Author Topic: Buran vs USA's space shuttle (Read 2211 times)

-duma- · « **Reply #45 on:** January 14, 2003, 10:57:17 AM »

The shuttle can do a wheelie on landing, therefore it's better than the Buran.

miko2d · « **Reply #46 on:** January 14, 2003, 11:11:54 AM »

CyranoAH: From what I know, the Buran was a very fine piece of engineering, but it was very expensive as well...

No sh#t - being hand assembled. Actually, money was not an issue, soviet workers being paid nominal wages - but the time it would have taken to assemble a new one, starting with sorting the millions of lousy components for ones actually within acceptable tolerances.

Even the space shuttle is barely cost effective in industrial terms,

It's not - the Shutle and Space Station only made sence in terms of assembling a manned mission to Mars - which got scrapped. So NASA is trying to sneak that project on us and keep the component programs going by coming up with inane reasons for their separate existence - trying not to mention a word "Mars" in the process.

miko

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #47 on:** January 14, 2003, 11:25:09 AM »

If only the two countries had worked together during the cold war/space race... we may actually be able to get past our moon... but to do the programs individually... what a fukin waste of money, time and resources.
-SW

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #48 on:** January 14, 2003, 11:29:25 AM »

That would negate the whole driving force of the rival space programs SW, to beat the other side. Look how it all went down the tubes as far as a Mars mission after the Soviets proved incapable of building a workable moon rocket.

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #49 on:** January 14, 2003, 11:50:06 AM »

this is how the buran looks like

udet · « **Reply #50 on:** January 14, 2003, 11:50:37 AM »

Russians are better at copying.

midnight Target · « **Reply #51 on:** January 14, 2003, 11:53:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tommy
NASA says it looks like the shuttle because the shuttle plans can be baught from them. As can be for all publicly funded programs. Saw it on Discovery chennel.

Anyone ever see Tommy and HiTech at the same party? Hmmmmmmmm?

Raubvogel · « **Reply #52 on:** January 14, 2003, 12:58:02 PM »

Boroda moved to LA and changed his name to Ike?

Boroda · « **Reply #53 on:** January 14, 2003, 02:07:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Nah, it was a high altitude, high speed interceptor. Unfortunately (fortunately?) it wasn't that good at the job it was designed for, so they turned it in to a spy plane.

25s flew over Israel in 1970 BEFORE 25 officialy entered service. It was armed after successfull recon service.

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #54 on:** January 14, 2003, 02:08:15 PM »

buran cockpit

piggyback with the an-124

Boroda · « **Reply #55 on:** January 14, 2003, 02:13:50 PM »

Ok.

Buran will never fly again.

In 1992 when USSR felt apart, Kazakhstan stated that Baikonur is now their property. Russian military literaly hacked everything they could ant carried it to Russia on cargo planes...

There were square kilometers of cryogenic equipment... It's impossible to restore it now.

BTW, Energiya was capable to bring 200 metric ton payload to orbit. AFAIK noone was ever able to beat it. Saturn-V (what a great rocket!!!) brought 145 tons IIRC.

Boroda · « **Reply #56 on:** January 14, 2003, 02:17:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
That would negate the whole driving force of the rival space programs SW, to beat the other side. Look how it all went down the tubes as far as a Mars mission after the Soviets proved incapable of building a workable moon rocket.

Ever heard of "Zond" returnable moon orbiters? We had unmanned spacecrafts on Moon orbit before we could launch manned flights.

Moon programm was a horrible waste of resources. No use to repeat American mistakes, and no glory to be second.

NUKE · « **Reply #57 on:** January 14, 2003, 02:31:40 PM »

I got the day off!

I'm not gonna post a list of US planes V. Russian because it is pointless.

The Russians built some fine aircraft.

I just think US stuff is a little ahead of them.

These I consider pretty advanced and/or amazing aircraft

47 StatoFortress
B-58 Hustler
A-5 Vigilante
F-4 PhantomII
SR-71 Blackbird
XB-70 Valkyerie
A-7 CoursairII
F-111 Aardvark
F-14 Tomcat
F-15 Eagle
F-16 Fighting Falcon
A-10 Warthog
B-1 ( ?)
B-2 Spirit
F-117 Nighthawk
F-22 Raptor

StSanta · « **Reply #58 on:** January 14, 2003, 02:40:50 PM »

Heh reminds me of that (urban myth) story.

NASA spends 1 million dollar developing a pen that works in zero gravity.

The Russian bring pencils

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #59 on:** January 14, 2003, 04:45:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
I got the day off!

I'm not gonna post a list of US planes V. Russian because it is pointless.

The Russians built some fine aircraft.

I just think US stuff is a little ahead of them.

These I consider pretty advanced and/or amazing aircraft

47 StatoFortress
B-58 Hustler
A-5 Vigilante
F-4 PhantomII
SR-71 Blackbird
XB-70 Valkyerie
A-7 CoursairII
F-111 Aardvark
F-14 Tomcat
F-15 Eagle
F-16 Fighting Falcon
A-10 Warthog
B-1 ( ?)
B-2 Spirit
F-117 Nighthawk
F-22 Raptor

oooops, you forgot SU-27 Flanker and SU-37 duper flanker on that list;)