HISTORY OF SCIENCE My friendship with K. E. Tsiolkovskii began in 1914 and continued until his death. I have kept his notes, letters, and photographs.
I will describe our struggle for Tsiolkovskii's priority in the field of astronautics and rocket dynamics. The reader will wonder why such a struggle should have occurred, since Tsiolkovskii has long been recognized throughout the world. However, in his day the situation was much more complex. Tsiolkovskii was scarcely known outside Russia, while in Russia itself rocket dynamics and astronautics were regarded as unimportant, unnecessary, and even undesirable because they might detract effort from the successful flying machines produced in Russia.
There are days in a man's life which influence entire months and years, and sometimes one returns to such days after many years. The second of October 1923 was one such day. It was a very ordinary day in late autumn — one on which the sky is overcast, and the trees almost bare, their fallen leaves rustling inthe wind. When one is young, all days are beautiful and even the calm days of late autumn possess a charm of their own. The mind contemplates a myriad of wonderful things, and one feels the surge of some obscure but exhilarating strength, creative inspiration, and bustling activity.
It was on just such a day that I rose early and unfolded the newspaper "Izvestiya" (No. 223 of 2 October 1923) which had just been delivered. At the bottom of page four in the section "News of Science and Engineering" I read the following item: "Can this be true? Surely this is Utopia: "In his book 'Die Rakete zu den Planetenraumen' published in Munich Professor Hermann °berth presents rigorous mathematical and physical proof that our modern engineering means are sufficient for attaining escape veloci ties and overcoming the force of terrestrial gravity. Astronomy Professor Max Wolf described Oberth' s calculations as 'scientifically flawless.' The ideas expounded in the book coincide with the experiments of the American professor Goddard who recently proposed a sensational plan of sending a rocket to the Moon. The ample means available to the American scientist enabled him to embark on most important experiments, while Oberth's book provides them with a solid theoretical foundation.
"Oberth presents detailed descriptions of the machinery and apparatus capable of overcoming the Earth's gravity; furthermore, he proves that the human organism is capable of surviving a trip to the planets, and that the spaceship can also return to Earth.
"The author also discusses the profitability (:) of such an enterprise. The cost of the machine was calculated at one million gold marks. The practical-minded Germans think that a rocket flight to the Moon is hardly worthwhile. It is much more important that such rockets be put into orbit around the Earth, becoming miniature moons in themselves that can be used as observation stations, for signaling to all parts of the Earth by means of mirrors, for exploring still undiscovered countries, etc. They also have not ignored the strategic value of such artificial moons...
"The author imagines a trip to the Moon and back as follows; the rocket is connected to a sphere filled with fuel. Upon arrival at the desti nation the rocket is detached from the sphere and lands, while the sphere continues to revolve around the planet; when the time comes for the return trip to Earth the rocket is again connected to the sphere." I read this item with bated breath. What about Tsiolkovskii? Why are Oberth and Goddard given precedence? Where is our Soviet priority? In short, I asked myself a thousand "why's," but could not anser a single one. Does the author of this newspaper article know about Tsiolkovskii? Is Tsiolkovskii known to the editorial board? I rushed to my bookshelves and took out a thick volume of the journal "Novosti Nauki" ["Science News"] for the year 1903— a single copy which I had found way back in 1915 or 1916 in a second-hand bookshop in Moscow, after a prolonged search. Tsiol kovskii's article was clearly entitled "Exploration of Interplanetary Space with Reaction Vehicles." Why, then, did they neglect Russian priority in this remarkable field— a priority dating back to 1903, i. e., twenty years earlier? All these questions were burning to be answered. There could not be even an hour's delay because work on interplanetary travel was already under way both in America and in Germany. This, at least, was my impression at that moment. I telephoned the editorial office of "Izvestiya," and finally succeeded in reaching the Science and Engineering section.