Chapter 192: Lin Ran Berates Korolev
“The Moon is right there, and we have no way to wait until a 100% success rate before carrying out the moon landing mission.
Space exploration has never been a smooth path; it is humanity’s magnificent feat of challenging the unknown.
When we carried out the Vostok series program, we also faced the risk of failure.
We also had to face failure risks in various fields, including rocket launch failure, orbital deviation, communication interruption, and re-entry loss of control.
We ultimately succeeded.
Scientific progress requires bold attempts.
The moon landing mission is not only to send astronauts to the Moon, but also to explore the mysteries of the universe.
Even if the mission is not completely successful, the scientific data and technical experience we gain will pave the way for the future.
From Sputnik to Gagarin’s first space flight, every step was accompanied by risk, but it is these efforts that have brought us to today’s heights.
History tells us that great achievements are often accompanied by great sacrifices.
Magellan’s circumnavigation, Scott’s Antarctic expedition—these pioneers faced unknown dangers but opened up new worlds for humanity.
Our astronauts voluntarily take on this mission; their courage represents the entire humanity’s spirit of exploration.
In addition, I want to emphasize that the Soviet Union’s aerospace program is not blind adventure.
We have conducted many unmanned test flights, optimizing the rocket, lunar module, and return system.
Our team worked day and night to ensure every link meets the highest standard.
Risks cannot be completely eliminated, but we have done our utmost to raise the probability to the current highest level.
Slavs have never lacked the spirit of sacrifice, let alone this sacrifice made for humanity’s exploration of the universe.
Before carrying out the mission, we had fully informed Gagarin and his family of the risks.
He showed astonishing will and courage for this mission, and his performance in this moon landing also proved this.
Finally, as a country committed to space exploration, we have the responsibility to lead this field.
Because we know deeply that the moon landing is not only the Soviet Union’s achievement, but also the victory of all humanity.
The Cold War may put us in different camps, but as the professor said, the universe is vast and belongs to everyone.”
Korolev’s tone was calm, but his words were full of emotion, deeply resonating with the guests in the audience.
At the same time, the sensitive diplomats present all realized that the Soviet Union hopes for peace and hopes for the Cold War to ease.
To be precise, they read different information: this White House obviously does not want the Cold War to ease, but the professor hopes for the Cold War to ease.
And combining Kremlin Nikita’s public speech, and that Korolev’s words were about all humanity, without emphasizing that Soviet people won the space race.
They could read a very clear signal: from bureaucrats to scientists in the Soviet Union, all hope that the Cold War situation can ease.
After listening, Lin Ran applauded and said: “Indeed, Gagarin truly showed unprecedented courage and belief.
It is precisely this courage and belief that enabled him to successfully complete the mission.
As Korolev said, the success probability of the moon landing mission is very low.
But in the end we succeeded; under the cooperation of America and the Soviet Union, we successfully completed the moon landing mission.
To be honest, Korolev, did you ever doubt whether our fuel tank could really land smoothly near your landing point?”
A faint smile finally appeared on Korolev’s tense face: “Of course, Randolph, before experiencing it personally, it was hard for me to imagine that human technology could achieve this precision.
It is not only that the control system, navigation system, and communication system of the moon landing spacecraft have extremely high requirements, but the calculations in mathematics must also be extremely precise.
Randolph, you have indeed surpassed this era in mathematical calculations.
Without these precise parameters, it would be difficult for us to safely bring Gagarin back to Earth.”
The diplomats in the audience sighed: “It’s rare to see American and Soviet scientists exchanging on the same stage.”
German people watching this were arguing: “Look, American calculations are so impressive! Without them, Soviet people couldn’t reach the Moon.” The person next to them retorted: “Soviet Union’s rockets and spacecraft are also great!”
Randolph turned to Korolev, his tone relaxed: “Mr. Korolev, in this cooperation, we encountered quite a few difficulties, such as differences in technical standards and language barriers.”
Korolev nodded: “Language was indeed a problem, but fortunately we both have excellent translation teams.
As for technical standards, both sides made compromises, such as the design of the docking interface. We also exchanged a large amount of data to ensure system compatibility.”
Randolph smiled and added: “I remember the conversion between imperial units and metric units was a big problem; in the end, we even nearly had an accident because of it.
The Soviet Union uses metric units, and we use imperial units.
In the mission planning stage, the Soviet team provided orbital parameters to America in kilometers.
Our team subconsciously thought they were in miles.
During orbital calculation, due to communication misunderstanding, this error nearly sent the fuel tank into the wrong orbit, unable to overlap with Gagarin’s landing point.”
Korolev nodded: “On this point, I think America should also use metric units.”
Historically, England, Maple Leaf Country, Kangaroo Country, South Africa, etc., all current or former British Commonwealth countries began promoting metrication of units in the 1960s and 1970s.
Only America, even 60 years later, still uses imperial units.
Lin Ran, whether in this spacetime or 60 years later, was deeply troubled by this; after hearing Korolev’s suggestion, he smiled wryly:
“This is not something I can decide; I am the NASA director, and this requires promoting relevant legislation.”
In the audience, England Prime Minister Harold Wilson leaned over and said softly to Humphrey: “Mr. Vice President, you really should consider this issue carefully.”
Humphrey looked puzzled: everyone uses imperial units, what are you asking us to consider?
Harold saw Humphrey’s confusion and continued: “We are going to fully start metrication next year.”
Indeed, England was among the first batch of British Commonwealth countries to promote metrication of units.
Metrication began in 1965.
(On May 24, 1965, England Trade Committee Chairman Douglas Jay announced in the House of Commons that England would gradually adopt metric units over the next decade, replacing imperial units. This plan was promoted by the England Standards Association and the Industrial Confederation.)
Imperial units—England itself doesn’t use them anymore.
Humphrey felt it was very strange, a very odd feeling: Korolev says on stage that you should use metric units, and England Prime Minister Harold Wilson immediately says offstage that we will use them next year.
To be honest, Humphrey had always heard rumors that the Soviet Union had deep control over England; he didn’t believe it before, thinking it was rumors aimed at undermining the unbreakable alliance between England and America.
Now he somewhat believed it.
Otherwise, why are you so tacitly in sync.
Harold Wilson, a shrewd one among the shrewd, quickly explained softly: “Most countries have adopted the metric system; we need to stay consistent with European Economic Community countries. This has nothing to do with Soviet people.”
After speaking, Harold emphasized again: “Absolutely unrelated!”
Humphrey nodded: “Alright, I will report this to Mr. President when I get back.”
In his heart, he thought: it seems we need to reduce military R&D cooperation with England; for you to switch to metric units, is staying consistent with France and Germany more important than military technology R&D cooperation with America?
Humphrey felt that the possibility of an ambiguous relationship between England and the Soviet Union had increased a bit more.
On stage, Lin Ran continued: “Before we discuss the technical details of the moon landing mission, I want to raise a more essential question: why does humanity explore space? Is this pursuit of the unknown an inevitable part of our destiny?”
Korolev thought for a moment: “Humanity’s history of gazing at the starry sky is longer than any civilization.
From the earliest star maps to today’s moon landing, every step is a challenge to the unknown.
Space exploration is not only a victory of technology, but also proof of the human spirit; we survive on Earth, but only in exploration can we find the meaning of existence.”
Lin Ran nodded lightly: “Your answer reminds me of existentialist views, such as what Sartre said: humanity defines itself through free choices.
Is space exploration also an embodiment of such freedom, breaking free from Earth’s shackles to pursue broader possibilities?”
After pondering for a moment, Korolev said: “Yes, space symbolizes infinite possibilities.
There, there are no borders, no ideology, only humanity’s existence as a whole.
But this freedom also comes with responsibility; we must ensure it serves peace and progress, not division and destruction.”
In Columbia University’s philosophy department, professors discussed: “The professor and Korolev linked space with existentialism; the professor is naturally suited to teach in our philosophy department.”
Columbia University’s philosophy department should be the group most hoping for Lin Ran to return to Columbia University to teach.
Horkheimer is old, and the Frankfurt School urgently needs a new top brain to take over Horkheimer’s mantle.
And on this Earth, whose brain could be more top-tier than Lin Ran’s?
Even though Lin Ran has never proven himself in the field of philosophy, the Frankfurt School still firmly believes that Lin Ran is the one who can take over the mantle and lead the Frankfurt School to its peak.
Another professor said: “Yes, to detach from peace itself and interpret it from a higher dimension is not easy.”
“This reminds me of Sartre’s ‘Being and Nothingness’; humanity creates meaning in choices.”
Lin Ran continued to guide the topic: “Mr. Korolev, this US-Soviet joint moon landing mission is particularly special against the backdrop of the Cold War. What do you think this cooperation means for humanity’s unity? Does it herald the possibility of transcending political opposition?”
Didn’t Humphrey tell me not to talk about peace?
Then asking Korolev’s opinion should be fine.
To be honest, Lin Ran had already been deeply moved by this era.
The Cold War is indeed war, and technology is not as brilliant as 60 years later.
But this era also means infinite possibilities.
It means humanity can avoid a future of capital alienation, where humanity shifts from gazing at the stars to cowering on Earth, everything oriented toward monetary interests.
He can still change it.
60 years later he could change it; on this current timeline, Lin Ran believes he can change it too.
He doesn’t expect to achieve peace and human unity just through an interview, but he needs to do something.
We can’t not do it just because it has no meaning.
Korolev’s gaze softened: “The Cold War puts us on opposing sides, but space lets us see common goals.
The moon landing mission proves that when humanity sets aside differences and collaborates, nothing is insurmountable.
I hope, and it is the Kremlin’s hope, that this is just a beginning, a starting point toward a more united future.
Randolph, like you, I also like reading philosophy-related books; these philosophy books accompanied me through the long years in the Gulag.”
There was a gasp from the audience.
Because Korolev was an absolutely mysterious figure to them.
At first, there was only a code name, then a name.
But only just a name.
They knew nothing of his life story; originally, Korolev’s information would only be declassified many years later.
Gulag past—for civilians, maybe they don’t know what it is, but everyone present is elite; even women who are unclear can learn from the male companions beside them what the Gulag past is.
“Simply put, the Gulag means being sent to Siberia to grow potatoes. Spending long years in such a place, if you don’t read some books, you’ll go mad sooner or later.
I didn’t expect Korolev to have such a growth experience.
Truly remarkable; to grow into the head of Soviet aerospace in such an environment.”
“Isn’t the professor even more remarkable? Orphan background, grew up in Europe, studied in Göttingen, and became NASA director.” His female companion, upon hearing this, said dissatisfiedly.
Women are appearance-obsessed; as 21st-century young humans with ample meat, eggs, and milk, compared to a malnourished Slav old man grown up in the Gulag, plus Lin Ran’s inherently good appearance genes, purely in terms of image, Lin Ran’s advantage is a bit too obvious.
Korolev continued: “This reminds me of Levi-Strauss’s structuralism, which emphasizes deep commonalities beneath appearances.
From the moment I devoted myself to space exploration, I wondered if space exploration could reveal some essence of human society, transcending immediate conflicts?
Structuralism reminds us that beneath differences lies a common foundation.
Space exploration is exactly the embodiment of this foundation—the thirst for knowledge, the expectation for the future.”
In the audience, Sir Haley and Major Freeman whispered: “They incorporate philosophy into the dialogue; with the professor as host, the tone of this dialogue is indeed something you can’t achieve.”
Haley is a sir, so it’s not strange for him to have a ticket.
Freeman is staff, so even less strange.
Freeman smiled wryly: “Yes, next to humanity’s top brains, even my main job, to the professor, is just amateur play, yet done so outstandingly.”
Haley nodded: “Yes, geniuses are always willful; an aerospace genius from the Gulag, an aerospace genius grown from Göttingen—this era getting to see the game between these two is too interesting!”
The German reporter next to them whispered: “Cooperation in the Cold War—space is truly humanity’s new hope.”
In front of televisions, Moscow workers said to their wives: “Korolev is right; space unites us.”
The wife nodded: “If Americans thought the same, that would be true unity.”
Lin Ran adjusted his sitting posture, his tone slightly serious: “Korolev, space exploration brings technological leaps but also raises ethical dilemmas.
Such as resource allocation and the risk of space militarization.
We need to respond to these voices from outside; I think today’s occasion is a good opportunity.
How do you view these challenges?”
Korolev frowned slightly and said gravely: “Technology is a double-edged sword. It can illuminate the future or cast shadows.
I hope, and the Soviet Union hopes, that the purpose of space exploration is peace and science, not war and plunder.
But this requires the common effort of all humanity to establish rules and trust.
This requires effort from both our sides.
Although America has always accused us of nuclear weapons expansion and nuclear weapons tests, don’t forget, America is the only country that has used nuclear weapons.
Japanese people are sitting in the audience.”
Lin Ran reminded: “Sorry, there are no Japanese in the audience.”
Korolev said: “Alright, in any case, the only one who has used nuclear weapons is America.
Including the Bay of Pigs Invasion, you struck first; the Soviet Union has always cherished peace. To avoid space militarization, we will make efforts, but it also requires restraint from America.”
Humphrey’s face darkened.
Mikoyan was applauding Korolev’s performance.
Lin Ran said: “We have never used nuclear weapons since the end of World War II; on the contrary, it is the Soviet Union that threatens to use nuclear weapons in newspapers, and against my homeland.
Sorry, Mr. Korolev, I must correct you on one point: the Soviet Union’s restraint is only toward Americans; toward other countries, you have never shown restraint.
The Soviet Union’s ‘restraint’ is just a superficial selective performance.
You openly threaten in newspapers to use nuclear weapons against southern neighboring countries; this is not empty talk, but a flaunting of power and oppression of other countries.
Critical theory lets us see that true equality should not only exist in declarations but be embodied in actions.
You preach socialism’s unity on one hand, yet use the shadow of nuclear weapons to threaten other countries that do not meet your expectations; this double standard exposes the hypocritical nature of the Soviet Union.
As a Chinese person, I cannot ignore what this threat means to my homeland and people.
In 1963, Nikita’s statements let the world see that the Soviet Union’s nuclear policy is not only strategic game against America, but also hegemonic suppression of other countries.
Such behavior is not only immoral but pushes all humanity into the abyss of nuclear competition.
Nuclear weapons should not be bargaining chips to resolve differences; their existence itself is a mockery of peace.
However, we are not without hope. The cooperation between America and the Soviet Union in the moon landing mission shows that even under the high pressure of the Cold War, dialogue and collaboration are possible.
I call on the Soviet Union to reflect on its nuclear policy, abandon threats—peace toward America but threats and coercion toward other countries is unacceptable; only a single standard can prompt us toward true international cooperation. Only then can we escape fear and jointly pursue humanity’s progress.
The international community must face this injustice and work together to eliminate the shadow of nuclear weapons.”
Lin Ran didn’t want to speak out, but hearing this, he really couldn’t hold back.
After Lin Ran finished speaking, thunderous applause erupted from the audience.
Not only because they liked seeing the Soviet Union deflated, but because what Lin Ran said was too reasonable.
America is far away; Europe is under the Soviet iron hoof, under the nuclear shadow.
Lin Ran spoke of China, but the Europeans present felt it deeply.
Hypocrisy, double standards, stern in appearance but weak inside—these adjectives, when pinned on the Soviet Union by Lin Ran, a globally renowned figure, made the old Europeans ecstatic.
This time it was Humphrey applauding, and Mikoyan’s face darkened.
December 31, 1964, 8:30 PM London time, equivalent to 4:30 AM January 1, 1965 Hong Kong time.
Hong Kong is in UTC+8 time zone, while London is UTC+0, differing by 8 hours.
Therefore, when London residents listen to the broadcast on New Year’s Eve, Hong Kong has already entered the dawn of the new year.
At 4:30 AM in Hong Kong, the night had not yet faded, and the streets were immersed in silence.
Televisions in many public places were on, with people gathering to watch the live broadcast from London, the BBC’s Face to Face special program.
Lin Ran’s criticism resonated deeply with Hong Kong people.
“The professor said it perfectly; Soviet people are just double standards.”
“Well scolded; the Soviet Union deserves to be scolded!”
“The professor is indeed the pride of Chinese people, publicly rebuking Korolev.”
Korolev said: “Sorry, this is political, I’m not well-versed in the specifics, I won’t comment.
But this reminds me of postmodernism’s questioning: should we reflect on the price of technological progress? The technological progress brought by space exploration may instead exacerbate inequality on Earth.
Postmodernism keeps us vigilant: exploration itself is not wrong, but how the achievements are used will cause further inequality between countries.
Space technology can improve life on Earth, such as new energy forms or climate monitoring.
The Soviet Union is willing to share technology with allies, while America only considers itself.”
Lin Ran sighed: “No, reality will prove who can better apply space technology.
I think we shouldn’t discuss politics anymore; even if we don’t think it belongs to politics, it is still closely related to politics.
Korolev, what do you think was the most tense moment in the moon landing mission?”
Korolev said: “For me, it was the instant the lunar module landed. Signal latency—I held my breath until confirming success. At that moment, I felt the greatness of human courage.”
Lin Ran smiled and recalled: “For me, it was the final adjustment before ignition. Unit inconsistency led us to correct overnight. At that moment, I felt not only technical pressure, but also responsibility.”
In the audience, Sir Haley sighed softly: “The professor still gave Korolev some leeway, not relentlessly hammering the Soviet Union’s double standards.”
Major Freeman nodded along: “Indeed.”
They are all industry insiders and clearly know who has the upper hand.
Or rather, Lin Ran is the host, with a natural advantage.
Because this is Europe, and America helped rebuild Europe’s industrial foundation through the Marshall Plan.
Saying this in Europe, Korolev clearly didn’t grasp the situation.
Moreover, Lin Ran’s Chinese identity at this point allows for too many talking points.
The Soviet experts’ collective departure wasn’t long ago.
Haley and Freeman clearly know Lin Ran couldn’t be unaware of these, while compared to Lin Ran, Korolev obviously wasn’t prepared.
Applause rose from the audience: “Thank you for your persistence.”
As the program neared its end, Lin Ran summarized: “Thank you, Mr. Korolev, for your profound insights. Tonight, we not only reviewed the moon landing feat but also explored humanity’s freedom, responsibility, and future. May such dialogues continue to inspire us.”
Korolev slightly bowed: “Thank you BBC, thank you Randolph. May space bring us peace and wisdom.”
Thunderous applause from the audience, listeners standing to pay respects.
Lin Ran stepped off the stage, and the celebrities present surged toward him.
em wrote this part with some difficulty; I wanted to make this segment as exciting as possible, really hard to grasp the scale, not sure if everyone is satisfied, anyway I racked my brains writing it.
