It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian - buran

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 09:47 PM
link   
It was very intresting project. Or combination of two: buran and enegy(name of rocket)

anton1234567890.xaker.ru...

in this movie shown how it flying up, but what more intresting there is no peope inside ( and it 1980s). buran landed by it self with aqurasy of 3 meter.




Rocket energy can carry 100t.
In nasa research centers are talking to launch space ship to jupiter to study its moons. But for this project they would use nuclear power engine.
Also it would over 40t. so there are no rockets that can take it in space. Nasa are thinking of Russian rocket energy.(give russian money and they will build Energy)




posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 01:30 AM
link   
actually we are more than capable of building the nuclear powered rocket on our own



posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Minor nitpick, the boosters name was Energia, and is still the most powerful booster yet designed and built. It can lift nearly 100 tonnes into geosync earth orbit, and was chosen in a cut down configuration to lift the Buran. The Buran could carry larger loads than the US Shuttle, because it carried no main engines, all the lifting power was on the boosters, which were all reusuable.

Three were built, and after the first flight it was decided that the flight cost was too expensive, and the Russian space agency cancelled the program, instead concentrating on the Soyuz, which was providing a comparable amount of science for a lot less cost. An external orbital capture module was subsequently developed for Soyuz, allowing cosmonauts to work on captured satalites in replace of the cancelled Buran.

NASA has so far rejected Russian offers to service Hubble, since NASA has palced a ban on shuttle flights not to the ISS, and refuses to allow the Russians to service Hubble, giving the Space Observatory another 4 years of life. NASA has never given a reason why it has rejected Russian offers.



posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
actually we are more than capable of building the nuclear powered rocket on our own


DO YOU KNOW WHAT ARE YOU TELKING ABOUT?
"nuclear powered rocket" there is no such thing and never will be.



posted on Jun, 25 2004 @ 08:58 PM
link   
sure it will not use nuclear power to get out of earths orbit but if we want to go farther in space we are going to have to build nuclear powers space vehicles its the only way.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 07:29 PM
link   

DO YOU KNOW WHAT ARE YOU TELKING ABOUT?
"nuclear powered rocket" there is no such thing and never will be.

There already have been nuclear powered ram jets that were developed (never flown) and it is only a matter of time. Ion thrust could be nuclear powered etc etc. Also, look at Project Orion:

www.islandone.org...



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 07:34 PM
link   
What year exactly was this made in? Im thinking if it was erly ebough the Americans ripped off the idea, and made their own shuttle.



posted on Jun, 29 2004 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
What year exactly was this made in? Im thinking if it was erly ebough the Americans ripped off the idea, and made their own shuttle.


Get real here is a quote and a URL to follow:
"The American shuttle design was studied intensively by Russian rocket scientists, but important aspects of it were rejected based on Soviet engineering analysis and technology"
www.astronautix.com...



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by AD5673
What year exactly was this made in? Im thinking if it was erly ebough the Americans ripped off the idea, and made their own shuttle.


More like the other way around. The Soviets copied the aerodynamic configuration of the American Orbiter to reduce risk.

www.aerospaceweb.org...



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 02:33 AM
link   
The american shuttle predates the russian one. The russian one looks alot like the american one dont you think? Its not like the specs of the shuttle were top secret or anything Im sure they could have wrote to nasa and got info on it ,but that thing is a rip off of the american one. Last I heard the russian one was sitting in a park in russia due to a lack of funds to keep it flying.



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Last I heard the russian one was sitting in a park in russia due to a lack of funds to keep it flying.


This is a common misconception. The Soviets built several mock-ups up their shuttle for various test purposes. One of these did end up as a display in a park in Moscow. It was supposed to be converted into either a restauarant or an amusemet park ride of some kind. Another test vehicle was a landing training craft used to train cosmonauts who would pilot the actual shuttle. Last I heard, it was shipped to Australia and put on display during the 2000 Olympics. The vehicle is apparently still there and is currently stored in a parking lot.

Buran was the only vehicle that was completed and capable of flying into space. It was placed in storage. However, the building it was being stored in collapsed in 2002, and it is believed that the Buran was destroyed.



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by aerospaceweb

This is a common misconception. The Soviets built several mock-ups up their shuttle for various test purposes. One of these did end up as a display in a park in Moscow. It was supposed to be converted into either a restauarant or an amusemet park ride of some kind. Another test vehicle was a landing training craft used to train cosmonauts who would pilot the actual shuttle. Last I heard, it was shipped to Australia and put on display during the 2000 Olympics. The vehicle is apparently still there and is currently stored in a parking lot.

Buran was the only vehicle that was completed and capable of flying into space. It was placed in storage. However, the building it was being stored in collapsed in 2002, and it is believed that the Buran was destroyed.


Actually the Australian one was a fully orbital capable production model of Buran. 3 examples were produced in full before the project was cancelled, one of which was destroyed in a warehouse collapse, another one was shipped to Aus as you said, and the third ended up in the Moscow Space Museum (this was the one that made the initial orbital flight).

Several other partially completed examples or training examples were shipped around the country as static displays or decommisioned in place.



posted on Jun, 30 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   
The version that ended up in Australia was not orbit capable. It was an aerodynamic test vehicle used as a landing trainer. It was equipped with four jet engines at the tail so that pilots could make touch-and-go landings to practice landing the orbiter.

"The program also included six full-scale mock-ups used to test a variety of manufacturing, assembly, and flying quality characteristics as well as handling procedures. Among these was a piloted flight test vehicle
fitted with four jet engines and capable of taking off under its own power. The "analog Buran," as it was known, was used to make repeated landings and collect data needed to develop an autopilot and automated landing system. This vehicle was later put on display for over a year in Sydney, Australia, for the 2000 Olympics. The owners actually attempted to auction it off for $6 million through a Los Angeles radio station, but no buyers were found, and it is believed that the vehicle still remains in Australia."

You can learn more about it here:

www.meniscus.net...
www.aerospaceweb.org...

The one on display is Gorkiy Park in Moscow was a full-scale mock-up. It was a structural test article used to evaluate the loads on the airframe. Additional information on its fate can be found here:

aeroweb.lucia.it...

As far as space-worthy craft go, a total of five were planned. The first two were named Buran and Ptichka. Buran made the only trip into space but was damaged on re-entry. Rumors say that it could not be repaired and was no longer flyable. It was placed in storage at Baikonur and was probably the one lost in the collapse of the hangar in 2002.

Ptichka was the second craft and was due to make an unmanned flight in 1991 but never did so. It was eventually to be upgraded to carry a human crew, but I don't believe it was completed. It was also stored at Baikonur, but I have been unable to determine its ultimate fate.

The third unnamed vehicle was due to be the first to make a manned flight, but I believe only the external shell was built and the interior was never completed. It was also put into storage, perhaps in Moscow, but I haven't found any conclusive information.

The fourth and fifth vehicles were under construction but stopped in the late 80s or early 90s. The incomplete vehicles were scrapped at the production site.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join