Rocket Racing Gets Its First Team

quad4b writes to tell us Wired is reporting that the Rocket Racing League (RRL), launched last October by Granger Whitelaw and Peter Diamandis of Ansari X Prize fame, has its first official team. "Leading Edge Rocket Racing" was launched by entrepreneurs and former F-16 pilots Don "Dagger" Grantham and Robert "Bobaloo" Rickard who see this as the "next great flying experience."

Comments

Come On Elon

[b0r1s]

Once Spacex gets their launch vehicle off the ground, maybe Elon can put up some money for this, too. Come on, put PayPal's money to some good entertainment use.

But "Team Rocket"?

[Anonymous Coward]

They weren't even that good at catching Pokemon.

safely

[gcnaddict]

Ill *safely* call this a gimick for now, but to be honest...

I wont be surprised if this does end up getting off the ground in a few yea--er, decades (pun definitely intended)

Re:safely

[POKETNRJSH]

Not a gimmick. Tons of info in PopSci (was it PopMech? one of them) last month on it.

Not going to work

[Reality Master 101]

The fact that there is no popular "airplane racing" sport to speak of should tell these people something. It's hard to watch and boring. I think they're letting their own enthusiasm for rockets cloud their reasoning.

But hey, let 'er rip and we'll see what happens.

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

Yeah, because the popular sporting events are MUCH better.

I don't very much care how popular something is. Why do you?

Re:Not going to work

[mmkkbb]

It's popular enough that Red Bull supports it.

Re:Not going to work

[Reality Master 101]

I don't very much care how popular something is. Why do you?

The point isn't whether YOU personally care about the sport, the question is whether enough people care to make it economically viable. Assuming you want it to work, you should care how popular it is.

Yeah, because the popular sporting events are MUCH better.

Not all popular sports are good (soccer, for example, is really a pretty damn bad sport from the standpoint of offensive/defense balance; it's far too heavily biased toward the defense), but that doesn't mean all unpopular sports are somehow more noble.

Again, there's a reason airplane racing has never "taken off" (so to speak). It sounds good on paper (machines blazing through the air at hundreds of miles per hour!! Wow!!), but in practice there's not much to watch, and it's too much like a boat race. The first one to get the upper hand will almost always win. There are not enough variables to introduce strategy during the race. A rocket race will be worse -- they're not even as maneuverable as an airplane. It'll be more like a drag race, except they'll be gone so fast you can't see anything.

Re:Not going to work

[TubeSteak]

no popular "airplane racing" sport to speak of

Define popular.

http://www.airrace.org/racingClasses.php

Those nutjobs go out and fly anywhere from 200~500 mph around a course. And they have fans.

Re:Not going to work

[jonv]

They plan to make use of technology to make it more interesting for the spectator. Overlaying live action onto a track for spectators and letting on-line competitors join in. Should have some interest amoung the slashdot crowd.

Re:Not going to work

[geofferensis]

Red Bull sponsors everything. I swear to god, I came home one day and my cat had a Red Bull logo painted on him. I asked him what was up and he said he needed the money because he was tired of eating god damn whiskas everyday.

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

You didn't say "economically viable". You said "popular". NASCAR and football are popular, but I'd rather rearrange my sock drawer than watch that stuff.

The organizers think they have a business model. You think it won't be popular. We'll see who's right.

"A rocket race will be worse -- they're not even as maneuverable as an airplane. "

Did you even bother to look at the pictures? They ARE airplanes...with rocket engines. But you're the Reality Master, so those facts probably don't have much to do with your judgement, right?

Re:Not going to work

[eonlabs]

I think the definitive difference between rockets and airplanes that would make this a mainstream interest is the several meter flame of hot gas spraying out the backside to keep it humming.

Frankly, I'm sure that everyone has an intrinsic interest in seeing people steering giant fireworks to compete in a race.

Even George Carlin would probably flip over it. Much better explosions when someone goofs up than even the Indy 500.

How many people try to watch a launch of one of Nasa's ships?

Re:Not going to work

[heinousjay]

His points are fairly valid - and the fact that you have unusual taste doesn't make you the entertainment master.

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

Where were the valid points? Were they when he changed the metric from popularity to economic viability, or when he demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the vehicles in question?

Re:Not going to work

[evilviper]

The fact that there is no popular "airplane racing" sport to speak of should tell these people something.

Yes, that nobody has even tried it yet.

It's hard to watch and boring.

I'd say watching cars drive around a tiny circular course is far more boring than FRICKIN' ROCKETS.

Besides, I seem to recall airshows being very near the top of the list of most popular spectator sports, worldwide.

Re:Not going to work

[heinousjay]

His point that fast vehicles on loose courses make for boring races is pretty much on the money (although that's subjective), as is the correlation of popularity to economic viability. I know you don't like either one of those, but I humbly submit you aren't looking at it objectively.

Personally, I don't care either way. I watch American football, and little else, and the popularity and viability aren't in question there. The excitement may be, but that's personal taste, again.

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

You're putting assertions in my mouth. I didn't say that popularity and economic viability were disconnected. I said that popularity is not a meaningful metric TO ME.

I don't know if this will be an interesting sport or not, but I don't think that popularity is going to change its interestingness to me. That's all I'm saying.

Am I looking at this from my own point of view? Duh, of course.

Re:Not going to work

[Reality Master 101]

You didn't say "economically viable". You said "popular".

I said both, and made the point that the two are tied together. Refusing to understand my point doesn't make it less valid.

NASCAR and football are popular, but I'd rather rearrange my sock drawer than watch that stuff.

Again, it's totally irrelevent what you as an individual care about. What matters is what people care about statistically when it comes to making a viable sport. If you have enough people who care and are willing to pay, then you have a viable sport.

Also don't make the mistake of thinking that something is bad just because you don't understand it.

Did you even bother to look at the pictures? They ARE airplanes...with rocket engines. But you're the Reality Master, so those facts probably don't have much to do with your judgement, right?

They're not airplanes as such; they're rockets with wings. If you actually read the web site (as I have), rather than just look at the pictures, they use use a combination of rocket power and gliding, the gliding presumably used for the actual turns. In other words, drag racing.

The Reality Master doesn't claim to be always right, but the Reality Master is dedicated to objective analysis without wishful thinking. I fail to see why rocket racing will succeed when airplane racing hasn't (to any great extent, the occasional race show notwithstanding).

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

I don't think you really understand airplanes very well. I also don't think you understand that the vehicles in this race will be airplanes with rocket engines, not Flash Gordon tail-sitting cylinders with fins.

Re:Not going to work

[Reality Master 101]

And they have fans.

Sure, but lots of things have fans. Checker tournaments have fans, but I'd hardly call it a popular sport.

Re:Not going to work

[jftitan]

And they are damn good pilots. Wasn't there one recently sponsored by RedBull? Flying through/between objects at high speed, takes huge balls!, of which if I had the nerves those guys have, I would do so myself.

  But I prefer to fly giant robots in space. At least the odds of hitting something is reduced.

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

"Again, it's totally irrelevent what you as an individual care about." Nonsense. The only things I care about are things I care about. What other people care about is irrelevant to me. Of course my predilections are irrelevant TO YOU. They are, by definition, the only things that are relevant TO ME.

This is your objective assessment? I think you need to think this through a little better.

"They're not airplanes as such; they're rockets with wings"

Uh, what do you think an airplane is? Is the Bell X1 not an airplane? How about the X-15? How about the Rutan Vari-Eze with the rocket motor in the back, that's on all the pictures on the rocket racing web site? An airplane is a thing that travels through the air borne by wings that generate lift. These vehicles are clearly airplanes, powered by rocket motors.

"they use use a combination of rocket power and gliding, the gliding presumably used for the actual turns. In other words, drag racing"

Not sure where to begin here. Yes, except for the fact that it's in the air, and part of the time your motor isn't even turned on, and you make turns, it's just like drag racing. In other words, it's not at all like drag racing.

"I fail to see why rocket racing will succeed when airplane racing hasn't"

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Heck, I don't know if it'll be interesting to watch. I do know that I don't much care about taking viewership away from NASCAR.

"(to any great extent, the occasional race show notwithstanding)"

Ah, so excluding the popularity of air race shows, air race shows are not popular. Wow. You really are the Reality Master.

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

Oh yeah, and you're speaking about yourself in the third person. That is definitely not a good rhetorical tactic to get people to think you have any association whatsoever with the reality the rest of us are enjoying.

Just a thought.

Re:Not going to work

[jcr]

I think they're letting their own enthusiasm for rockets cloud their reasoning.

Maybe they just want to do it because it's fun?

-jcr

Re:Not going to work

[Reality Master 101]

You're refusing to argue against the point I'm making, and instead being deliberately obtuse and arguing against what I'm not saying.

Re:Not going to work

[Reality Master 101]

Oh yeah, and you're speaking about yourself in the third person.

That was a joke, responding to your attacking my username (which is also a joke) to make your point. -sigh-

Re:Not going to work

[ctid]

        The fact that there is no popular "airplane racing" sport to speak of should tell these people something.

Yes, that nobody has even tried it yet.

Of course it has been tried! Airplane racing has been popular in the past, it just isn't popular now.

Re:Not going to work

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

And they have fans.

You'd think they'd just open a window...

I'll get my coat...

Re:Not going to work

[Anonymous Coward]

The Reno Air Races get an attendance of over 200,000 each year.

http://www.rgj.com/news/stories/html/2005/09/13/10 8687.php

The EAA AirVenture Oshkosh show gets 750,000+ visitors.

http://www.airventure.org/2006/about/history.html

Re:Not going to work

[Moofie]

*eyebrow* Okay, Reality Master. Lay it out for me. You say that it won't be popular. I say that raw popularity is irrelevant. If there's an audience, it will be successful. If there isn't, there won't be. You haven't said anything that convinces me that you've got your finger on the pulse of the sporting universe, so I assert that you don't have anything to hang your argument on.

Re:Not going to work

[Anonymous Coward]

There IS an racing event, at Reno, NV, once a year... and about 100,000 people show up every year, myself included. It's called the Reno National Championship Air Races, it features mostly hot-rodded WW2 fighters, although there are other classes as well.

Re:Not going to work

[MichaelSmith]

too much like a boat race

Except those boats races where the boats skitter across the surface of the water and occasionally take flight and cartwheel across the water shedding bits of boat as they go. That always gets in the evening news. Just like speedway car crashes.

Rocket races need a deliberate flaw: something like having your engines started by sticks of TNT with a manually lit fuse sticking out the tailpipe. Explosions and popularity guaranteed.

Re:Not going to work

[CastrTroy]

Just because nobody watches it, doesn't mean it's not a good sport. I know a guy who's really into unicycling. They get big beefed up unicycles and ride around on dirt trails, jump around, and do a bunch of really fun stuff. As a sport it's pretty good. Low cost to start, $600 gets you pretty much the best unicycle there is, and you can do it just about anywhere. It's very exciting, and very rewarding, as you can judge your success on how much you can do, compare to what others can do.

Re:Not going to work

[kfg]

The point isn't whether YOU personally care about the sport, the question is whether enough people care to make it economically viable. Assuming you want it to work, you should care how popular it is.

Yes, racining requires that at least two people are interested enough and have the werewithal to make it happen.

This may come as a shock to you in this day when every participant sport has been converted into a franchised Circus Maximus to sell a shitload of Tshirts, but there are still sporting events that largely, or even wholly, supported by the participants, just because they think it's fun to do it.

Please note the cost of entry, three quarters of a million dollars per year in racing fees.

This is a rich boy's amatuer sport. Any monies derived from specators and merchandising will certainly be sought and spent, but the show will go on just as long as a couple of monied fighter jocks want to have at each other.

Think of the street luge scene before the Xgames, or competitive surfing in the 50s. Not only did nobody but the participants and their family/friends give flying fuck about the sports, but they often had to hide from possible spectators, because what they were doing could get them arrested.

But the participants lived, and often died, for their sport.

"Popularity" is what has fucked up sport.

KFG

Re:Not going to work

[brucehoult]

Again, there's a reason airplane racing has never "taken off" (so to speak). It sounds good on paper (machines blazing through the air at hundreds of miles per hour!! Wow!!), but in practice there's not much to watch, and it's too much like a boat race. The first one to get the upper hand will almost always win.

That's certainly not true in yachting. The problem is that yacht races tend to be held over too large an area for spectators to be able to see most of the race. GPS and computer graphcs have solved that problem for TV coverage.

There is the same problem, but even more so in sailplane racing. Where Americas' Cup yacht races are held over an 18 mile long course, sailplane races are typically held over 150 - 300 mile long courses. Because the speeds are so much higher it takes about the same amount of time to complete a race.

Last week we held our first Gliding Grand Prix here in New Zealand. It is a new format for glider racing, with simultaneous starts, a race course designed to be more spectator-friendly by bringing the gliders back over the airfield during the race, and a complete TV package using live 3D computer graphics (fed by in-glider GPS via Iridium phones), live in-cockpit video cameras, and chase helicopters (which worked well other than the helicopter sometimes not being able to keep up with the gliders on the final 30 km sprint back to the airfield).

You can get an idea of the TV coverage available from movies. That is, frankly, only a shadow of what it was really like. Hopefully you'll get a chance to see it on ESPN or something soon.

I have some photos on my site, and there are more on the official site.

There are not enough variables to introduce strategy during the race.

Both yachting and gliding have huge numbers of variables. In gliding, for example, the fastest way to the next turn point can often involve sidetracking 20 or 30 km from the direct path, and different pilots will have quite different ideas about the best place to go. Then there are the questions of how fast or slowly to fly at each point in time, whether to fly high or low, whether to fly low along a ridge, or try to take a thermal to 8000 or 10000 ft, or try to find mountain wave and climb to 20,000 or 25,000 ft or more.

A rocket race will be worse -- they're not even as maneuverable as an airplane. It'll be more like a drag race, except they'll be gone so fast you can't see anything.

As a matter of fact, these are airplanes -- airplanes with a rocket attached instead of a piston or jet engine.

Re:Not going to work

[TubeSteak]

I got a laugh out of that.

You deserve +1 Funny.

Re:Not going to work

[UnixRevolution]

If it's so boring, why is the Indianapolis 500 the most popular single-day sporting event in the world?

Re:Not going to work

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a theory, but it would probably be classify as flamebait ;)

Re:Not going to work

[evilviper]

I didn't say it was all-out boring, genius, I said it was: "...more boring than FRICKIN' ROCKETS."

Re:Not going to work

[Grab]

The "people to care" don't always have to be passive observers. This is a very modern phenomenon - the football (American or soccer) fans sitting on their fat arses watching other people having fun taking part in sport...

FWIW though, there *are* adventure sports catering to the spectator market. In hang-gliding there's a discipline called "speed gliding", which is basically a hang-glider following a downhill skiing course, complete with checkpoints where they have to go under/over/round a gate. You're right that many airsports take place too far away from the ground for ppl to see them; speed gliding is trying to make this work for spectators. HG is very popular in Brazil, which is a major mover in commercialising the sport, and speed gliding is definitely a step forward.

And as for boat races - well, I can tell you're not a sailor. ;-) Boats are driven by wind. Wind changes. Even America's Cup one-on-one races (which are often boring, I'll freely admit) have a random element in there. Add the random element of wind changes into your typical race of 20 people racing the same type of boat, all trying to get round quicker than each other, and you've basically got an aquatic version of Nascar. Really - the fact that it's never on the TV doesn't stop it being a pretty damn good sport.

Grab.

Just like NASCAR

[chanrobi]

The rocket powered aircraft will only be able to turn left.

Maverick's re-engaging sir!

[Anonymous Coward]

was launched by entrepreneurs and former F-16 pilots Don "Dagger" Grantham and Robert "Bobaloo" Rickard

Are all fighter pilots given nicknames and if so, are they used, as seen in the 80s classic Top Gun, as callsigns over radio? Are they painted on helmets and on the side of planes? Anyone from the services got any cool examples or stories?

Re:Maverick's re-engaging sir!

[massivefoot]

I suspect most fighter pilots will aquire such a nickname, but no, they are almost certainly NOT used as callsigns. For a start, the radio callsign identifies the aircraft, not the pilot; secondly most militaries forbids the transmittion of names (and one assumes that includes nicknames) in radio calls.

Re:Maverick's re-engaging sir!

[YrWrstNtmr]

Yes, most of them acquire nicknames. It's somewhat a sign of acceptance by your fellow pilots.
No, they don't use that nick as a radio call sign.
In the USAF, a pilot may have his name on the side of a plane, but it's not 'his' a/c. That's just for a pic to send home to mom. He flies whatever maintenance gives him that day.
This pic shows the right side of an F-16, with the crew chief's name on it. Some pilots name will be on the other side, sans nickname.

Get in on the action

[thebear05]

"Fans on the ground will see the virtual track superimposed over the action on giant TV screens as well as on specially developed handheld units. A video game also in development by the RRL will pit fans at home against actual pilots during races." their are alot of gamers out there who i think would love the oportunity to take on actual f-16 pilots

Re:Get in on the action

[ELProphet]

As a gamer, I for one would love the opportunity to fly in a virtual vs. real race. However, I think I would lose...

But honestly, this looks a hell of a lot better than NASCAR, and I must admit I enjoy a good NASCAR race.

Rocket racing huh?

[bogie]

Sound like just the kind of thing Joe-sixpack can relate to.

Re:Rocket racing huh?

[Moofie]

Who cares?

Re:Rocket racing huh?

[massivefoot]

Not all entertainment has to appeal to the lowest common denominator. And anyway, the public don't neccesarily need to relate to something to find it entertaining, look at how popular airshows are.

And the nominations for the Darwin Awards are....

[TheNoxx]

TFA.

Next Great Flying Experience

[PopeOptimusPrime]

It might just be their "next great dying experience" as well.

Anyone else remember this game?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just add goofy helmets and ropes to attack your opponents and you've got Rocket Jockey.

Re:And the nominations for the Darwin Awards are..

[XNormal]

Yes. People will die in these rocket races. People die on car race tracks. People die surfing. People die exploring Antrarctica, too.

NASA astronauts are treated like national treasures which must be protected at any cost. The whole country goes into mourning when they die and the space program is halted for years. When people will die in these races their comrades will drink to their memory in the evening and climb into another rocket vehicle the next morning.

These rocket races will give small companies a chance to get their hands dirty with rocket engines. The engines that will eventually power the vehicles that take us to space.

Re:And the nominations for the Darwin Awards are..

[Anonymous Coward]

NASA astronauts are treated like national treasures because that's exactly what they are. Mind you, I'm not even American. Astronauts are much more than space pilots or scientists -- they represent humanity's hopes and dreams.

Crowd pleaser..

[slashmojo]

While I think its cool and certainly support anything related to the xprize and rocket technology in general, I suspect most people will only watch this for the inherant 'disaster factor' which is presumably way higher than F1 or any other form of racing plus you wont have to sit through 127 boring laps before the sh*t hits the fan so its a sure thing as far as ratings.

Still I have no doubt people will be dying to have a go.. ;)

They should give up...

[Xymor]

No one can beat Earthworm Jim.

Re:They should give up...

[FusionDragon2099]

Not true. Psycrow kicked his ass on so many occassions... crashing into asteroids didn't help.

Significance; prototype test-pilot video

[FleaPlus]

Hm... I tried submitting this story a couple times in the past week, with no luck. I've pasted my submission below, which has a little more info on why the Rocket Racing League could be significant, and a video of former Shuttle Commander Rick Searfoss test-piloting the rocket-plane prototype:

X Prize founder Peter Diamandis's Rocket Racing League has announced its first rocketplane team, headed by two F-16 pilots. The team's expected annual operating cost is up to $1 million, compared to $18 million for a NASCAR vehicle. A video is also available of former Shuttle Commander Rick Searfoss test-piloting a prototype racer at the 2005 X Prize Cup. It's hoped that the competition will help foster the development of more robust, economical, and reliable rocket technology.

I'm still not sure on whether or not this League will be successful. It's a neat idea, but it'll be tricky to do this well, without making it boring or too tacky.

Ok, it's time for a "meeting of the minds"...

[The_REAL_DZA]

I say someone should put these guys in touch with the physics students who built the drivable couch

rocket-powered drivable couch, anyone?!?!

PopMech...

[Kadin2048]

Not that I think this is a gimmick, but just because something makes the cover of PopMech doesn't mean it actually exists, ever will exist, or is even remotely practical. It's a pretty low bar.

Not to say that the stuff they have on there isn't usually very cool, it just has a tendency to fail to materialize later. (Examples off the top of my head ... 1:1 reproduction of the Titanic, giant 'floating island' aircraft carrier, 747-sized gyroplanes, supersonic Skycars...).

These are the same people who were saying in 1955 that there'd be a big lump of plutonium in everyone's water-heater in 20 years, and last time I checked, mine's not sheathed in lead. I wouldn't use it to back up any claims of possibility.

America's Cup

[YrWrstNtmr]

The point isn't whether YOU personally care about the sport, the question is whether enough people care to make it economically viable. Assuming you want it to work, you should care how popular it is.

I doubt very much that the America's Cup yacht race is "economically viable", or popular enough for many people to watch. Yet it continues.

Just another way for rich guys to convert money into fun.

Joke (Slightly OT)

[rikkards]

Leading Edge Rocket Racing" was launched by entrepreneurs and former F-16 pilots Don "Dagger" Grantham and Robert "Bobaloo" Rickard who see this as the "next great flying experience."

What is the difference between a jet fighter and the fighter pilot inside it?

The jet stops whining when it's turned off. /Thanks I'll be here all week! Enjoy the Prime Rib!

Sounds like Rocket Jockey

[Tanlis]

Anyone remember this game?

Rocket Jockey

This is what I was reminded of when I saw the headline. Too bad, they would never add the elements Rocket Jockey had. That would definitely get me to watch it.

Sign me up though when people will be straddling rockets and trying to clothesline each other with ropes. :D

Re:And the nominations for the Darwin Awards are..

[6Yankee]

When people will die in these races their comrades will drink to their memory in the evening and climb into another rocket vehicle the next morning.

While still drunk. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Rocket "Racing"???

[Wiwi Jumbo]

Thanks, but I'll wait for Rocket Jockey.

http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?id=2094

Re:And the nominations for the Darwin Awards are..

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Well, considering they race on virtual tracks, you probably won't see many of them collect an award.

It all seems a bit of a let down to me. I think I'd rather play on a flight simulator, watch aerobatics, or watch Alan Szabo Jr. hammer the crap out of an RC heli only 1m above the ground.

I've always thought about having car-like races with RC planes, flying low to the ground, around and over objets etc. So I guess I was expecting something like that when I heard of this. Of course, treating full-scale aircraft in such a way did seem a bit to insane to be true.

Read up on your history

[Andy Dodd]

Airplane racing used to be HUGE back in the early days of aviation.

Unfortunately, due to safety concerns (there were quite a few crashes, some of the racing courses were right over densely populated urban areas), air racing was mostly legislated out of existence.

If these guys can come up with a reasonably safe system that remains exciting, air racing will come back.

Keep in mind that safety and excitement are not mutually exclusive - NASCAR vehicles have so many safety systems that drivers often walk away from rather spectacular crashes without a scratch. Despite the very high safety of those vehicles, lots of people watch it anyway. (Personally, I don't. I probably won't watch rocket racing myself unless they can come up with a good way to simulate dogfighting safely, which will be EXTREMELY hard. I would love to be able to watch a dogfight! :)

Sounds like what you want is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Pod-racing.

Visually different

[Julian Morrison]

Prop aircraft type go so slow you can barely see them move from the ground. Jet aircraft are fast but hard to see. Rocket aircraft would be both startlingly fast, and very easy to see (because of the 20ft flame and the persistent smoke trail). They would if anything be easier to watch than NASCAR, owing to being in view all the time, rather than disappearing behind hills and bits of track furniture. Plus they could layout the track so the racers whizz past on a straight, 100 ft overhead above the viewing stands.

The main problem would be the number of viewers getting cricks in their necks.

Re:PopMech. or PopSci.. or Nat'l Enquirer?

[aqk]

I remmeber a copy of Pop Mech (or was it Pop Science?) that I read perhaps 30,.. well, probably 40 years ago, published just after the Luna-1 (I think that was the name) went around the Moon and photographed the FAR SIDE OF THE MOON for the first time.
Humans actually got to see what was on the other side!
Of course those pesky commies named the various Lunalogic features there after Soviet heroes- Crater Mendeleyev, Mare Moscovium, Sea of Lenin, etc.
The rag in question claimed it was all a big hoax.
Well when NASA (with robot cameras) and later US astronauts finally managed to circle the moon, they reported back sadly that the lunagraphic features jived with the original Russian data.
I believe it's still called Mare Moscovium or whatever.

Not long after I gave up reading these trashy magazines.
Oddly they still survive today.
But then, so does General Motors....

- Tony King www.tonyking.tk