Back

Failed Soviet Venus lander Kosmos 482 crashes to Earth after 53 years in orbit

161 points4 daysspace.com
GMoromisato16 hours ago

My favorite Six Million Dollar Man episode is where Steve Austin had to fight a Soviet Venus rover that accidently landed on Earth. It was autonomous, obviously, and because it was designed to survive on Venus, it was nearly indestructible.

No one comes up with plots like that anymore!

oxryly114 hours ago

Also similar to the strange subplot in "Until the End of the World" [1] where a damaged Indian nuclear satellite threatens to fall to earth destroying civilization.

[1]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101458/

grujicd9 hours ago

That movie has one of the best soundtracks ever. Highly recommended - it was released as an album and you can find it on Spotify and similar services.

sweetbacon12 hours ago

wow that's an old movie call back I hadn't thought about in years. I loved the whole sub-plot of the repercussions of being able to record and replay ones dreams.

bigyabai10 hours ago

> Wim Wenders' original rough cut for this film was twenty hours long.

Holy hell

Tempest19817 hours ago

I'm still working on all 83 hours of Suits

dghughes2 hours ago

Did Steve have a mustache? Those are the epic seasons. Imagine fighting a CCCP Venus rover with a glorious 'stache!

pgreenwood12 hours ago

Kenner also released a surprisingly large toy version of that probe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTWJc72p2pE

stronglikedan11 hours ago

Considering the GI Joes I had, that was average size for toys like that.

oxryly114 hours ago

Ah I've been trying to dig up that episode from my faulty memory for years! I was convinced it was an episode of the A-Team fighting a killer tank instead.

GMoromisato13 hours ago

Glad to help! I was 12 at the time, proving the adage about the "Golden Age of science fiction."

brk12 hours ago

Was that the episode where it was defeated by screwing an eye hook into the top of it and lifting it to immobilize?

ggm14 hours ago

Its a dalek: Just climb stairs.

keepamovin9 hours ago

It’s funny that classified imaging platforms would definitely have tracked this reentry, but they’re gonna hold off on providing their data and maybe not going to provide it at all because it needs to be parallel constructed through non-classified capabilities.

so it’s sort of like that submarine implosion incident where US Navy knew what happened immediately. They may have even notified people at that time.

but I’m sure that US space force already exactly knows the trajectory of this object and probably the Russian corresponding agency does as well. but like the public has to wait for “open science” to reverse engineer where it might’ve been.

It’s a funny Highlighting of the gap between public state-of-the-art and deployed capabilities that are not public.

whycome9 hours ago

I'm still convinced that Luigi's capture happened via similar parallel construction. I suspect they knew where he was as soon as the crime occurred (or shortly thereafter).

It also reminds me of the fact that the Titanic was only discovered because Robert Ballard funded the submersible robots via the US Navy looking for specific wrecks.

https://spyscape.com/article/how-the-titanic-was-discovered-...

> "The Navy never expected me to find the Titanic, and so when that happened, they got really nervous because of the publicity," Ballard told National Geographic. "But people were so focused on the legend of the Titanic they never connected the dots."

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/titanic-w...

> Ballard met with the Navy in 1982 to request funding to develop the robotic submersible technology he needed to find the Titanic.

farseer3 hours ago

Regarding Luigi, he took no steps to alter his very prominent facial features before or after the crime.

keepamovin9 hours ago

Yes and in general I think it's a good thing. It's a shame and a moral obscenity (and moral injury for the people staffing those systems) when they can see crimes or abuses but are unable to do anything due to "national security" (when such withholding seems to undermine it!).

Good connecting of the dots with the Titanic! Interesting. Did not know that :)

clarionbell6 hours ago

I don't think these issues can be easily resolved. Intelligence isn't just about what you know, but also about the other side knowing what you know. What if exposing that capability to public will allow enemies to circumvent it, thus leading more lives lost? This isn't something confined to questions of military intelligence.

That being said. There was series, Person of Interest, exactly about this problem.

keepamovin4 hours ago

It's the intersection of morality, and power. In the game of power morality is often suspended, or vastly differs. In the realm of ordinary human affairs, where people are not endless in competition, morality reigns supreme and governs ideals for interactions, such as interpersonally. Both morality, and game of power, are necessary and important, I guess. But it's not easy because I think there's a fundamental tension between morality and power always.

That's why people in intelligence (fundamentally a power game) need moral flexibility. This can go right, or sometimes it goes wrong. But having to make such high stakes decisions all the time would at the least be fatiguing I imagine. And overtime, with the inevitable bad decisions, or implementing decisions made by others, the moral injury sets in.

Sort of related but a lot of the bigdrone pilots have serious PTSD and suicide: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2GFcNynl9qY

raducu6 hours ago

> but also about the other side knowing what you know

The israelis used the Spike missile for DECADES (they even had mock tanks launching it) and kept it quiet.

The ukrainians immediately uploaded videos of them using FPVs, I was sure at that time that the russians will in no time catch up and surpass ukraine in their FPV drone usage.

ogurechny7 hours ago

One might think that “moral obscenity” happens when “people staffing those systems” get their jobs and pretend that their responsibility is now delegated to some imaginary authority from the contemporary tales (which is not carved from wood or stone in our enlightened times).

In other words, such dramas are fake, and smokescreen the unclean consciousness. Remember the story about digital spying clerks from US complaining about being lent to Saudi Arabia, not because it was against their principles or laws, but because they were not paid “well enough”?

permo-w8 hours ago

I’m struggling with the terminology here. what do you mean by "imaging platforms"?

keepamovin8 hours ago

I think it's just a general term for things like satellites, space vehicles, ground-based radar or other grounded imaging, drones, etc without being specific as to whether it's optical, IR, radar, etc, and also disregarding its mounting and domain of operation. Sort of in the same sense that "spectroscopy" in science can refer to a wide variety of instrumentation! :)

stevage8 hours ago

spy satellites

snickerbockers3 hours ago

Dude everybody knew what happened to that sub. At that pressure differential there was never going to be a failure mode wherein the sub is unable to surface or communicate yet still has an intact pressure vessel.

sph2 hours ago

There is a lot of difference about random Twitter posters sharing cynical opinions and multi-billion military systems actually sensing the collapse of a sub thousands of miles away from a secret location.

It feels weird having to explain the different definitions of the verb “knowing”, but such is the case in a post-truth world.

alfiedotwtf4 hours ago

At the time MA370 went down I thought the same thing… yet in 2025 that info still hasn’t “leaked”.

To be honest, I’m blow away that organisations like NORAD a know where MA370 was

justinator18 hours ago

The entire Soviet Union Venus missions are absolutely fascinating. "Hardening" takes on a whole new meaning when you're preparing a craft to survive mere minutes on Venus' surface. I'm a little surprised their deep sea craft never got much attention.

deepsun18 hours ago

USSR focused on Venus, because at that time it wasn't apparent which one would be more interesting/accessible -- Venus or Mars.

And USSR didn't want to compete with US anymore, after lost the Moon race. USSR really did want the Moon too, after so many prior successes. So switching to Venus allowed to "split" the race.

abcd_f3 hours ago

A fun fact is that two Soviet Mars probes missed their trajectories because of the same software bug in the onboard navigation firmware. There's also a legend that the bug was a mistyped comma in the Fortran code.

lupusreal17 hours ago

The Soviet Union landed a rover on Mars almost 30 years before NASA. Unfortunately the lander it was tethered to, Mars 3, stopped communicating about two minutes after landing so the rover didn't get a chance to go into action.

Anyway, the Soviet Union's relative lack of success with Mars wasn't really for lack of trying. Space is hard.

floxy17 hours ago

>The Soviet Union landed a rover on Mars almost 30 years before NASA.

The Mars 3 landed on Mars in 1971:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_3

The NASA Viking program landed on Mars in 1976:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_program

...but I guess that didn't rove.

+1
lupusreal16 hours ago
ProAm14 hours ago

Soviets won the space race, just lost the cold war. And now we're here fighting another cold war and the US is losing

+3
nradov13 hours ago
donatj3 hours ago

About ten years ago I became fascinated with the Venusian landings. I've read a fair number of books about the US space program, including the great "Failure Is Not an Option", and I was kind of surprised to not find many English language books detailing the Soviet programs, and particularly the Venus missions.

perihelions17 hours ago

The other recent threads,

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43873531 ("Old Soviet Venus descent craft nearing Earth reentry (leonarddavid.com)" — 291 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43831602 ("After 53 years, a failed Soviet Venus spacecraft is crashing back to Earth (gizmodo.com)" — 50 comments)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43944167 ("Cosmos 482 Descent Craft tracker (utexas.edu)") — 9 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43942194 ("Cosmos-482 descent craft re-entry prediction (esa.int)") — 5 comments

aunty_helen8 hours ago

I’ve held one of the fuel tanks that came back down around the launch. It was impressively thick and for a kid, very heavy. I sometimes think how much that would’ve weighed if it was standard iron and not titanium.

It came down in a rural field in the south of New Zealand and the secretary of the primary school I went to was of the family that owned the field. It made a fun show and tell item.

At the time no one knew what it was, and titanium was a classified material so they had to wait for the government to show up and then eventually after correspondence with the yanks gave it the all clear.

People wondered if it was extraterrestrial and this wasn’t helped by finding two field mice huddled inside when it was recovered.

thenthenthen4 days ago

Apparently it crashed near Java in the Indian Ocean [0]. Any news on retrieval efforts?

[0] https://t.me/roscosmos_gk/17407

alserio7 hours ago

Near Java? From memory, it will definetely be garbage collected, can't say when.

AdamN4 hours ago

Depends on whether it landed in the C.

tristramb2 hours ago

Efforts are already underway to convert it to Rust!

asdefghyk18 hours ago

Any information on ocean depth in that area? Or did it float? for a while?

From NASA article - https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id... Apparently, it broke up too 4 pieces soon after launch time and it was the lander that was circling earth for 53 years..

From https://www.npr.org/2025/05/12/nx-s1-5395631/a-soviet-era-sp...

"...The Russian space agency Roscosmos said in a Telegram post that the spacecraft reentered Earth's atmosphere Saturday morning at 2:24 a.m. ET and landed in the Indian Ocean somewhere west of Jakarta, Indonesia. It said Kosmos 482 reentered the atmosphere about 350 miles west of Middle Andaman Island off the coast of Myanmar. ..."

NASA gave the same reentry time and landing location for the spacecraft in a post on its website...."

deepsun18 hours ago

Too expensive. It's very hard to find even an aircraft carrier at the surface, ocean is just too big. Metallic non-moving things at the bottom is easier, but it still often takes years to find a large sank ship, yet alone a small round spacecraft.

But there are many ocean hunters ready to jump on the assignment, if you secure funding.

asdefghyk18 hours ago

There have been searches for years for MH370 airline in Indian ocean and it has not been found. I guess the problem there is getting a more accurate? location where it came down...

pests17 hours ago

They’ve found debris though, so we know it’s fate.

nancyminusone18 hours ago

Darn. Where's an inexpensive carbon fiber based submarine when you need one?

kennethrc16 hours ago

It's been down there waiting!

netsharc15 hours ago

They're going to find MH-370 instead...

rhcom218 hours ago

Coming down at "145 miles per hour-plus" and a "mass of just under 500 kg and 1-meter size" I would imagine there are just pieces out there now.

deepsun18 hours ago

That's nothing compared to Venus. There it's 500C with sulfuric atmosphere.

pinewurst17 hours ago

A lot like New Delhi...

bell-cot17 hours ago

And ~1,300 psi at the surface, and a few other features.

On the upside - undeveloped property is readily available, and quite affordable.

sph2 hours ago

> quite affordable

The commute to there is the real problem

+1
perihelions16 hours ago
SequoiaHope18 hours ago

Apparently it was quite dense as to be able to survive the Venetian atmosphere so there has been speculation it may stay somewhat intact.

perihelions17 hours ago

- "Venetian"

That one means "having to do with Venice". Of Venus would be "Venusian", "Venereal" (yes, really), or "Cytherean". Or, one of a dozen others—it's a Greek god-name; there's millennia of culture to drawn on.

There's an entire Wikipedia entry devoted to this adjective question,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytherean

SequoiaHope16 hours ago

Oh right! I did know that but typo’d it thanks.

+2
ForOldHack14 hours ago
rhcom218 hours ago

It was suppose to come down with a parachute but fingers crossed.

squigz16 hours ago

That Italian atmosphere is really rough!

dotancohen13 hours ago

Smells worse than the venereal atmosphere the craft was designed for.

donatj3 hours ago

I am usually an exceedingly rational person yet for some silly reason I had this creeping feeling for the last couple weeks I've known about the probes return that it was going to crash into my house and kill me. Very unlike me to think that way.

The persistence of the thought itself kind of gave me the creeps.

I can't explain it, it's absurd. The odds were astronomical in the truest sense of the word, and yet it did not happen and I am grateful.

whatagreatboy3 hours ago

It's very similar to people getting scared about SKylab so, you are not alone.

ChuckMcM16 hours ago

I had the live tracking up and went to bed and apparently it fell out of the sky about 90 minutes later :-). I was hoping that if it started burning over North America I'd be able to go out and see it go over. Alas.

I heard rumors that it had a Plutonium RTG on it for power, that would have been a bit spicy if it had splatted across the ground somewhere. Does anyone have any primary sources on whether or not that was the case?

perihelions14 hours ago

There's nothing to indicate there were radioisotope sources on this mission.

Public information: [0] describes the six publicly-disclosed Soviet radioisotope launches up to 1989. (It's not a primary source; it's hard to find those). This one's not among them—none of the Venus missions were reported to use radioisotopes. This Kosmos 482[1] and the rest of the Soviet Venera program were publicly described as being solar-powered, which is evidence against any engineering need for other power sources. The landing probes themselves carried chemical batteries (they were very short-lived landers).

Nothing I can find through search contradicts [0]. Wikipedia's list[2] is the same, and adds two more post-1989 launches.

Seven radioisotope payloads have already reentered/crashed into Earth before—four Soviet or Russian and three American; some thermometric generators and some simple heaters; containing either polonium-210 or plutonium-238. That's not counting fission reactors, of which there are several in addition (I'm unclear the precise count of which nuclear reactors returned to Earth, or simply exploded in orbit; or what became of the latter group).

[0] https://nuke.fas.org/space/sovspace.pdf (Gary L. Bennett, "A look at the Soviet space nuclear power program" (1989))

[1] https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id... ("Two solar array wings, with an area of 2.5 meters, had a span of 4 meters. Due to the spacecraft's proximity to the Sun at Venus, the wings were only partially covered with solar cells".)

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_power_systems_... ("List of nuclear power systems in space")

shoo7 hours ago

fascinating and disturbing -- i had no idea that there were fission powered satellites.

stevage13 hours ago

> Earth isn't the planet that Kosmos 482 was supposed to land on.

Such a great line.

azinman214 hours ago

I’d love to know (up to a point) how flat earthers / firmament-die hard explain how a Soviet era satellite comes and crashes back on the planet.

Loughla16 minutes ago

They just say things like this didn't happen. It doesn't take creative writing skills to just call people you disagree with liars. It's very lazy overall.

Muromec14 hours ago

Nobody saw them falling, so no reason to explain fake news

Waterluvian14 hours ago

They always can. But I think it’s sometimes kind of interesting to see the creativity of trying to reconcile such an outlandish belief with the evidence.

th0ma514 hours ago

Well as always the belief is immutable, the evidence can only serve that belief and so if it doesn't it surely isn't evidence in that confused perspective.

spartanatreyu14 hours ago

<sarcasm>Obviously it hit bounced off the sky dome and came back down.</sarcasm>

ArthurStacks14 hours ago

Oh, they will think up something, and gullable useful idiots will continue to believe they actually believe that stuff, whilst they rake in the money from content engagement, laughing at the idiots trying to convince them the earth isnt flat for the 9000th time

HelloUsername17 hours ago

Related:

Old Soviet Venus descent craft nearing Earth reentry https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43873531 02-may-2025 280 comments

After 53 years, a failed Soviet Venus spacecraft is crashing back to Earth https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43831602 29-april-2025 46 comments

Soviet-era spacecraft plunges to Earth after 53 years stuck in orbit https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43949025 10-may-2025 0 comments

A Soviet-era spacecraft built to land on Venus is falling to Earth instead https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43938644 09-may-2025 1 comment

pawanjswal12 hours ago

Guess Kosmos 482 finally decided Earth wasn’t such a bad backup plan after all!

KyleBerezin17 hours ago

I wish we could push things like this into a higher orbit. High enough to not be a danger and to be preserved for future generations.

jl617 hours ago

There’s a (very slim) chance this one is being preserved at the bottom of the Indian Ocean for whoever invents submersible scanner drone swarm tech to find it.

kortilla17 hours ago

Doing this requires immense amounts of energy because you need to match its velocity to safely bump it.

xchip13 hours ago

USSR scientific accomplishments were amazing, and more considering the lack of resources they had, so bad many of their breakthroughs have been overshadowed or credited to people from other nationalities

aaron69512 hours ago

[dead]

codedokode17 hours ago

It is not surprising that it remained intact for 53 years. In USSR, unlike modern times, all products were made to last, like refrigerators, motorcycles, TV sets or clothes, because there was not enough supply to replace them every year.

II2II15 hours ago

I was under the impression that the Soviets launched multiple identical missions to account for failure. In other words: rather than investing a huge effort into reducing the probability of failure of a singular mission, they invested in multiple missions in hopes that one would be successful. If that is the case, it sounds like the had much more confidence in the engineers who did the design work than their ability to do quality control while building.

Any how, it's meaningless to compare old Soviet products to new Western ones. The older Soviet ones are likely still in use due to an incentive to maintain and repair them. Old Western products were probably just as repairable, but there was less incentive to do so. As for new Western products, there are both technological and business reasons to ignore repairability.

ogurechny6 hours ago

For starters, there was little to be shared between unique programs in space industry and products for general public, they belonged to different universes even when being made by the same factories. In fact, it was quite common to point to the split between praise of spaceships in media and regular people living like swine, both in servile and in critical works. Which, of course, is not in any way specific to USSR, or very original.

“Quality” and chances of success are relative, you need to have reference points. As space missions had none, they all were test flights AND scheduled flights at the same time. If boosters for a new rocket to Venus, radios and solar panels were ready, you launched a rocket with a dummy to check how those systems behaved, and so on.

pezezin16 hours ago

We are talking about space junk, a dead chunk of metal just orbiting Earth until its inevitable decay. Saying that it was "intact" and "built to last" is disingenuous.

coolcase15 hours ago

Yeah Elons car will last forever in space, but probably won't start. Maybe it will.

dylan60416 hours ago

But it wasn't built to orbit Earth for 53 years. It was built to land and survive for a period on the surface of Venus. I can think of few places more difficult to survive, so to say it wasn't built to last is disingenuous on your part.

rdtsc15 hours ago

> It is not surprising that it remained intact for 53 years.

I mean we couldn't use for the last 53 years and it didn't fulfill its mission. It's like saying the boulder in my yard has remained intact for 100 years "they just don't build them like they used".

squigz16 hours ago

Weren't USSR products rather famously poorly built?

spyrja16 hours ago

I think "simple but rugged" would be a more apt description. Less moving parts than the US equivalent, easier to maintain, and usually fairly sturdy. On the other hand, since cost was a constant concern, Soviet equipment was generally not designed with aesthetics in mind. So "ugly but reliable" might be another way to put it!

codedokode16 hours ago

I saw still working after many years Soviet refrigerators, motorcycles and TV sets, so maybe they were built not that poorly after all. Of course there could be some survivorship bias, but generally modern (inexpensive) things seem to break earlier.

sssilver15 hours ago

A lot of them were built like a tank. Their issue was lack of features, not lack of reliability.

pavel_lishin15 hours ago

I wonder if they just had a lot of repairs done to them, due to the unavailability of alternatives.

linksnapzz16 hours ago

Depends; they might not have had the most expensive materials available, or the trickiest assembly quality, but were often designed so that the inevitable repairs could be made quickly in the field by minimally-trained personnel.

See: Zaporozhets 968 vs. Hillman Imp, AK-47 vs. AR-15, T-72 vs. M1.

matkoniecz13 hours ago

One joke/observation was that soviet product will either fall apart immediately or will last 70 years.

Other ones:

> What's as big as a house, burns 20 liters of fuel every hour, puts out a shit-load of smoke and noise, and cuts an apple into three pieces? A Soviet machine made to cut apples into four pieces.

> What is it? It doesn't glow, and it doesn't fit into ass. Answer: soviet thing to glow in the ass.

> A man walks into a shop. He asks the clerk, “You don’t have any meat?”

> The clerk says, “No, here we don’t have any fish. The shop that doesn’t have any meat is across the street.”

Also, exaggerated (but partially true) stories about factory fulfilling production quota for 10 tons of nails by producing single enormous 10 ton nail.

stodor8911 hours ago

"This year a semiconductor factory, next year a whole-conductor factory!"

"Soviet microchips are the largest microchips in the world!"

tguvot7 hours ago

Soviet microchips have 8 legs and two handles