Talk:Gagarin's Start

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

No move Duja ► 11:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Gagarin& → Baikonur Cosmodrome Launch Complex 1 — Far more common usage, and keeps article in line with other articles about launch pads, for example Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Launch Complex 41, and Vandenberg AFB Space Launch Complex 6 — GW_SimulationsUser Page 20:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Oppose There are results for Gagarin's Start in searches, but only 2 for the proposed move. --Russavia 13:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Please provide evidence. Searching for Gagarin's Start returns 164 results, compared to 201,000 for Baiknour Cosmodrome Launch Complex 1. -- GW_SimulationsUser Page 19:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You search for any of the words, for example all entries on "Baikonur" are included in your results. Searching for exact string returns only two results . But even if this would not be the case, Google searches cannot be considered serious arguments. Cmapm 21:08, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose "Gagarin's Start" is the official name (see the board at the entrance into it here), while "Baikonur Cosmodrome Launch Complex 1" is a designation similar to NATO reporting names for Soviet rockets. But in Wikipedia for Soviet and Russian rockets official designations are used instead in article titles, see Naming conventions (missiles and unguided rockets). So, for the article title here we should also use the official name. Cmapm 20:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you please provide evidence that it is the official name.
 * Naming conventions (missiles and unguided rockets) is defunct.
 * If it would be more acceptable to you, I would accept Baikonur Cosmodrome Site 1, or area 1, as a compromise.
 * -- GW_SimulationsUser Page 07:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The first evidence already provided, see a link into the picture above. If you want an additional one, here and here are the most recent news releases on Soyuz TMA-11 launch at the website of the Russian Federal Space Agency, where the number of the launch pad on Baikonur is given and its name (Гагаринский старт) is provided. So, you suggested one title and now suggest a different one as a "compromise"? Here we are discussing the move proposed by you in "Requested moves". And why the pad should be named by its sequence number if it has the name? That convention is not discussed for a long time, but if you look inside the Category:Guided missiles of the Soviet Union the majority of articles there are named according to the Russian designation system. Cmapm 17:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Of the three links that you have provided, the first one doesn't prove anything. It's just a sign. There's a sign like that at the entrance to Canaveral LC-14, commemorating John Glenn's flight, but that doesn't make it his pad. The third doesn't exist. As for the second, it actually supports my compromise suggestion, "Work is set to start No. 1 site". Later on, it mentions your name - "No. 1 site Baikonur cosmodrome (Gagarin's start)". The fact that it is in parenthesis suggests that it is an unofficial name. It might even be that they are simply saying that it is the same pad that Gagarin launched from - "launch" is often mistranslated from Russian as "start". -- GW_SimulationsUser Page 19:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Huge pit
Pictures I have seen of the site often reveal the presence of a huge pit, with the launch pad perched on the edge. See e.g. this image. This gives it a very different appearance from the launch complex at Cape Canaveral, for example. What's the reason for this pit, and what's the history behind it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beorhtwulf (talk • contribs) 19:37, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

First start
2 different dates: 21 August 1957 in article, 15 May in infobox. According to http://www.astronautix.com/sites/baikonur.htm the first start took place on 15 May, but the booster crashed 400 km from the pad. However I think it can be considered as first start. First successful start took place on 21 August indeed. Can someone who knows english better than me correct it in the article? Pikador (talk) 09:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Soyuz T-10a: damage and downtime
The Soyuz 7K-ST No.16L article claims that the failure of that rocket caused $300M damage to this launch facility, but doesn't cite a source for that - does anyone have a reference for the actual cost? Also, the repairs would mean lots of downtime: that appears to be the case, as preceeding Soyuz-T launches all started at LC1 but T-10, T-11, and T-12 all launched from LC31/6 instead, before T-13 launched from LC1 (suggesting a downtime of about 20 months). Do we have any info about this time, what they did, and how long it took? -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 17:57, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Gagarin's Start. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051029143025/http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru:80/content/numbers/237/36.shtml to http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/content/numbers/237/36.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:42, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Number of launches
How many launches lift off from LC1 till now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.63.73.87 (talk) 06:11, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gagarin's Start. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415160730/http://www.astronautix.com/sites/baiurlc1.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/sites/baiurlc1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Decommission Reprieve?
Rob Navia, a NASA public affairs officer, on NASA TV mentioned at approximately 0948 EDT 2019-09-25 that Launch Site 1 is going to be refurbished to be able to launch the Soyuz 2.1a rocket. First I've heard that.Abebenjoe (talk) 13:51, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

To quote Rob Navia at T-10 minutes and 29 seconds on the NASA TV public feed: "After today's liftoff, the legendary site 1 – where Yuri Gargarin began his journey into the history books, more than 58 years ago – will be temporarily closed for renovation and modernization to accommodate future human spaceflight launches of the Soyuz spacescraft on the upgraded Soyuz 2.1a booster."Abebenjoe (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2019 (UTC)