Also, Is/Would the Silverbird Performance Calculator a good reference?
Silverbird is pretty good for giving you ballpark numbers. Be aware that it over-values the impact of ISP and under-values the impact of thrust for getting off of Earth (so you can make a rocket with high ISP engines that wouldn't get off the ground in real life but that looks great in Silverbird) so some comparing to real rockets is required to reality-check Silverbird paper rockets.
The RLA-5 looks great for moonshots, or for some far-future scenario where we have a really large scale space presence and actually care about lofting fifty-ton modules into LEO.
It'd also be good for a Mars sample return mission.
Speaking of moon missions... The current Chinese moonbase program would be a good fit for the Soviet program at the moment.
They're planning on landing various robot experimental modules and telescopes in one area to build an infrastructure for later manned expeditions.
Could be an idea of what to do with the Luna program if the Americans succeed in landing and returning men from the moon with their rube goldberg Gemini lander.
__________
On the subject of the vote, I think we should consider Klimenko's personal politics. The guy has serious "old man complaining about the kids on his lawn" energy and he's currently relatively young. Him taking a conservative position is going to be the one that harnesses that energy best. Finding an ally to deal with the politics that Klimenko isn't suited for also seems most sensible.
Also, it sounds like finding an ally sounds like it synergizes well with taking a conservative position, since the latter option says "
Whatever new conservative consolidates the factional position is going to be desperate and need a degree of backing, ensuring that wherever they move the ministry can project influence."
Working with Abramov is a non-starter IMO. He's been tarred with the brush of corruption and he tried to backstab Klimenko in a tight spot. He's tainted and proven untrustworthy.
Approaching Kosygin and taking a moderate position is a nice combo, but not for Klimenko IMO. Being Kosygin's annointed heir and taking over his faction would be a nice position for a more political minister.
Approaching Podgorny is potentially strong. Klimenko thinks an alliance with Podgorny would destabilize the Union more, which makes me leery, but also this could just be Klimenko's conservatism speaking. An alignment with Podgorny would probably pair best with a moderate position, since a more right-wing approach would be easier to compromise with Podgorny's even more right wing approach. I have mixed feelings about whether going with a right-wing approach would be a good idea though.
My feeling is that attacking the State Farms would be easier from the right, working with Podgorny to improve the autonomy of private and family farms against the new gentry that is the State Farm bureaucracy. But I worry about right-wing overshoot somehow, and the impact of supporting a right-wing deviation on Sino-Soviet relations.
Also, tacking to the right and working with Podgorny leaves the left open for Ashimov to grow stronger. I suspect that Klim's angry old man energy means that he is over-estimating the danger from Ashimov, but even so, if they don't get on, they don't get on, and Klim is probably going to be minister for the next 7 years. Probably don't want those next 7 years to be burdened by a large SupSov faction who will eventually respond to Klimenko's disdain with disdain of their own.
So for me, this is the political move to make:
[X] Plan Leftist Cooperation
-[X]Back a Conservative Position
-[X]Try to Find an Ally
With regards to the space program, my vote is for:
[X]Maintain It
I feel strongly that cancelling Venera is foolish at this point. The Americans are close to being able to attempt a moon landing, changing elements of our space program after a successful American landing is sure to be seen as a pathetic response. The Luna program is doing well currently, I don't want it being seen as a cheap knock-off of what the Americans are doing. The manned program is similarly at risk of being seen as responding to the American activities, and IMO would be best served to go slow and steady for now. The Mars program is maybe the one place we could use extra funds in a way that would be seen as impressive even when the Americans had landed men on the moon. However, what could we do with extra funds going to Mars? The most impressive realistic goal for the 70s would be to land a rover there. However, I feel we would be better served waiting for better electronics and better knowledge of Martian conditions before we try roving on the Martian surface.
By contrast, sticking to our guns and puting an orbiter over Venus is I feel better bang-for-buck. There's ALOT of interesting stuff going on with the Venusian atmosphere, and a Venus orbiter can leverage the work we've been doing for our aggressive weather-sat program to do some good science. A radar altimiter can also reveal the rocky surface of Venus, which again, is a pretty interesting place and there's a big scientific return. Remember that Venus is the planet in the Solar System most similar to Earth, which makes finding the differences in its atmosphere and surface very worth investigating.
Probing Venus is also a way to get the ministry more interested in the environmental consequences of the war against nature... Modelling the Venusian atmosphere was one of the things that got people to really think about what fossil fuel burning was doing to Earth.
Also, probing an alien atmosphere from orbit, rather than trying for a Martian rover, is a better foundation for the grand tour probes, which we'll need to start work on in a few years.
It is unfortunate that we've rolled poorly for Venus so far, and that our guys have given up on a lander for now, but IMO sticking to our guns is still the way to go. There's no guarantee that the Luna, Mariner or manned programs won't roll poorly next turn anyway.
Regards,
fasquardon
