures and time pressures, flying missions before they are fully ready to meet political/budget/prestige goals.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 9:30:41 PM)

Q1 1959

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$981.5 $3,977.9 $6,022.1

Actions

Open R-7 Molyna booster program
Open Luna 3 program

Events

At the end of the Q1, the R-7 Vostok booster is at 84% reliability, and the Vostok capsule is at 75%.
NASA successfully launches the Explorer 1 probe.

Analysis

The requirement to research both the Luna 3 and the Vostok program require I hire 2 more SET personnel. I actually need more personnel, but I’m wary of the expense this early in the budget cycle. The R-7 Molyna booster program is also opened, as it will be needed for the Luna 2 and Luna 3. I could have used the less expensive R-7 Luna booster, but the Molyna can also be used for heavier planetary and lunar payloads later in the budget cycle. Given the shortage of SET personnel, I’m opting to take a revolutionary, versus evolutionary booster development strategy, in hopes it saves me time, if not expense.
The successful launch of Explorer 1 makes the space race a little closer. However, I believe that the development of the Vostok is sufficiently far ahead that the Soviet manned program will easily beat NASA into space.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 10:32:09 PM)

Q2-4 1959

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$ 5,657.6 $4,123.9 $5,876.1 Q2
$10,733.7 $4,123.9 $5,876.1 Q3
$16,609.8 $4,123.9 $5,876.1 Q4

Actions

NSTR

Events

At the end of the Q3, the R-7 Vostok booster is at 89% reliability, and the Vostok capsule is at 82%. The R-7 Molyna is at 62 % and the Luna 3 is at 81% reliability.

NASA performs a flight test of the X-15.

Analysis

I’m using this gap in the flying schedule to accumulate funds for the Vostok flights. Given the reliability of the system, I anticipate flying manned missions at Q3 of 1960. The first flight will be an unmanned orbital flight in Q1.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 11:26:58 PM)

Q1 1960

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$16,254.2 $4,123.9 $5,876.1

Actions

Launch Unmanned Vostok/Zenit mission.

Events

Successful launch the Orbital Unmanned Vostok/Zenit mission.
NASA opens the Biosatellite program
NASA flight Explorer-Extended mission

Analysis

The unmanned orbital Vostok/Zenit mission has a 84% reliability rating, so I’m relatively confident that it will be successful. I could raise it higher by flying a suborbital flight, but I’m trying to conserve funds. As some of the controllers are less that 75%, I’m betting on the reliability of the system rather than mission control for success. Fortunately, the gamble paid off. I still must launch one more Vostok/Zenit mission to complete the military requirements.

Image-Zenit Reconnaissance Satellite (http://www.thespacereview.com/article/750/1)


[image]local://upfiles/43164/DEE4C3E0DED445B89B04C25F5303C358.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/22/2015 11:49:00 PM)

Q2 1960

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)
$ 19,205.8 $4,792.9 $5,207.1

Actions
NSTR

Events
Unsuccessful launch the Orbital Unmanned Vostok/Zenit mission-Heatshield failure on reentry.

Analysis
The heatshield failure of the 2nd Vostok mission puts me in a bit of a conundrum. I have to fly one more mandatory Zenit mission to fly before I can fly the manned Vostok missions. However the mission control staff need more training before they begin to support manned flights. I opt to do a 3 quarter “training time out” to bring mission control staff up to the standards necessary for manned missions. Hopefully, I will still be ahead of NASA in 3 quarters.

Image (http://news.discovery.com/space/astronauts-watch-spectacular-spacecraft-reentry-pictures-131106.htm)




[image]local://upfiles/43164/CD208901BD594334A00197F9628E9CA2.jpg[/image]



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/23/2015 2:36:02 PM)

Q3-4 1960

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$ 19,205.8 $4,792.9 $5,207.1 Q3
$23,612.9 $4,792.9 $5,207.1 Q4


Actions

NSTR

Events

Q3-NASA successfully flies theX-15 altitude flight
Q4- The Vostok capsule has a 90% reliability, the Luna 3 probe a 92%, and the Molyna boostera 79% reliability.

Analysis

My budget is looking relatively healthy now. My flight schedule-notsomuch. I’m behind in both the Luna 3 flight and in my manned Vostok programs, primarily because of training issues with the mission controllers. My plan is to resume the Vostok flights in 2 Q 1961, followed immediately by Luna 3. I’ll also get the Luna 2 program started, more to give my SET personnel something to work on. As soon as the level 3 VAB is completed, I will also start the Proton K program, more to provide a jump-start on the UR-700 booster. If I maintain this schedule, I should have a manned orbital flight in 4 Q 1961.



CV60 -> RE: Teaching the History of the Space Race: A Soviet AAR (11/23/2015 3:06:36 PM)

Q1-2 1961

Expenditures/Budget(Current Funds/Expenditures/Quarterly Balance)

$ 18,832.1 $6,087.8 $3,912.2 Q1
$18,412.6 $6,087.8 $3,912.2 Q2

Actions

Q1-Open Proton K Booster
Q1-Open Luna 2
Q2-Successful Vostok/Zenit mission

Events

Q2- The Vostok capsule has a 91% reliability, the Luna 3 probe a 93% reliability, the Luna 2 probe is at 82 % and the Molyna booster is at 82% reliability and the Proton K booster is at 77% reliability.


Analysis

Luna 2 is opened in Q1 to provide a useful project for some of my SET personnel. I also pull some of the extra SET personnel out of Luna 3 and the Molyna project to get additional training. The rapid advance of the Proton K booster is a bit of a surprise. I believe it is the result of a game-generated random event that increased the R&D advance by 20%.
The overall reliability of the Vostok is 93%, and the mission was successful. However, there was a glitch during the mission. Even with the additional training of the mission control personnel, there remained a 20% chance of a failure. This highlights the importance of having trained mission control personnel in the game.




[image]local://upfiles/43164/16AF054C6F114EAB828B2EF230574121.jpg[/image]



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.59375