Contacts Rules Advertising Subscription
Register Log in to the site
Forgot your password?
Enter
Home News Armament Arsenal Military Archive Technologies Forum
New on the site
Events National Security Geopolitics Opinion Results of the week Translations Foreign press Polls
Sniper weapons Artillery and MLRS Engineering troops and transport Aviation Air defense systems Armored vehicles Fleet of the Strategic Missile Forces Individual weapons
Torpedoes and mines Weapons of mass destruction Ammunition Uniforms and personal protection
Documentary Elite The Russian Army The Armies of the world Special services History Photo Archive The Science of survival Soldier's tales
OPK Technologies Cosmos
Main
Previous news
Cosmodromes of the world.
Part 1 I
Next news
Cosmodromes of the world.
Part 2 I
"Technologies" Cosmos
"Buran" and "Shuttle": such different twins
December 30, 2013
When you look at the photos of the cruise spacecraft "Buran" and "Shuttle", you may get the impression that they are quite identical.
At least, it seems that there should be no fundamental differences.
Despite the external similarity, these two space systems are still fundamentally different.
"Shuttle" and " Buran"
"The Shuttle"
The Shuttle is a reusable transport spacecraft (MTCC).
The ship has three liquid rocket engines (LRE) running on hydrogen.
The oxidizer is liquid oxygen.
To make an exit to near Earth orbit, a huge amount of fuel and oxidizer is required.
Therefore, the fuel tank is the largest element of the Space Shuttle system.
The spacecraft is located on this huge tank and is connected to it by a system of pipelines through which fuel and oxidizer are supplied to the Shuttle engines.
And still, three powerful engines of a winged ship are not enough to go into space.
Two solid - fuel boosters are attached to the central tank of the system the most powerful rockets in the history of mankind today.
The greatest power is needed precisely at the start to move a multi ton ship and lift it to the first four and a half dozen kilometers.
Solid fuel rocket boosters take on 83% of the load.
Another "Shuttle" takes off"
At an altitude of 45 km, solid fuel accelerators, having exhausted all the fuel, are separated from the ship and parachuted into the ocean.
Further, to an altitude of 113 km ,the "shuttle" rises with the help of three rocket engines.
After separating the tank, the ship flies for another 90 seconds by inertia and then, for a short time, two orbital maneuvering engines running on self igniting fuel are switched on.
And the shuttle is entering a working orbit.
And the tank enters the atmosphere, where it burns up.
Some of its parts fall into the ocean.
Separation of solid fuel accelerators
Orbital maneuvering engines are designed, as can be understood from their name, for various maneuvers in space: to change the parameters of the orbit, to dock to the ISS or to other spacecraft in near Earth orbit.
So the " shuttles "visited the Hubble orbiting telescope several times for maintenance.
And, finally, these engines serve to create a braking impulse when returning to Earth.
The orbital stage is made according to the aerodynamic scheme of a tailless monoplane with a low lying delta shaped wing with a double sweep of the leading edge and with a vertical tail of the usual scheme.
For control in the atmosphere, a two section rudder on the keel (here is also an air brake), elevons on the trailing edge of the wing and a balancing shield under the tail part of the fuselage are used.
The chassis is retractable, three post, with a nose wheel.
Length 37.24 m, wingspan 23.79 m, height 17.27 m.
The" dry " weight of the device is about 68 tons, take off from 85 to 114 tons (depending on the task and payload), landing with a return cargo on board – 84.26 tons.
The most important feature of the airframe design is its thermal protection.
In the most heat stressed places (the estimated temperature is up to 1430 ° C), a multilayer carbon carbon composite is used.
There are few such places, it is mainly the nose of the fuselage and the leading edge of the wing.
The lower surface of the entire device (heating from 650 to 1260 ° C) is covered with tiles made of a material based on quartz fiber.
The upper and side surfaces are partially protected by low temperature insulation tiles where the temperature is 315-650 ° C; in other places, where the temperature does not exceed 370 ° C, a felt material covered with silicone rubber is used.
The total weight of the thermal protection of all four types is 7164 kg.
The orbital stage has a two deck cabin for seven astronauts.
Upper deck of the shuttle cabin
In the case of an extended flight program or when performing rescue operations, up to ten people can be on board the shuttle.
In the cabin there are flight controls, working and sleeping places, a kitchen, a pantry, a sanitary compartment, an airlock, control posts for operations and payload, and other equipment.
The total sealed volume of the cabin is 75 cubic meters, the life support system maintains a pressure of 760 mm Hg and a temperature in the range of 18.3-26.6 ° C.
This system is made in an open version, that is, without the use of air and water regeneration.
This choice is due to the fact that the duration of the shuttle flights was set at seven days, with the possibility of bringing it up to 30 days with the use of additional funds.
With such a small autonomy, the installation of regeneration equipment would mean an unjustified increase in the weight, power consumption and complexity of the onboard equipment.
The reserve of compressed gases is enough to restore the normal atmosphere in the cabin in the case of one complete depressurization or to maintain a pressure of 42.5 mm Hg in it for 165 minutes when a small hole is formed in the hull shortly after launch.
The cargo compartment with dimensions of 18.3 x 4.6 m and a volume of 339.8 cubic meters is equipped with a "three wheeled" manipulator with a length of 15.3 m.
When opening the doors of the compartment, the radiators of the cooling system turn together with them to the working position.
The reflectivity of radiator panels is such that they remain cold even when the Sun shines on them.
What the Space Shuttle can do and how it flies
If we imagine the system assembled, flying horizontally, we will see an external fuel tank as its central element; an orbiter is docked to it from above, and accelerators are on the sides.
The total length of the system is 56.1 m, and the height is 23.34 m.
The overall width is determined by the wingspan of the orbital stage, that is, it is 23.79 m.
The maximum starting mass is about 2,041,000 kg.
It is impossible to speak so unambiguously about the size of the payload, since it depends on the parameters of the target orbit and on the launch point of the ship.
Here are three options.
The Space Shuttle system is capable of carrying: - 29,500 kg when launched to the east from Cape Canaveral (Florida, East coast) to an orbit with a height of 185 km and an inclination of 28 ° ; - 11,300 kg at launch from the Space Flight Center named after Kennedy to an orbit with an altitude of 500 km and an inclination of 55 ° ; – 14,500 kg when launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base (California, West Coast) to a circumpolar orbit with a height of 185 km.
Two landing strips were equipped for the shuttles.
If the shuttle landed far from the spaceport, he returned home riding on a Boeing 747
Boeing 747 takes the shuttle to the cosmodrome
In total, five shuttles were built (two of them were lost in disasters) and one prototype.
During the development, it was envisaged that the shuttles would make 24 launches a year, and each of them would make up to 100 flights into space.
In practice, they were used much less — by the closure of the program in the summer of 2011, 135 launches were made, of which Discovery 39, Atlantis 33, Columbia 28, Endeavour — 25, Challenger — 10.
The shuttle crew consists of two astronauts — the commander and the pilot.
The largest crew of the shuttle is eight astronauts ("Challenger", 1985).
The Soviet reaction to the creation of the " Shuttle"
The development of the "shuttle" made a great impression on the leaders of the USSR.
It was considered that the Americans are developing an orbital bomber armed with space - earth missiles.
The huge size of the shuttle and its ability to return a cargo of up to 14.5 tons to Earth were interpreted as a clear threat of theft of Soviet satellites and even Soviet military space stations of the Almaz type, which flew in space under the name "Salyut".
These estimates were erroneous, since the United States abandoned the idea of a space bomber in 1962 due to the successful development of a nuclear submarine fleet and land based ballistic missiles.
The Soyuz could easily fit in the cargo compartment of the Shuttle"
Soviet experts could not understand why 60 shuttle launches a year were needed - one launch a week!
Where were the many space satellites and stations that would require a "Shuttle" to come from?
Soviet people living within a different economic system could not even imagine that the leadership of NASA, strenuously pushing a new space program in the government and Congress, was guided by the fear of being out of work.
The lunar program was nearing completion and thousands of highly qualified specialists were out of work.
And, most importantly, the respected and very well paid NASA managers faced the disappointing prospect of parting with their habitable offices.
Therefore, an economic justification was prepared about the great financial benefit of reusable transport spacecraft in the event of abandonment of disposable rockets.
But it was absolutely incomprehensible to the Soviet people that the president and congress could spend national funds only with great regard for the opinion of their voters.
In this connection, the opinion prevailed in the USSR that the Americans were creating a new CC for some future incomprehensible tasks, most likely military.
Reusable spacecraft " Buran"
In the Soviet Union, it was originally planned to create an improved copy of the "Shuttle" - an orbital aircraft OS 120, weighing 120 tons.(The American shuttle weighed 110 tons at full load)
.
Unlike the Shuttle, it was supposed to provide the Buran with an ejection cabin for two pilots and turbojet engines for landing at the airfield.
The leadership of the armed forces of the USSR insisted on an almost complete copy of the "shuttle".
By this time, Soviet intelligence had managed to get a lot of information on the American CC.
But it turned out not everything is so simple.
Domestic hydrogen oxygen liquid propellant engines turned out to be larger in size and heavier than American ones.
In addition, they were inferior in power to overseas ones.
Therefore, instead of three LRE, it was necessary to install four.
But there was simply no room for four main engines on an orbital plane.
At the shuttle, 83 % of the load at the start was carried by two solid fuel accelerators.
In the Soviet Union, it was not possible to develop such powerful solid fuel missiles.
Missiles of this type were used as ballistic carriers of sea and land based nuclear charges.
But they did not reach the required power very, very much.
Therefore, the Soviet designers had the only opportunity - to use liquid rockets as accelerators.
According to the Energia Buran program, very successful kerosene oxygen RD 170 were created, which served as an alternative to solid fuel accelerators.
The very location of the Baikonur cosmodrome forced designers to increase the power of their launch vehicles.
It is known that the closer the launch pad is to the equator, the more cargo the same rocket can put into orbit.
The American spaceport at Cape Canaveral has a 15% advantage over Baikonur!
That is, if a rocket starting from Baikonur can lift 100 tons, then it will also put 115 tons into orbit when launched from Cape Canaveral!
Geographical conditions, differences in technology, characteristics of the created engines and a different design approach have had their impact on the appearance of the "Buran".
Based on all these realities, a new concept and a new orbiter OK 92, weighing 92 tons, was developed.
Four oxygen hydrogen engines were transferred to the central fuel tank and the second stage of the Energia launch vehicle was obtained.
Instead of two solid fuel boosters, it was decided to use four kerosene oxygen liquid fueled rockets with four chamber RD 170 engines.
Four chamber - this means with four nozzles.
It is extremely difficult to make a large diameter nozzle.
Therefore, designers go to complicate and weigh down the engine by designing it with several smaller nozzles.
As many nozzles as there are combustion chambers with a bunch of fuel and oxidizer supply pipelines and with all the "vandals" .
This bundle is made according to the traditional, "royal" scheme, similar to the "unions" and "vostoks", it became the first stage of "Energy".
"Buran" in flight
The cruise ship "Buran" itself became the third stage of the launch vehicle, like the same "Soyuz".
The only difference is that the Buran was located on the side of the second stage, and the Soyuz was located on the very top of the launch vehicle.
Thus, the classical scheme of a three stage disposable space system turned out, with the only difference that the orbiter was reusable.
Reusability was another problem of the Energia - Buran system" For the Americans, the "shuttles" were designed for 100 flights.
For example, the orbital maneuvering engines could withstand up to 1000 inclusions.
All the elements (except the fuel tank) were suitable for launching into space after prevention.
The solid fuel accelerator was selected by a special vessel
Solid fuel boosters were parachuted into the ocean, picked up by special NASA ships and delivered to the manufacturer's factory, where they were preventive maintenance and filled with fuel.
The Shuttle itself also underwent a thorough inspection, prevention and repair.
Defense Minister Ustinov in an ultimatum demanded that the Energia Buran system be as suitable for reuse as possible.
Therefore, the designers were forced to deal with this problem.
Formally, the side boosters were listed as reusable, suitable for ten launches.
But in fact, it did not come to this for many reasons.
Take, for example, the fact that American boosters flopped into the ocean, and Soviet ones fell in the Kazakh steppe, where the landing conditions were not as gentle as warm ocean waters.
And a liquid rocket is a more gentle creation.
than solid fuel."
Buran" was also designed for 10 flights.
In general, there was no reusable system, although the achievements were obvious.
The Soviet orbiter, freed from large main engines, received more powerful engines for maneuvering in orbit.
Which, in the case of its use as a space "fighter bomber", gave it great advantages.
And plus turbojet engines for flight and landing in the atmosphere.
In addition, a powerful rocket was created with the first stage on kerosene fuel, and the second on hydrogen.
Just such a rocket was not enough for the USSR to win the lunar race.
According to its characteristics, Energia was almost equivalent to the American Saturn 5 rocket that sent Apollo 11 to the moon.
"Buran" has a great external similarity with the American"Shuttle"
The ship is built according to the scheme of an aircraft of the "tailless" type with a triangular wing of variable sweep, it has aerodynamic controls that work during landing after returning to the dense layers of the atmosphere – the rudder and elevons.
It was able to make a controlled descent in the atmosphere with a lateral maneuver of up to 2000 kilometers.
The length of the "Buran" is 36.4 meters, the wingspan is about 24 meters, the height of the ship on the chassis is more than 16 meters.
The launch weight of the ship is more than 100 tons, of which 14 tons are fuel.
A sealed all welded cabin for the crew and most of the equipment for flight support as part of the rocket and space complex, autonomous flight in orbit, descent and landing is inserted into the nose compartment.
The cabin volume is more than 70 cubic meters.
When returning to the dense layers of the atmosphere, the most heat stressed areas of the ship's surface are heated to 1600 degrees, while the heat reaching directly to the metal structure of the ship should not exceed 150 degrees.
Therefore, the Buran was distinguished by a powerful thermal protection that provides normal temperature conditions for the ship's structure when passing through dense layers of the atmosphere during landing.
The heat protective coating of more than 38 thousand tiles is made of special materials: quartz fiber, high temperature organic fibers, partially carbon based material.
Ceramic armor has the ability to accumulate heat without letting it pass to the ship's hull.
The total weight of this armor was about 9 tons.
The length of the Buran cargo compartment is about 18 meters.
Its vast cargo compartment could accommodate a payload weighing up to 30 tons.
Large – sized spacecraft could be placed there- large satellites, blocks of orbital stations.
The landing weight of the ship is 82 tons.
The Buran was equipped with all the necessary systems and equipment for both automatic and manned flight.
These are navigation and control devices, radio and television systems, automatic devices for regulating the thermal regime, and the crew's life support system, and much much more.
Buran Cabin
The main propulsion system, two groups of engines for maneuvering are located at the end of the tail compartment and in the front part of the hull.
In total, it was planned to build 5 orbital ships.
In addition to the "Buran", the "Storm" and almost half of the "Baikal"were almost ready.
Two more ships that are in the initial stage of production have not received names.
The Energia Buran system was unlucky - it was born at an unfortunate time for it.
The economy of the USSR was already unable to finance expensive space programs.
And some kind of fate pursued the astronauts who were preparing for flights on the "Buran".
Test pilots V. Bukreev and A. Lysenko were killed in plane crashes in 1977, even before joining the cosmonaut group.
In 1980, test pilot O. Kononenko died.
The year 1988 took the lives of A. Levchenko and A. Shchukin.
After the Buran flight, R. Stankevicius, the co - pilot for the manned flight of the winged KK, died in a plane crash.
I. Volk was appointed the first pilot.
Buran was also unlucky.
After the first and only successful flight, the ship was stored in a hangar at the Baikonur cosmodrome.
On May 12, 2002, the ceiling of the shop in which the Buran and the Energia layout were located collapsed.
On this sad chord, the existence of the winged spacecraft, which gave such great hopes, ended.
After the collapse of the overlap
Sources: http://timemislead.com/kosmonavtika/buran i shattl takie raznyie bliznetsyi http://gunm.ru/news/spejs shattl kak dostizhenie tekhnicheskoj mysli chast 6 poslednjaja/2011-07-21-359 http://www.znanijamira.ru/publ/kosmos/korabli mnogorazovogo ispolzovanija shattl ssha i buran sssr/39-1-0-1481
Author Alexander Ivanov
Article rating
60
2
–
+
9420
The opinion of the editorial board of the "Military Review" may not coincide with the point of view of the authors of the publications
If you notice an error in the text, select the text with the error and press Ctrl+Enter
New Nokian Hakka Green 2 tires.
The Coand effect…
₽
Where did the Palefaces go?
…  How outsourcing accounting will help you save money…
₽
Media: A Spanish boat tried to prevent an American submarine from docking in Gibraltar…
NI: with the adoption of the S 500, the sky over Russia will become almost invulnerable…
"Admiral Grigorovich" began the transition to Sevastopol…
The first non combat losses in the Ukrainian "suicide battalion" controlling the border with Crimea…
The Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine received the first armored vehicles "Varta 2"…
Comments
4
Energet1k_
December 30, 2013 09: 28
↓
There is probably twice as much written about the information shuttles as about the Blizzard.
And after all, the Buran is by no means an exact copy of the shuttle, many unique Soviet developments were implemented in it.
Well, there are great doubts about the need for such ships even now, there are no goals for what to use them for, and they will gather dust in the hangars.
4
sledgehammer102 (2)
December 30, 2013 10:41 am
↑ ↓
Quote: Energet1k_ And after all, the Buran is by no means an exact copy of the shuttle, many unique Soviet developments were implemented in it.
It was the most perfect drone, and its time will come.
As soon as they learn how to launch ships into space from a height of 20 km.
For great things are not so easily forgotten.
11
Canep (1)
December 30, 2013 11:52 am
↑ ↓
The shuttle and the Buran are similar only by the fact that someone in the Politburo poked at the photo of the Shuttle and said: "I want the same thing," and rushed, closed the spiral project, and rushed to create an analog of the Shuttle, not quite understanding why we need it.
We must pay tribute to the designers, they made the Buran in a very short time, for 12 years a ship was created from scratch.
1
Denis (5)
December 31, 2013 02: 44
↑ ↓
Quote: Canep project " spiral" And after all, the "Spiral" was before!
Work on the creation of the" Spiral", including analogues of its orbital aircraft, interrupted in 1969, was resumed in 1974.
In 1976-1978, 7 test flights of the Mig 105.11 were conducted, the head of the Spiral project was Gleb Yevgenyevich Lozino Lozinsky.
If only they wouldnot interfere with him yet!
And the orbital plane, as it was called "Lapot" in the program, flew There was a story about how the friction of his skis on the watermelon strip was reduced, and the article is informative,but more about " Shuttles"
2
Uhe
December 31, 2013 16: 06
↑ ↓
Well no.
The Politburo has nothing to do with it.
In the USSR, the whole system did not work like that at all, there is no need to distort it.
The creators themselves admitted that they simply decided not to build a garden for the first ship, but to use the achievements of the Americans, so the appearance is similar.
Faster, cheaper, you can focus on more important things.
In parallel, we worked on other systems that are already excellent.
The funny thing is that now the Americans are already copying our achievements of that time :)
0
Kir
December 31, 2013 16: 32
↑ ↓
Yes, no, it's not funny at all, But it's Iconic!!!, but another thing is interesting: why do our people take outdated and bankrupt systems and technologies from there with a screech?
it is not clear what is more present in these decisions of illiteracy ( more correctly a half wit) or what is more terrible.
1
papuasimus
January 9, 2014 14: 44
↑ ↓
The "Spiral" is still relevant today.
Ten years ago, I heard from the second hand (not from the first) from the PVOSHNIK (during the formation of the RKO system) that up to two 30mm guns were easily placed on the Spiral, not to mention the equipment for reconnaissance, navigation, maneuvering, and space space missiles in the cargo compartment.
4
slavik gross
December 30, 2013 09: 33
↓
Oh, such a technique was created, and so everything ended lamentably.
It's not even enough to shoot for such things...
The comment was deleted.
2
papuasimus
January 9, 2014 14: 55
↑ ↓
After the first flight of the "Buran" in automatic!!!
mode (no one in the world has ever dreamed of such a thing, fully automatic flight and landing!!! on the machine) and clarifying a huge number of prospects for these systems (I will not list them, there are many of them), the guardian of the interests of the American people, Mikhail Gorbachev ("We are against the introduction of an arms race into space.
Here our interests coincide with the interests of the American people" end quote) nakornyu stopped any attempts to use the Energy Buran system for military and scientific purposes.
For such things, it's not even enough to shoot ... who?
There is still a question who?
6
avt (3)
December 30, 2013 09: 53
↓
A good educational program for those who still think and doldonit that, "Buran" - a copy of the Shuttle .
6
Vasia Kruger
December 30, 2013 12:28 pm
↑ ↓
They are in no way copies.
Just the logic of creating such devices is the same.
The comment was deleted.
1
Kir
December 30, 2013 20: 09
↑ ↓
Excuse me, but what kind of shuttle is the cabin given, what year of construction is this shuttle and has the cabin changed since it was built?
This is one thing different, the fact that not everything is better - it looks more comfortable, better and safer, I'm sorry, but it was like that with the T 90 and Abrams, there is air conditioning and other benefits, but they have a larger dead zone, and the risk of breaking their spine is higher, so.....
The comment was deleted.
2
vlad0
December 30, 2013 09: 56
↓
We hope that we will see the launches of Russian shuttles more than once.
"Buran" was only the first step, the development of technologies.
We canot do anything without space!
4
Ahmed Osmanov
December 30, 2013 10:05 am
↓
Beautiful cars, but it's painful to look at the last photo.
3
poccinin
December 30, 2013 10:14 am
↓
yes, such a project was ruined.
"BURAN" was BETTER THAN a SHUTTLE.this is unequivocal.
The comment was deleted.
3
Mairos
January 9, 2014 10:27 am
↑ ↓
The fact, at least, that the Shuttle could only carry in space what fit into its cargo compartment, and the Energy could both a Blizzard with a cargo in the compartment, and in general any cargo of the order of 100 tons without a BLIZZARD at all.
0
Kir
January 9, 2014 19: 08
↑ ↓
And this is in the minds of some, although I would like to be wrong, just does not fit, look at how hard they are looking for a trace of borrowings in our aircraft of the Second World War, and not only this period, but when you point to borrowing from Us, they look at least as a complete zero, if not worse, as a mentally ill person, especially if it concerns the states.
0
papuasimus
January 9, 2014 15: 00
↑ ↓
At the start, the Shuttle uses its own engines burning fuel (the carrier's power is not enough), and the Buran does not, takeoff is only on Energy engines.
The result is an undeniable advantage in the fuel reserve for maneuvering in orbit, even for a rescue operation, even for a military one.
The comment was deleted.
3
El13
December 30, 2013 16: 31
↑ ↓
They say that it was almost blown up because of this ...
The post flight analysis showed that the probability of choosing such a trajectory was less than 3%, but under the current conditions it was the most correct decision of the ship's onboard computers!
0
papuasimus
January 9, 2014 15: 02
↑ ↓
Exactly!!!
AUTOMATION!!!
1
1c inform city
December 30, 2013 10:30 am
↓
It is necessary to build an orbital refueling and repair complex.
6
tolyasik0577 (1)
December 30, 2013 11:20 am
↓
Nothing is said about the fact that the "Buran" carried out the flight completely in automatic mode.
damn, the amers were always lucky.
both geographically and economically.
the gain in everything is 15 percent and the soft landing of the modules in the ocean.
1
Kuzkin Batyanya
December 30, 2013 12:03 pm
↓
On May 12, 2012, the overlap of the shop in which the Buran and the Energia layout were located collapsed.
- A typo?
1
ed65b (10)
December 30, 2013 12:21 pm
↓
the sad end of a beautiful beginning.
Sorry.
The comment was deleted.
6
kirgudu (1)
December 30, 2013 15: 48
↓
Well, guys, with each such post, I understand more and more that the collapse of the USSR was planned and carried out from the outside with the help of our traitors.
It costs a lot to remove such a competitor from orbit.
7
Falcon5555
December 30, 2013 15: 56
↓
"And plus turbojet engines for flight and landing in the atmosphere."
- There were no them! "
"Buran" was equipped with all the necessary systems and equipment for both automatic and manned flight.
These are navigation and control devices, radio and television systems, automatic devices for regulating the thermal regime, and the crew's life support system, and much much more."
- They were not equipped!
There were no controls in manned mode, no life support systems!
This, by the way, is one of the reasons why the project was quietly closed.
It is strange, but equipping them should have cost more money than was allocated after the "perestroika".
Interestingly, the article contains a photo of an empty cabin of the Buran - where are "all the necessary systems" there?.
Nothing is said about the stupid and shameful copying of the shape of the Shuttle and about how and by whom this decision was made, about the closure of the "Spiral", about the origin of Energy from the lunar project.
A strange article.
Lots of details .
For example: "Heat protective coating of more than 38 thousand tiles" (This is about a Blizzard - very important!).
And the more obvious circumstances are made up (TRD, form) or are not mentioned.
As if its author just picked up material from the Internet in a couple of hours and posted it.
0
El13
December 30, 2013 16: 21
↑ ↓
I absolutely agree.
Who is interested in there is a great website, there is a lot not only about the Buran, but also about our cosmonautics in general: http://buran.ru/
1
Kir
December 30, 2013 18: 54
↑ ↓
By the way, the author of the article did not mention the fact that our thermal protection was superior to the shuttle, and immediately after landing it was possible to touch the surface of the ship without using cooling, as on shuttles, and with regard to the LRE, there are doubts that they had more powerful turbojet engines, but we were inferior to them.
Then it is confusing that our resource was lower, I'm sorry, but we always had a higher margin of safety, and as a result, frequent losses to them in terms of mass dimensions.
Then for which photo of the cabins was to bring, what does it give?, especially since there are several such things as their desire for comfort and ours for maximum functionality, they fly to work!
and it's not a fact that the cabin (situation) would not have changed during further operation, and if there was a desire, it was necessary to bring the very first cabin of the shuttle.
1
askold
December 30, 2013 18: 03
↓
As it turned out, an extremely complex and unreliable system, disasters both during takeoff and landing.
The death of 16 people is the price of her ambition.
To return such a huge object from orbit, heated to the state of plasma, is still a task.
It is easier to create an enlarged one for 6-8 cosmonauts (astronauts)the lander is of the traditional shape as it is now without any wings there.
To take it into space, and already there to dock to another ship, sharpened for the performance of some specific tasks,and intended only for flights in outer space....Although, again, two missiles.
But I have a question:what is this payload in the cargo compartment of the shuttle and what prevented it from being put into orbit by a conventional rocket,is it really a Hubble?
And in general, what is so valuable(weighing up to 14.5 tons) that can be returned from orbit, which cannot be created on Earth, during the time that this cargo was in orbit?
The cargo, at the same time, as I understand it, will also be radioactive.
The comment was deleted.
0
Kir
December 30, 2013 18: 57
↑ ↓
Academician Alexandrov's bright memory had a project of such an engine, but there seemed to be problems with the "exhaust" of radiation, and the same problems in maintenance.
The comment was deleted.
1
Kir
December 30, 2013 20: 01
↑ ↓
But this miracle should start from the Earth, it's another matter to use it in Space, and now such people fly, but look at how many problems arise after the development of their resource, do not remember how much there was a fuss around one (like from the Cosmos series), and here the "fool" is clearly much more serious.
Clutter up the Near Space?, or create some kind of burial ground outside the Earth.
2
sss5.papu
December 30, 2013 19: 08
↓
Buran is an unusual cargo that had to be put into orbit with the help of an Energia rocket - he himself could not go into orbit.
As a result, a single use powerful and very expensive rocket put a landing container for cargo into orbit and burned up .
Why this utter stupidity?
The whole world knew the true state of affairs ,and only in the USSR everyone shouted hurrah.
And what kind of money is wasted?
One Energia rocket cost 3-4 Soyuz missiles.
The shuttle is a reusable system that puts itself into orbit.
And where all the losses are this is the fuel tank.
0
Falcon5555
December 30, 2013 19: 30
↑ ↓
Yes, for reusable flights with cargo return, the Shuttle configuration is an order of magnitude smarter than the Buran Energy.
But the Americans eventually abandoned the Shuttles because of the high cost of their operation.
And they turned out to be unreliable, as you know.
The comment was deleted.
-1
ABV (1)
December 31, 2013 03: 05
↑ ↓
that's what a stupid pseudo patriot stupidly ignores people who just express their opinion???
After all, they write correctly - the shuttle is a reusable system, the buran is a little less...what is immediately a minus to throw?
??
where is the exchange of opinions???
what is the rejection of opponents???
like YOUR opinion is correct, and who does not agree in the negative???
DRIVE SUCH XXXXXXXX FROM THE SITE!!!!!!!!!!!!
2
biglow
December 30, 2013 20: 07
↓
Russians leave but always come back.....
8
rurikovich (5)
December 30, 2013 21: 44
↓
The article is more or less informative in technical terms(i.e. it will do to explain the differences).
I will only add from myself that the main difference, in my opinion, is the different approach of delivering cargo to orbit.
The American made "shuttle" is the rocket itself in fact.
Our shuttle is the CARGO ITSELF for the rocket.
The rocket can be used to launch OTHER cargo as well.
Therefore, only an external similarity is not proof of copying.
Remove the "Buran" from the "Energy" - and it will fly.
Remove the "shuttle" from the fuel tank - and you will get NOTHING at the exit.
Another thing is that at the wrong time, all this was born to us... it's sad...
12
AlexA
December 30, 2013 21: 48
↓
Quote: sss5.
papu As a result, a single use powerful and very expensive rocket put a landing container for cargo into orbit and burned up .
Why this utter stupidity?
To show off in front of your people?
You shouldnot be so peremptory.
By the 80s, after the closure of the Saturn program, Americans were faced with the problem of delivering large, indivisible cargo to near Earth orbits.
The shuttle with its main engines on the bird and an external tank was able to deliver only a maximum of 28 tons.
With the possibility of returning.
There were such tasks.
Well, if it was necessary, for example, to deliver 100 tons without the need to return, then they did not have the funds for such a mission.
That's why they didnot build their own space station.
And in general, for the delivery of non returnable cargo, the Shuttle turned out to be, indeed, a completely inefficient system.
Excessively complex and expensive.
But the Energy Buran system turned out to be more multifunctional.
For example, for the delivery of 20 tons of returned cargo, the main bundle "carrier bird" could be used.
For the delivery of 100 tons of indivisible large sized non refundable cargo: "carrier with 4 sidewalls side container".
This was demonstrated in one of their test flights.
For the delivery of 30 tons of indivisible non refundable cargo: "carrier with 2 sidewalls side container".
Moreover, in all cases, the optimal CRT was used.
On the sides: Oxygen kerosene.
On the central block: oxygen hydrogen.
The main achievement: the technologies of very efficient LRE were developed.
And technologies of heat protective coatings of various types.
Snide remarks about the "irrational" form are "philistine conversations".
We should not be so arrogant about both Soviet and American scientists.
The laws of ballistics and aerodynamics are objective and the same for everyone.
The form is optimal for the selected mission.
And there's no getting away from it.
And the Spiral was closed, because it fulfilled its task: it developed methods and accumulated experience.
As a result of which, by the way, the form of a Blizzard was born.
And also about the reusability of the first stage.
In the liquid stage, not all components are equal.
The most expensive thing is the engines.
It makes sense to save only them.
Rivet tanks - it's cheaper to use disposable ones.
Therefore, the rescue system was designed in such a way that the tanks played the role of a deformable damper ( like hoods in modern cars).
So after the necessary routine maintenance, the engines could be reused.
So the system was both conceived and executed intelligently.
It just fell under the political millstones of the collapse of the country.
I say this first hand.
In the mid 70s, I was lucky enough to work in Podlipki.
In the department for the development of Buran engines.
It was a school for life.
Thanks to Buran.
He'll shoot again!
-1
sss5.papu
December 31, 2013 14: 52
↑ ↓
Quote: AlexA But the Energy Buran system turned out to be more multifunctional.
For example, for the delivery of 20 tons of returned cargo, the main bundle "carrier bird" could be used.
For the delivery of 100 tons of indivisible large sized non refundable cargo: "carrier with 4 sidewalls side container".
This was demonstrated in one of their test flights.
- So isnot it better to withdraw 100 tons of payload , and not dead cargo in the form of a Blizzard - since if you donot need to return it , and at the same time shout -"Reusable ship".
You really "separate the grain from the chaff", and do not write about the "advantages" of this huge stupidity.
1
El13
January 6, 2014 15: 05
↑ ↓
He just wrote to you in Russian in white, what you are asking for now and again write your stupidity about "stupidity"...
2
VMF7981
December 30, 2013 23: 35
↓
I wouldnot be surprised if the roof collapsed at the request of friends...
-2
Danilych38
December 31, 2013 08: 26
↓
Quote: VMF7981 I would not be surprised if the roof collapsed at the request of friends...
It is not necessary to justify your own sloppiness and clumsiness with the machinations of your enemies..
On the topic of the Blizzard..
yes, everything is cool, a lot of technologies, auto planting..
But at what price was this toy given ?
3
GUR (1)
December 31, 2013 08: 50
↓
The article is a school essay, such a promising title and not a horseradish in meaning, what is the similarity?
what is the difference?
so the general data..
nothing interesting.
The comment was deleted.
3
Uhe
December 31, 2013 16: 07
↑ ↓
Aha, the Blizzard itself arose, without the legacy of Ivan the Great and Stalin ;) I grew up in the field :)
0
Kir
December 31, 2013 16: 16
↑ ↓
Well, this is a favorite song of individual......., all the best from the People, or under the wise guidance of " pr avila" (in the opinion of the patriarch)managers, but how is everything the most .......
So immediately the Tyrants (the term itself was misinterpreted - the tyrant originally meant the one who seized power) are to blame Stalin, Grozny, Pavel 1, etc.
0
Vikmay16 (1)
December 31, 2013 21: 00
↓
It's a shame!
It's a shame!
As always
1
vignat21 (2)
January 3, 2014 15: 30
↓
http://abbreviator.ru/?p=768
0
Kir
January 3, 2014 16: 07
↑ ↓
Sure the whole site still see People in this thread are enough at the time, firmly dealt, but contingent will say not much homogeneous from the Patriots to sit down next and pravokatorov parasitic on the subject of Patriotism, just minus the name, though in Italy even patrols with this arm patch is (or was?).
For the link Thanks and happy New Year You wholeheartedly!!!
3
russian
January 4, 2014 23: 39
↓
The article is not bad but suffers from incompleteness.
Specify at least what modifications are shown in the photo.
In the photo of the Buran, it is clearly a modification that has never flown into space and was used only for flights in the atmosphere when testing equipment in manual mode.
By the way, they were going to call it their homeland.
Donot be ashamed to be precise.
Many people have seen the blizzard in podlipki on Baikonur and in other places.
And the system was really unique in its versatility.
The shuttle wasnot even there.
One military application is worth something.
The bomber .a scout .the fighter is a hostile satellite, you can grab and much more.
And civil applications.
And flights to the moon .
Mars.
launch of orbital stations .
So, friends, criticize and think for what.
Happy New Year to all.
0
Sergei75
March 22, 2014 19: 18
↓
http://www.3dnews.ru/799033/
Information
Visitors who are in the Guests group cannot leave comments on this publication.
Latest news
Loading...
Online news
SMI2 News
Rambler.
News
Home Advertising on the site Contacts Rules RSS Forum Questions and Answers
© 2010-2015 "Military Review" Certificate of registration of mass media El No.
FS77-56354 issued on 02.12.2013 by the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technologies and Mass Communications (Roskomnadzor) Rules for using and copying information from the site
Picture of the day
Mi 8 vs UH 60: bells and whistles will not help the "Black Hawk" In Tatarstan, a new generation patrol ship will be laid Russia and China will conduct exercises in response to negotiations between South Korea and the United States The intelligence Service of Somalia uses children An experienced 105 mm howitzer "Hawkeye" with a reduced barrel rollback Who cuts with what: Combat knives of various special services around the world "Watch B".
Fight with the shadow of the Crimea.
Stones and ashes View from the "Tiger": the dress rehearsal of the Victory Parade A drone of Syrians filmed the explosion of a tunnel bomb near Aleppo Sisters of Mercy.
The courage of the weaker sex in times of war, Militant missile bases are burning near Deir ez Zor German media: "Russia is acting faster and more decisively than NATO" The history of the St. George ribbon and the St. George ribbon on Russian awards Jet "Swifts" "Raptor" and "Ruslan": back to the future?
top
up
down
