Buran goes up the Rhine....

newsartist · Apr 9, 2008

(Many news links)A Buran, spacecraft is en-route to the Technik Museum at Speyer, Germany, via barge up the Rhine. It will eventually go on public display.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Apr 9, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>(Many news links)A Buran, spacecraft is en-route to the Technik Museum at Speyer, Germany, via barge up the Rhine. It will eventually go on public display.  Posted by newsartist</DIV> But it ain't gonna fly right?I think a trip up the Rhine is below orbital velocity <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Zipi · Apr 9, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>(Many news links)A Buran, spacecraft is en-route to the Technik Museum at Speyer, Germany, via barge up the Rhine. It will eventually go on public display.  Posted by newsartist</DIV> I guess this is a mockup of Buran... The original one were destroyed when the roof of the hangar collapsed on it and its Energia booster.Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_%28spacecraft%29 Molniya: http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya.htmAnd two sad pictures of it: Remains of Buran: http://www.buran.ru/images/jpg/bbur90.jpg Remains of Energia: http://www.buran.ru/images/jpg/bbur89.jpgI'm so pissed off to Russians that they led this really cool piece of technology to fade away so brutal way... Still, this is very typical how things were handled at the old Soviet Union times. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

Zipi · Apr 9, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> But it ain't gonna fly right?I think a trip up the Rhine is below orbital velocity Posted by MeteorWayne</DIV> Actually.... I haven't researched this issue any further, but if it is a this version of buran, then it could even fly: <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" />http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.buran.ru%2Fhtm%2Fanabst.htm&langpair=ru%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8But if I remember correctly they also have a some mocup which they are flying with that really big Antonov aircraft... And I guess this is more likely that one than this turbojet version. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

ThereIWas2 · Apr 9, 2008

The pre-launch video of the latest Soyuz launch showed the cosmonauts and So-yeon Yi being given a tour of a Russian spaceflight museum, and part of that included a tour into what looked like a full size mockup of the Buran parked outside.   It had the name "BURAN" on the side in cyrillic. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

qso1 · Apr 9, 2008

It was long rumored that the flight orbiter, Buran was the one on display for a time at Gorky park. It turns out that one was a mockup. There were two flight orbiters completed, one being Buran (Snowstorm in Russian) the other being Pritchka or Pitchka (Birdie). 3 more orbiters were in various stages of construction an AFAIK, never completed.According to: http://www.buran-energia.com/blog/category/bourane/buran-ok-gli/Heres the status of the Buran orbiters.Buran OK-MT, this may well be the first test article built. Buran OK-GLI, this one appears to be the shuttle with the jet engines used for airborne testing and may actually be Buran 1.01 (See below).Buran OK-M, this one was mainly used for thermal testing.Buran OK-TVA, another heat sheild and mechanical test article.Buran 1.01, the actual flight vehicle (Buran) that was launched on 15 November 1988.Buran 2.01, the other flight article (Pritchka).This was the best I was able to gather. I have a few other sources I may try to compare these to because it always seems the data isn't quite accurate and I'm not sure even this Russian source data is all that accurate.There is also sometimes confusion resulting from the fact the Russian shuttle program itself is called Buran and one of the orbiters bears that name as well. Still, this is very typical how things were handled at the old Soviet Union times. Posted by Zipi We didn't do much better actually. Only in the last decade did we finally build proper facilities to house one of the leftover Saturn-Vs at KSC and IIRC, JSC. KSC complex 37 was well on its way to being forgotten before being converted to the larger Delta rocket launch facility. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

Zipi · Apr 10, 2008

Space.com article: http://www.space.com/news/080409-buran-germany.htmlAbove article says that the second Buran had the turbojets... I'm thinking that only the aerodynamic test shuttle had those and those were not intended to be at the real Buran shuttle. However it could have been an intresting vehicle to have turbojets and on orbit engines but not the SSME. Would those turbojets serve any purpose during the liftoff?Think about the ability to fly Buran from airfield to another without the Antonov plane and the safety aspect of the re-entry because they would be able to fly longer before landing. Still I'm wondering would those turbojets to be able to withstand the re-entry from the orbit to the atmosphere...However the Energia booster was excatly what NASA is now developing under the name of Ares 5. Russians had also plans to develop Energia II (Uragan) booster which was planned to be totally reusable. With Energia they could have launched at least four modules worth of payload at the initial launch to the ISS...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EnergiaIt is a really shame that this fine piece of engineering got scrapped... <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-frown.gif" border="0" alt="Frown" title="Frown" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

qso1 · Apr 10, 2008

As I understood it, the jet engines were for the test vehicle which used to be called the Buran analogue. The flight vehicle did not use them as evidenced by the liftoff and landing photos. As far as turbojets rather than SSME. The Buran had no main engines attached because the Energia core vehicle had them. The turbojets would be of little value during launch.The only purpose having turbojets available at liftoff that I can see is in the event of an RTLS where the turbojets could mean the difference between the orbiter falling short of the runway and making it to the runway.The engines were basically designed to do for Buran what the NASA SCA did for our shuttle. At the time the Buran analogue was being tested (1985). There was no carrier aircraft available to airdrop or transport the Buran orbiter in one piece.The Myasischev M-4 bomber was initially used to transport Buran minus its rudder before the AN225 became available. The Antonov AN225 Dream became available some 3 years after the airborne tests.I don't think the engines would allow Buran to travel great distance. Only enough to get it airborne, fly for a bit and return. Keeping in mind the shuttle and Buran orbiter designs are poor aerodynamically for the purpose of sustained atmospheric flight.The jet engines theoretically would have enabled Buran to land safely in the event of a problem on re-entry where it could be ascertained that the orbiter was going to fall short of the runway. In early U.S. shuttle studies, jet engines were considered particularly as a way to provide go around capability should a missed approach occur during landing.The drawback is of course, the amount of payload capacity traded off which is why our shuttle, and even Buran...ultimately did not use jet engines on the orbiters. I do think the way Burans jets were designed that with thermal protection, they would be okay during reentry. The only potential problem being what to do about the intake openings.Your right, Our Ares V is indeed pretty much an Energia class lifter. The Energia actually demonstrated shuttle "C" capability when it lofted the Polus spacecraft to orbit on its first launch on May 15, 1987. The only real difference between Energia and Ares V is that Ares is an in line payload LV and energia is side mounted payload.I recall the Uragan but even the Energia itself was supposed to be partially reusable. Those large semi boxy looking protrusions on the liquid booster sides were suppose to house booster recovery systems. It was never used as Energia only flew twice and proposals for recovering boosters have so far been more wishful thinking since no booster I'm aware of has ever been recovered except shuttle boosters.At one time, NASA expressed an interest in the Energia as a station launcher and it would have been nice to have the Energia for that purpose. It is definitely a shame the Russians could not continue production on Energia.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

CalliArcale · Apr 10, 2008

About ten years ago (I think) the Russians tantalized us all at the Paris Air Show by displaying a model of a booster called Baikal that might have gone some way towards realizing the original plan for the Zenits -- reusable flyback strap-on boosters.There was a test of a prototype reusable booster sometime later, perhaps five years ago.  The booster appeared to perform correctly in its suborbital hop, and probably survived landing.  Unfortunately, scrap metal scavengers got there first and stripped the booster bare.  (An active "rocket mafia" has developed in some parts of Russia and Kazakhstan.  They track launches so they can find the spent boosters and chop them up for scrap.)  EDIT: Changed "Angara" to "Baikal".  Whoops!  Thanks for catching my error!  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

qso1 · Apr 12, 2008

I remember the original Angara proposal. It had a first stage flanked by what I recall being something like drop tanks. I cannot recall if they were designed to be reusable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

PistolPete · Apr 13, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>About ten years ago (I think) the Russians tantalized us all at the Paris Air Show by displaying a model of a booster called Angara that might have gone some way towards realizing the original plan for the Zenits -- reusable flyback strap-on boosters.There was a test of a prototype reusable booster sometime later, perhaps five years ago.  The booster appeared to perform correctly in its suborbital hop, and probably survived landing.  Unfortunately, scrap metal scavengers got there first and stripped the booster bare.  (An active "rocket mafia" has developed in some parts of Russia and Kazakhstan.  They track launches so they can find the spent boosters and chop them up for scrap.) Posted by CalliArcale</DIV>I'm not quite sure, but I think you're thinking of Baikal.  It is designed to be a strap on booster for the Angara.  I don't think it flew, though.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> So, again we are defeated. This victory belongs to the farmers, not us.-Kambei Shimada from the movie Seven Samurai </div>

Strannik · Apr 13, 2008

The Angara project is still alive. Yesterday, April 14, 2008, director general of Hrunichev center (the developer of the project)  said that beginning of the fly tests scheduled for the 2010, and in the end of 2011 they plan to launch heavy Angara-5 .  It is remains to be seen what come out of those plans. http://www.avia.ru/news/?id=1208119168

qso1 · Apr 14, 2008

I'm not quite sure, but I think you're thinking of Baikal.  It is designed to be a strap on booster for the Angara.  I don't think it flew, though.  Posted by PistolPetehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angara_rocket http://www.russianspaceweb.com/baikal.html The two links detail Angara's current progress and your right. A booster stage called Baikal is part of the newer Angara proposal. <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/5/6/85c9b7c8-91ce-4938-8652-dce57c31091d.Medium.jpg" alt="" /> Above is a quick image I did of Angara as it originally appeared years ago with stap on tanks. I built the model in the image when Angara first started making the rounds. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

CalliArcale · Apr 14, 2008

Whoops!  You guys are right -- I got the names mixed up.  I was thinking of Baikal, which was meant to be a strap-on for the Angara. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff." -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

keermalec · Apr 19, 2008

Killing the world's largest (and one of its finest) launcher by letting its hangar fall into such a state of decrepitude that it collapses on it is perfectly ridiculous! Absolute shame on the technical team in charge of facilities in 2002. Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I guess this is a mockup of Buran... The original one were destroyed when the roof of the hangar collapsed on it and its Energia booster.Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_%28spacecraft%29Molniya: http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya.htmAnd two sad pictures of it:Remains of Buran: http://www.buran.ru/images/jpg/bbur90.jpgRemains of Energia: http://www.buran.ru/images/jpg/bbur89.jpgI'm so pissed off to Russians that they led this really cool piece of technology to fade away so brutal way... Still, this is very typical how things were handled at the old Soviet Union times. Posted by Zipi</DIV> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> “An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.” John F. Kennedy </div>

Strannik · Apr 19, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Killing the world's largest (and one of its finest) launcher by letting its hangar fall into such a state of decrepitude that it collapses on it is perfectly ridiculous! Absolute shame on the technical team in charge of facilities in 2002. Posted by keermalec</DIV><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-foot-in-mouth.gif" border="0" alt="Foot in mouth" title="Foot in mouth" />That statement of you does sound a bit funny.It seems to me, You are forgetting to notice that Russia was in the midst of the major catastrophe. That is collapse of the USSR. Catastrophe  that ensured the loss  70% of GDP (not 7%), poverty for hundred of millions people, and for tens of millions it got even worse, as they discovered they live in medieval kingdoms now, falling further and further back in time with no hope to ever return to normality.

Zipi · Jan 13, 2010

Seems that Buran shuttle is not completely dead:

http://englishrussia.com/?p=361

Ok, far from flightworthy, but it still at least looks like a shuttle and seems to be far better condition than you can imagine from this picture:

http://www.buran.ru/images/jpg/bbur90.jpg

Or it might be some mockup version of Buran shuttle at the first link... But I really hope that it is the original Buran which have visited in space.

Zipi · Jan 13, 2010

From this link you can find amazing amount of very detailed pictures from the whole Buran program:

http://www.buran.ru/htm/mtkkmain.htm

The site is in russian, but don't let it stop your web surfing experience... Just click all the links from top and left hand navigations which you can find. Almost every page has lots of awesome pictures (Buran constructing, first flight, after flight processing, manufactoring next Burans, etc).

Yes, there is almost complete Buran 2K in hangar at Baikonur (or at least there were 2004, I'm not yet aware the status of today). It was Buran 1K which were destroyed. This is just too cool to topic to stop here... I must dig deeper... :twisted:

Zipi · Apr 15, 2010

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDKoFyEe2PE[/youtube]

Hopefully this is video relates to Buran enough to reside in this thread... I don't understand Russian language, but maybe someone who does can make subtitles for this?

trailrider · Apr 16, 2010

Buran goes up the Rhine...and with Obama's "space program" we are up the creek!

EarthlingX · Apr 16, 2010

Zipi":39z0rt20 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDKoFyEe2PE

Hopefully this is video relates to Buran enough to reside in this thread... I don't understand Russian language, but maybe someone who does can make subtitles for this?

I would not call myself a Russian language expert, but i understand enough to say it is related. It is a history of Buran program, which started as a military project, i think called 'Spiral'. They had first launch in 1969, and a special unit of space commandos to use it. It seams to me, the idea was somewhere near X-37B, with more military candy, and finished with the name BOR-4.
Nice video.

http://www.astronautix.com/craft/bor4.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_%28spacecraft%29 ( a lot of external links )

vladdrac · Apr 16, 2010

You know, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia and Germany didn't surprise the world with a real 'space plane'. Hmmm

EarthlingX · Apr 17, 2010

Keep your eye here to avoid surprises

:

http://www.buran.ru/

Google translated page : Why Multipurpose Aerospace System (MAKS)?
original : http://www.buran.ru/htm/maxmain.htm

MAX is a two-stage air launch complex consisting of a carrier aircraft An-225 "Mriya" development ANPK im.O.K.Antonova (Kiev, Ukraine), which established an orbital flight in a manned or unmanned, or a cargo container with an external fuel tank filled with cryogenic propellants.

Wiki : Antonov An-225

vladdrac · Apr 17, 2010

When it comes to 'East and West' sometimes I think of the fable of "The Tortoise And The Hare".

andrew_t1000 · Apr 17, 2010

Have a look at this link!
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/sp ... 0241.shtml

There is a early morning TV show here in Australia, Oz aerobics or something, gorgeous girls exercising, anyway, one morning they were doing their thang under the wing of a Buran!
What really caught my eye were the Roman centurion's trying to do the same moves the girls were doing!
Totally surreal!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHrBpgoi9Ck[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHMqu__TaKc[/youtube]

More links

http://www.experiment4.com/travel/austr ... yburan.php

http://raz.cx/20001123_Buran.html

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/45jack_fil ... n_001.html

http://www.traveljournals.net/stories/87.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK-GLI

Buran goes up the Rhine....

newsartist

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Zipi

Guest

Zipi

Guest

ThereIWas2

Guest

qso1

Guest

Zipi

Guest

qso1

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

qso1

Guest

PistolPete

Guest

Strannik

Guest

qso1

Guest

CalliArcale

Guest

keermalec

Guest

Strannik

Guest

Zipi

Guest

Zipi

Guest

Zipi

Guest

trailrider

Guest

EarthlingX

Guest

vladdrac

Guest

EarthlingX

Guest

vladdrac

Guest

andrew_t1000

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page