Venus, Luna, further everywhere: interview with Pavel Shubin
There are a lot of popularizers of cosmonautics, and, even better, they are different. Texts, podcasts, books, videos, live performances - there are all the options for a very different audience. At the same time, some follow less trodden paths. Pavel Shubin writes books on the history of the study of celestial bodies by spacecraft and publishes them with the help of crowdfunding. I bring to your attention an interview with him.
How and when did the space hobby come about? What influenced this?
Space has been carried away for a long time. The trigger was two points. The first is Shklovsky’s book, The Universe. A life. Mind "1981 edition. Began to read, roughly, the class in the fifth. Of course, most did not understand. But what he understood was interesting. It is even strange that after this book, hobbies were focused more on the planets of the solar system, and not on astrophysics. The second point: the class in the eighth I was asked to make a report on the exploration of the moon. So it started ...
')
Why was the crowdfunding method chosen instead of the usual way through publishing? Years later, do you think the choice was right?
I just had no other choice. I remember well 2014, when I personally took the text of the book “Venus. Indomitable Planet ", sent by mail, etc. Do you think at least one answered? Yes, answered. One of several dozen. It was Peter's. They proposed to cut the text in half and write in this volume about all the planets. And I even agreed, but then they changed their minds.
After the release of "Venus," the book was praised by both professionals and amateurs. So crowdfunding was the only option. Although, if I knew in advance all the difficulties that are coming before the publication of the book ... I would still try. After all, there were no other options.
How many rounds of crowdfunding have you had? How successful were they?
Currently the fourth project is underway. But so far only “Venus has been published. The indomitable planet "- in two versions, where the second edition, as they say," expanded and augmented. " It was the first and the third in terms of fundraising. Plus, an album has been released, consisting of materials that will not be included in the "Moon". Now the first volume of the book “The Moon. History, people, technology. Actually, my second fundraising project was to create an electronic layout for this book.
I then, launching the second project, tried to solve the main problem of crowdfunding: to exclude a very large break between fundraising and publication. It is extremely difficult to estimate at the naked text stage how many pages there will be in a real book. But it is precisely this that affects the price of the circulation, and the cost price of the copy, and the layout time, etc. I assumed that if I first assembled it with an electronic model, then everything will be fine. With a ready-made layout and funds already received, printing a print run is a matter of the month. But as a result, it took more time to design the “Moon” than on the “Venus,” and people were already nervous. How will I pay for the layout of the second volume of the "Moon", has not yet decided. Need some other option. However, if now I collect money significantly more than the minimum required for the publication of the "Moon", then I will direct it to this business.
How much personal money was spent on books, and how do relatives relate to this?
I really want to answer this question that relatives, of course, understand and support everyone. Such an answer sounds so often in similar situations that it has practically become a stamp. Alas. It is a pity, but in my case it is not. Work on the layout of the first “Venus” required very significant sacrifices. And not only financial.
Why exactly this order - first Venus, then the Moon? After the moon will be mars?
Chronologically, Venus was ready a little earlier. The advantage for this book is that now there are very few flights to Venus. So, you can describe the history of its study, and the book will not become obsolete in a few years. Although to study the planet, this situation is, of course, very unpleasant.
I thought that with the "Moon" story will be similar. Still, the history of the exploration of the Moon from 1958 to 1976 is already in the past, and in general there everything is known ... I thought so, until I received the open reports of those years. After studying them, the scattered pieces of the mosaic finally occupied their proper places, many strange moments of our cosmonautics became clear, information appeared about projects that no one had known until now. I had to rewrite and write a lot. As a result, the history of the study of the moon of the mid-twentieth century will take two volumes. Each is more than Venus.
Yes, after the "moon" should be "Mars." And five years ago, I also thought that I know a lot about the projects of half a century ago. And the text was ready. But now and there, I feel, it is necessary to redo much. I have already mentioned above that for the time being I do not take in archives for reading new, recently declassified materials related to Mars. In order not to be distracted from much more pressing issues.
Is there any feedback to the books? Feeling that they are useful or vice versa?
I really hope so. But no, it's better this way: I understand that there is a benefit. Thanks from various people confirm this. But sometimes I have a feeling that, at least, “Venus” is incorrectly positioned by people. I try to create a product that will be interesting to both ordinary readers and professionals. For the first I give a detailed story, for the second - different details and nuances, information about which was not previously published.
But sometimes it seems to me that amateurs believe that the book is too complicated, even without having read it, and professionals believe that they already know everything.
Worse yet, a certain mythology sometimes arose around cosmonautics, and the mythology was rather strange. For example, now an Israeli probe is flying to the moon, and they have already written a lot where it is the lightest landing gear. When I stuttered that the landing “Rangers” were easier, though they didn’t sit down, I was accused of not knowing the question at all: they say, everyone knows that there were no landing Rangers, the “Rangers” were only meant for photographing the moon in the fall. This is a very vivid example of how people take their own knowledge for the ultimate truth and do not even try to understand the question a little deeper.
Or another example. I have in the book a comparison of Soviet and American stations since the first Lunar race of 1958-1960. Including in the list there are stations of the P-3 series, which were supposed to go into the lunar orbit in 1959-1960. When I asked a very experienced illustrator of space books to make a comparative scheme for the "Moon", he was extremely surprised: what kind of strange stations are these? Maybe I meant the probe "Pioneer 5"?
But these are not some secret stations in the United States, the information on them has always been opened. But they are firmly forgotten, and the story in the memory of people is formed without failures that took place in the American space program of the 60s.
Actually, even the correct chronology of launches of famous stations, in my opinion, would be very useful and interesting. But I also want to tell you what we didn’t know until now. For example, in the first volume of the "Moon" a very detailed history of our series of stations for soft landing (E-6) is described - from the choice of concept to all flights. It also describes in detail how our manned lunar program unfolded, why such an H-1 carrier scheme was chosen, and much, much more. The second volume will contain even more interesting information - such as the real TASS messages that were prepared before the launch of the N-1, the history of the Lunokhod E-8, the E-8-5 primer, and also what was hidden under the E indexes. -8-2 and E-8-3 (what is E-8-4 - even I still do not know). It cannot be said that in the history of studying the moon there are no white spots left. But after my book they should definitely be much smaller. And while there are no analogues of this book. Even according to the inventory of documents in the archives, I was one of the first to read them after the declassification.
Do you have any other cosmic hobbies?
I don’t know if time-lapse photography (filming of various processes that are extremely slow) can be called near-cosmic, but was once fascinated. Here is a very old project:
But this is really an old movie. Then there were more successful "star" video, but the work on the books pushed them into the background. The experience appeared, and time disappeared. And I never created a new video.
Another very serious interest in the history of hydronautics - underwater space. And I also wanted / want to write a book about it. But in this situation, everything has to be relegated to the background. Even in archives, I specifically ignore materials related to Mars (and the book on Mars explorations is also in my plans), since there will definitely be interesting information that will need to be studied and understood, and this will distract from the current work on the publication of the Moon. .
What space books do you read yourself and can you recommend?
Journal of Astronautics News. But he is no longer there. I read your blog :) The problem is that because of the overload associated with the work on the book, there is very little time to read modern publications. I'm still completely busy reporting 60s. For example, in the plans of reading - the book "Non-invented cosmic stories", but free time is really small, although the reading promises to be interesting.
The cosmic task of mankind: the moon or mars?
Moon. No questions. She and much closer to Earth, and less. You can fly at least every day, energy for start / landing less. The moment is very good for mastering. And geology has not really been studied. Although already known elements that may be useful - like helium-3. Mars is much worse in this respect.
In general, after the Moon (or in parallel), it is better to start exploring asteroids. If you find a suitable ice asteroid and drag it to Lagrange point, then you can try to start producing fuel outside the Earth’s gravity well. This will change a lot in the balance of power.
Manned flight to Mars is, in my opinion, redundant. More precisely, the manned flight itself would be interesting, but only for scientific purposes. It’s still very early to think about mastering Mars.
How do you see the future of cosmonautics in general?
In the short or long term? Although, if we can not really say about the short-term, what to say about the long-term?
In my opinion, our space program is now in one of the branch points. What happens next depends on the decisions we are making now.
Why now? The fact is that somehow the Soviet plan of the late 80s fell into my hands. To my surprise, a decent part of this plan was implemented. This is especially true of applied cosmonautics. Even the names of the stations that should have changed the old platforms are familiar. Like the "Meridian". Among the scientific devices are also familiar indices, albeit on other platforms. And they are just underway: “Spectrum-RG”, “Spectrum-UV”, etc.
This is really a failure - this is in interplanetary missions. Moreover, the Soviet plan was aimed specifically at Mars, with a possible manned flight in 2018-2019. And such a date is not accidental - right now there is a minimum of energy needed for the flight. The next such minimum will be in 2033.
It means that right now it is necessary to make decisions on changing platforms, on new goals - both for applied devices and scientific ones, etc. Of course, you need to choose a new task in manned space. The ISS has long been built, and there is already talk of its flooding. And the goal is chosen - this is the moon. And while we are gradually moving towards it. But as is well known, the future thing is unpredictable. Plans can be canceled and money written off. So while we wait and hope. The key elements of our program are the Federation and Soyuz-5. And, of course, a series of lunar AMC. We are waiting for their first flight.
How and when did the space hobby come about? What influenced this?
Space has been carried away for a long time. The trigger was two points. The first is Shklovsky’s book, The Universe. A life. Mind "1981 edition. Began to read, roughly, the class in the fifth. Of course, most did not understand. But what he understood was interesting. It is even strange that after this book, hobbies were focused more on the planets of the solar system, and not on astrophysics. The second point: the class in the eighth I was asked to make a report on the exploration of the moon. So it started ...
')
Why was the crowdfunding method chosen instead of the usual way through publishing? Years later, do you think the choice was right?
I just had no other choice. I remember well 2014, when I personally took the text of the book “Venus. Indomitable Planet ", sent by mail, etc. Do you think at least one answered? Yes, answered. One of several dozen. It was Peter's. They proposed to cut the text in half and write in this volume about all the planets. And I even agreed, but then they changed their minds.
After the release of "Venus," the book was praised by both professionals and amateurs. So crowdfunding was the only option. Although, if I knew in advance all the difficulties that are coming before the publication of the book ... I would still try. After all, there were no other options.
How many rounds of crowdfunding have you had? How successful were they?
Currently the fourth project is underway. But so far only “Venus has been published. The indomitable planet "- in two versions, where the second edition, as they say," expanded and augmented. " It was the first and the third in terms of fundraising. Plus, an album has been released, consisting of materials that will not be included in the "Moon". Now the first volume of the book “The Moon. History, people, technology. Actually, my second fundraising project was to create an electronic layout for this book.
I then, launching the second project, tried to solve the main problem of crowdfunding: to exclude a very large break between fundraising and publication. It is extremely difficult to estimate at the naked text stage how many pages there will be in a real book. But it is precisely this that affects the price of the circulation, and the cost price of the copy, and the layout time, etc. I assumed that if I first assembled it with an electronic model, then everything will be fine. With a ready-made layout and funds already received, printing a print run is a matter of the month. But as a result, it took more time to design the “Moon” than on the “Venus,” and people were already nervous. How will I pay for the layout of the second volume of the "Moon", has not yet decided. Need some other option. However, if now I collect money significantly more than the minimum required for the publication of the "Moon", then I will direct it to this business.
How much personal money was spent on books, and how do relatives relate to this?
I really want to answer this question that relatives, of course, understand and support everyone. Such an answer sounds so often in similar situations that it has practically become a stamp. Alas. It is a pity, but in my case it is not. Work on the layout of the first “Venus” required very significant sacrifices. And not only financial.
Why exactly this order - first Venus, then the Moon? After the moon will be mars?
Chronologically, Venus was ready a little earlier. The advantage for this book is that now there are very few flights to Venus. So, you can describe the history of its study, and the book will not become obsolete in a few years. Although to study the planet, this situation is, of course, very unpleasant.
I thought that with the "Moon" story will be similar. Still, the history of the exploration of the Moon from 1958 to 1976 is already in the past, and in general there everything is known ... I thought so, until I received the open reports of those years. After studying them, the scattered pieces of the mosaic finally occupied their proper places, many strange moments of our cosmonautics became clear, information appeared about projects that no one had known until now. I had to rewrite and write a lot. As a result, the history of the study of the moon of the mid-twentieth century will take two volumes. Each is more than Venus.
Yes, after the "moon" should be "Mars." And five years ago, I also thought that I know a lot about the projects of half a century ago. And the text was ready. But now and there, I feel, it is necessary to redo much. I have already mentioned above that for the time being I do not take in archives for reading new, recently declassified materials related to Mars. In order not to be distracted from much more pressing issues.
Is there any feedback to the books? Feeling that they are useful or vice versa?
I really hope so. But no, it's better this way: I understand that there is a benefit. Thanks from various people confirm this. But sometimes I have a feeling that, at least, “Venus” is incorrectly positioned by people. I try to create a product that will be interesting to both ordinary readers and professionals. For the first I give a detailed story, for the second - different details and nuances, information about which was not previously published.
But sometimes it seems to me that amateurs believe that the book is too complicated, even without having read it, and professionals believe that they already know everything.
Worse yet, a certain mythology sometimes arose around cosmonautics, and the mythology was rather strange. For example, now an Israeli probe is flying to the moon, and they have already written a lot where it is the lightest landing gear. When I stuttered that the landing “Rangers” were easier, though they didn’t sit down, I was accused of not knowing the question at all: they say, everyone knows that there were no landing Rangers, the “Rangers” were only meant for photographing the moon in the fall. This is a very vivid example of how people take their own knowledge for the ultimate truth and do not even try to understand the question a little deeper.
Or another example. I have in the book a comparison of Soviet and American stations since the first Lunar race of 1958-1960. Including in the list there are stations of the P-3 series, which were supposed to go into the lunar orbit in 1959-1960. When I asked a very experienced illustrator of space books to make a comparative scheme for the "Moon", he was extremely surprised: what kind of strange stations are these? Maybe I meant the probe "Pioneer 5"?
But these are not some secret stations in the United States, the information on them has always been opened. But they are firmly forgotten, and the story in the memory of people is formed without failures that took place in the American space program of the 60s.
Actually, even the correct chronology of launches of famous stations, in my opinion, would be very useful and interesting. But I also want to tell you what we didn’t know until now. For example, in the first volume of the "Moon" a very detailed history of our series of stations for soft landing (E-6) is described - from the choice of concept to all flights. It also describes in detail how our manned lunar program unfolded, why such an H-1 carrier scheme was chosen, and much, much more. The second volume will contain even more interesting information - such as the real TASS messages that were prepared before the launch of the N-1, the history of the Lunokhod E-8, the E-8-5 primer, and also what was hidden under the E indexes. -8-2 and E-8-3 (what is E-8-4 - even I still do not know). It cannot be said that in the history of studying the moon there are no white spots left. But after my book they should definitely be much smaller. And while there are no analogues of this book. Even according to the inventory of documents in the archives, I was one of the first to read them after the declassification.
Do you have any other cosmic hobbies?
I don’t know if time-lapse photography (filming of various processes that are extremely slow) can be called near-cosmic, but was once fascinated. Here is a very old project:
But this is really an old movie. Then there were more successful "star" video, but the work on the books pushed them into the background. The experience appeared, and time disappeared. And I never created a new video.
Another very serious interest in the history of hydronautics - underwater space. And I also wanted / want to write a book about it. But in this situation, everything has to be relegated to the background. Even in archives, I specifically ignore materials related to Mars (and the book on Mars explorations is also in my plans), since there will definitely be interesting information that will need to be studied and understood, and this will distract from the current work on the publication of the Moon. .
What space books do you read yourself and can you recommend?
Journal of Astronautics News. But he is no longer there. I read your blog :) The problem is that because of the overload associated with the work on the book, there is very little time to read modern publications. I'm still completely busy reporting 60s. For example, in the plans of reading - the book "Non-invented cosmic stories", but free time is really small, although the reading promises to be interesting.
The cosmic task of mankind: the moon or mars?
Moon. No questions. She and much closer to Earth, and less. You can fly at least every day, energy for start / landing less. The moment is very good for mastering. And geology has not really been studied. Although already known elements that may be useful - like helium-3. Mars is much worse in this respect.
In general, after the Moon (or in parallel), it is better to start exploring asteroids. If you find a suitable ice asteroid and drag it to Lagrange point, then you can try to start producing fuel outside the Earth’s gravity well. This will change a lot in the balance of power.
Manned flight to Mars is, in my opinion, redundant. More precisely, the manned flight itself would be interesting, but only for scientific purposes. It’s still very early to think about mastering Mars.
How do you see the future of cosmonautics in general?
In the short or long term? Although, if we can not really say about the short-term, what to say about the long-term?
In my opinion, our space program is now in one of the branch points. What happens next depends on the decisions we are making now.
Why now? The fact is that somehow the Soviet plan of the late 80s fell into my hands. To my surprise, a decent part of this plan was implemented. This is especially true of applied cosmonautics. Even the names of the stations that should have changed the old platforms are familiar. Like the "Meridian". Among the scientific devices are also familiar indices, albeit on other platforms. And they are just underway: “Spectrum-RG”, “Spectrum-UV”, etc.
This is really a failure - this is in interplanetary missions. Moreover, the Soviet plan was aimed specifically at Mars, with a possible manned flight in 2018-2019. And such a date is not accidental - right now there is a minimum of energy needed for the flight. The next such minimum will be in 2033.
It means that right now it is necessary to make decisions on changing platforms, on new goals - both for applied devices and scientific ones, etc. Of course, you need to choose a new task in manned space. The ISS has long been built, and there is already talk of its flooding. And the goal is chosen - this is the moon. And while we are gradually moving towards it. But as is well known, the future thing is unpredictable. Plans can be canceled and money written off. So while we wait and hope. The key elements of our program are the Federation and Soyuz-5. And, of course, a series of lunar AMC. We are waiting for their first flight.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/446818/
All Articles