Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Buran from the dead?  (Read 14672 times)
desktopsimmer
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 692


Re-Building Mir, with a Hammer and Sickle


WWW
« on: December 09, 2008, 11:42:53 AM »

Back maybe back from the dead, or at least some of the technology.

http://www.russiatoday.com/scitech/news/33330?gclid=COCv5ua5s5cCFQtoQgodKj3mjg
Logged

Winner of the "weakest HW/OS combination on which SSM2007 runs with acceptable frame-rates" - Admin

Proud SSM2007 Linux User
STS78MEMBER
Mission Specialist
****
Posts: 347



« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2008, 01:46:29 PM »

Very interesting article thanks for sharing.  I guess a SIM for Buran would be pretty boring or accomodating to some since landing is automatic.  Grin
Logged

"No bucks; no Buck Rogers!"
desktopsimmer
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 692


Re-Building Mir, with a Hammer and Sickle


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2008, 03:49:57 PM »

The only missions that I know that Buran was to accomplish was creating Mir 2, a USSR Space telescope with Habitat module. There was rumour that Buran was also going to be used to setup weapon platforms, as USSR thought that was one of the main goals of the US Shuttle. Regarding landing it, yes it was fully automated and made it's own choices for approach, but this was done to upstage the US Shuttle. However, I think that the CDR would take over flying pre HAC phase just like the US shuttle.

Here's a list of the difference's between the two
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_program#Key_differences_from_the_NASA_Space_Shuttle
Logged

Winner of the "weakest HW/OS combination on which SSM2007 runs with acceptable frame-rates" - Admin

Proud SSM2007 Linux User
USA~Driver
Guest
« Reply #3 on: December 11, 2008, 05:38:21 AM »

Since Buran (Snowstorm) was destroyed in 2002 along with Energia it would be like designing a whole new technology to replace it, No? In the end you'd prolly end up with 'a new shuttle' by the time it was all said and done. As much as the Russians tried to come up with something different, They pretty much came up with what NASA already Had.

The Energia launcher I think could have some potential. A modular system - different configurations of boosters and even extra stages stacked on the rocket, Could turn it into a general-purpose heavy launch vehicle.

BTW. That hanger roof collapse at Tyuratam killed eight people.


Logged
enterprise_69
Just joined training
*
Posts: 18



« Reply #4 on: December 11, 2008, 10:37:37 PM »

Something the author of that artical missed and phrased incorrectly is that the U.S. Space Shuttle can land automatically though none never have as we have the worsld best pilots flying the Shuttle. If I remember correctly the USSR also got a hold of the U.S Shuttle plans and basically copied our Shuttle, but nothing new there as they have always tried to copy our aircraft(B-29, B-1, ...).
Logged

STS-1
STS-8
STS-41C
STS-26
STS-27
vertical
Just joined training
*
Posts: 19


« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2008, 11:32:46 PM »

Buran is not coming back.  NASA is not going to invest in a program with no active airframes (there's one in a German museum, IIRC.  Not sure what state it's in) and zero hours of manned space flight.  The press in Russia just seems obligated to run an article about their dead shuttle program every so often and how it is so much more advanced than that Space Shuttle that has actually flown missions for ~25 years. 

We'll likely be extending our own Shuttle program (not by more than a few years though) to wait out Orion and its launch vehicle coming online. 


vertical
Logged
Yossarian1943
Just joined training
*
Posts: 27



« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2011, 10:08:55 PM »

Buran is not coming back.  NASA is not going to invest in a program with no active airframes (there's one in a German museum, IIRC.  Not sure what state it's in)

Found this old thread. Maybe you are still interested in BURAN.

It´s in the Technikmuseum Speyer, Rheinland-Pfalz. You can read the Museum´s HP in English. Wink

http://speyer.technik-museum.de/
Logged

»Warum soll ich nicht beim Gehen« -
Sprach er - »in die Ferne sehen?
Schön ist es auch anderswo,
Und hier bin ich sowieso.«
Wilhelm Busch
Spaceguy5
Astronaut
***
Posts: 176


Astronaut Wannabe


« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2011, 02:06:03 AM »

A museum is planning to refurbish and complete one of the Burans that was only partially constructed. http://englishrussia.com/2011/06/24/the-second-chance-for-buran/
Logged

STS-8, STS-26, STS-27, STS-88, STS-93, STS-100, STS-116, STS-130, Arex 1X Testflight
Yossarian1943
Just joined training
*
Posts: 27



« Reply #8 on: July 28, 2011, 03:01:32 AM »

Nice article, and the bad condition allows some interesting views on shuttle construction.
Logged

»Warum soll ich nicht beim Gehen« -
Sprach er - »in die Ferne sehen?
Schön ist es auch anderswo,
Und hier bin ich sowieso.«
Wilhelm Busch
Spaceguy5
Astronaut
***
Posts: 176


Astronaut Wannabe


« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2011, 03:37:09 AM »

Yeah. It's very obvious how similar Buran is to our own space shuttle, they truly were aiming for an exact copy.  Have you ever seen the photos of the US Shuttles being constructed?
Logged

STS-8, STS-26, STS-27, STS-88, STS-93, STS-100, STS-116, STS-130, Arex 1X Testflight
Moonwalker
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 936


« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2011, 04:07:25 AM »

Yeah. It's very obvious how similar Buran is to our own space shuttle, they truly were aiming for an exact copy.  Have you ever seen the photos of the US Shuttles being constructed?

Yes. And I even have got 51 high res pdf drawings on my HD which show the (US) Shuttles structure and location of the different systems in it. I tried to find the source but I can't find it anymore. Otherwise I would have posted it.

The structures of the Shuttle and Buran indeed are quite similar. Except that the OMS pods and main engines are missing. And the leading edges of the wings also don't have the RCC tiles (reinforced carbon–carbon). This actually indicates that Buran was a little less complex. But this is anyway backed up by the fact that Burans computers were running a software converted from Soyuz computers which was considered to be not fully developed.

But I think it would have been nice to see Buran become fully operational later on. Sometimes it's a real shame what governments do with their space flight programs. At least the US Shuttles won't rust away Cry
« Last Edit: July 28, 2011, 04:09:01 AM by Moonwalker » Logged
Spaceguy5
Astronaut
***
Posts: 176


Astronaut Wannabe


« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2011, 05:51:55 AM »

I think I know those PDFs. They used to be on the NASA Human Spaceflight website, but were taken down. You can still access them through the Wayback Machine.
Logged

STS-8, STS-26, STS-27, STS-88, STS-93, STS-100, STS-116, STS-130, Arex 1X Testflight
Cthulhus
Space Shuttle Mission 2007
Commander
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 2,114


Crew/Moderator


WWW
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2011, 12:38:27 PM »

Incredible ...
USA stop their Space Shuttle for a "Apollo" concept.
The Russian will stop their Soyuz in 2010 for a Space Shuttle concept ? (Buran 2.0)

What's next ? Boeing will stop producing Air-plane for a Zeppelin concept ?
Logged

- The Space Shuttle Mission 2007(tm)Team -

Moonwalker
Shuttle Pilot
*****
Posts: 936


« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2011, 09:21:08 PM »

Incredible ...
USA stop their Space Shuttle for a "Apollo" concept.

Meanwhile I agree that it was a bad mistake to cancel STS (STS-135 actually did make me come down to earth again). Developing a MPCV is not bad though. But not having the capability which STS had is a very bad course for the future of NASA I think.

The Russian will stop their Soyuz in 2010 for a Space Shuttle concept ? (Buran 2.0)

Never heared of something like this. There was talk in the past to make Buran fly again in future. But it was just talk.

I think that Soyuz CSTS is more likely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSTS
Logged
Yossarian1943
Just joined training
*
Posts: 27



« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2011, 09:46:47 PM »

But not having the capability which STS had is a very bad course for the future of NASA I think.

Not only for NASA and the US. The possibilty to carry tons of payload back is the biggest plus for the Shuttle.
Logged

»Warum soll ich nicht beim Gehen« -
Sprach er - »in die Ferne sehen?
Schön ist es auch anderswo,
Und hier bin ich sowieso.«
Wilhelm Busch
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC
SMF Theme Designed by XP Concept