Soviet version of the Space Shuttle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_(spacecraft)

by cullenking • 15 years ago

33 28 15 years ago

en.wikipedia.org

chli• 15 years ago

There is one exposed in Germany at the "Technik Museum" in Speyer. The story behind that particular model is quite amazing.

Taken from : http://speyer.technik-museum.de/node/647

"After the end of the Russian space shuttle program, a long odyssey began for the BURAN OK-GLI. In 1999, after 10 years of storage, it was shipped to Sydney where it was exhibited as a tourist attraction during the Olympic Summer Games. Subsequently the shuttle was taken over by an investment group from Singapore who was planning a world-tour with the BURAN. However, the first and last station of the tour was Bahrain. Due to financial differences the shuttle was seized and put into storage in the harbor of Bahrain. In the summer of 2003 the BURAN was acquired by the museum but transport to Germany was delayed because of legal struggles for five years. In early March 2008 finally the time had come - The BURAN was loaded onto a cargo ship. The voyage to the Technik Museum Speyer could begin."

sasvari• 15 years ago

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=buran%20speyer&#...

google images reveals some amazing pictures of the transport to the museum.

Soupy• 15 years ago

It's interesting to note that there was a recent story that went around in September about the Buran being "rediscovered" in a junkyard. This is interesting since the traditional history of the Buran states that it was destroyed when the hanger it was stored in collapsed. I don't read Russian so it was hard for me to follow the story so take this with a grain of salt.

source: http://www.mk.ru/photo/social/1090-buran-prinesennyiy-v-zher...

pavel_lishin3• 15 years ago

Quick translation: "Even the impossible happens. You'd think that an abandoned spaceship laying on a Moscow street would be something out of science fiction. Alas, it's reality. Correspondent "MK" discovered the Soviet orbiter Buran laying, like garbage, on the outskirts of the capital. Nobody seems to care that at one point it was the symbol of our country's might in space."

(Disclaimer: haven't spoken Russian regularly since I was 10, but luckily, newspapers are written for that sort of literacy levels anyway.)

thingie2• 15 years ago

One interesting difference from the American program that had always intrigued me is that Buran was carried horizontally on a heavy launch pad with gear to erect the whole unit on the launch site, moving on pretty much ordinary railway tracks, hauled by off-the-shell diesel locomotives, while the Shuttle has to be moved in vertical position, very carefully and slowly, on a very special vehicle, that cannot be done in a stronger wind, and so on. For me, it was always like real version of the american space pen and Russian pencil urban legend. The Russian solution here is obviously superior in every its aspect.

growt• 15 years ago

I think the reason is that the shuttle is using the old Saturn V infrastructure and the Saturn had to be transported vertically. The infrastructure (launchpad, etc) is really expensive, so this was a rather smart choice.

pvg2• 15 years ago

A lot of the infrastructure for storing and moving the Shuttle is inherited from the Apollo program.

Whatever's going on here looks convoluted enough -

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/107/315442494_6d3239a0ff.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2010/2028067672_2ba6479d74.jp...

Seems pretty hard to tell what solution is 'obviously superior' unless you're a rocket-moving engineer or somesuch.

oiuytghyujki• 15 years ago

Supposedly Buran's launch pad is also due to this.

Because it's pad was built on top of an earlier Apollo pad the shuttle launches in the wrong orientation and has to make a roll just after takeoff to head into orbit.

The Russians copied this non-optimal arrangement for Buran believing that there must be some advantage that they didn't know about but Nasa had discovered,

thingie2• 15 years ago

Shuttle needs to be assembled and erected (though in the opposite order?) somewhere and somehow as well. (And requires a giant hall to do so.)

But yes, of course, I tell it mostly as a joke to counter the space pen story. I'm sure that there is some reasonable rationale for this solution.

burgerbrain4• 15 years ago

The Buran was also capable of landing entirely by itself, something I don't believe the shuttle can do even now.

pavel_lishin3• 15 years ago

I'm not sure what you mean, can you elaborate? Do you mean that Buran can land without computer assistance?

rriepe• 15 years ago

The shuttle always lands by itself. Looks like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R2dCWZ92ew

If you've seen the shuttle on the back of a 747, that's just for transport, not landing.

marbu• 15 years ago

I remember reading about this issue in chapter dedicated the Challager disaster in 'What Do You Care What Other People Think? '. Even in the begining of the shuttle program, the landing was controlled by computer with exception of two things: astronauts had to load the tape with landing instructions into the computer (there was several tapes for various scenarios) and lower the landing gear before touching the ground.

bane2• 15 years ago

It's likely that the Shuttle design may be lighter as it only has support weight in one direction while the Buran design requires it to have load bearing structures for two orientations.

IgorPartola• 15 years ago

Wouldn't you want structural integrity in all planes upon landing?

smackfu2• 15 years ago

OTOH, the "very special vehicle" already existed from the Apollo program so it was pretty practical to reuse it.

There is actually a lot of history from the Apollo program on why they chose to use what they did. Trains and barges were considered as well as the crawler they ended up using. Remember that Cape Canaveral is on a marsh, and that they had to make a turn between the VAB and the launch pads.

smackfu2• 15 years ago

Here is the documentation I was thinking of:

Choosing a method:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4204/ch6-3.html http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4204/ch6-4.html

Details on the crawler:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4204/ch13-1.htm...

adlep• 15 years ago

From the space/engineering/scientific point of view the cold war period was actually quite beneficial to both Soviet Union and the United States. Now, the budget of both US and Russian space programs is like a shadow of its former self. These days some folks in the US are shelling millions of dollars to build a wooden replica of Noahs Ark in Kentucky.... http://arkencounter.com/ I want my cold war back!

Shengster• 15 years ago

I like how the organization behind this wants people to "donate" for their cause, while the ark itself will be owned by a private corporation.

Nice swindle eh?

If the project doesn't work out, they keep the cash donations, if the project works out, they charge people to see it.

Soviet version of the Space Shuttle

Related Stories