Author Topic: The Concord (Read 4107 times)

JimBear · « **Reply #135 on:** May 15, 2003, 12:45:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Boroda
Americans have great technological culture and have a lot of money, but Russians had to keep up with them having the industry they were given, and use smart designs and scientific research... Combibing American technology and Russian/European engineering art - we could walk on Mars 10 years ago...

I agree with you on this, the counterpoint being if that the cold war had moved more agressively into the high frontier the same might have happened even earlier.

Scootter · « **Reply #136 on:** May 15, 2003, 02:44:01 PM »

I hope I live long enough to see our Russian brothers and us get past the political bull **** and join together in a true and real push into space. With all the talent on both sides we will get to Mars. I am now 41 do you think this is possible?

When you get past our government’s (both sides) tainted rhetoric I have found we are not a very different people and really have the same desires and goals.

I would like to meet Borada and over a few drinks talk about our culture and country, I would not waste any time over our governments, as I have found this is not very important at an interpersonal level. Really how much time do any of you spend with your mates talking about religion or politicks?

Am I out in left field here or is anyone else getting tired of this bantering back and forth about who did what first or whose better? It is kind of like someone from the University of Florida arguing with someone from Florida State over who has the best football team or what’s the best collage. Who cares they are both good and you will never win the argument.

Can you Imagine someone from another planet reading these posts about who copied what or what nation is better, I think they would really have a laugh. I think it would be like listening to a school yard conversation between two 8 year olds arguing about who’s dad can beat up who’s dad.

I have gone back and without the emotion read some of the old posts, I am as guilty of the my dad is better syndrome as anyone else, but it really is a but humorous.

My two cents worth

Take care all,

swoopy · « **Reply #137 on:** May 15, 2003, 06:00:51 PM »

Concorde's the best example of great engineering, a supersonic airline, probably one of the reasons why i became an engineer. i hope virgin buy it cause i want a fly in it someday.

Furball · « **Reply #138 on:** May 15, 2003, 06:16:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
Name another transport vehicle with over 350 million miles logged with less than 20 deaths.

But that contradicts the original claim that its based on departures/time in air?!

NUKE · « **Reply #139 on:** May 15, 2003, 08:28:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball
But that contradicts the original claim that its based on departures/time in air?!

Yeah. There have been about 112 shuttle launches ( I think) and two have been lost, killing everyone. That's a pretty scary average.

Overall the shuttle has been a failure IMO. It was intended to be a cost-saving way to get payloads into orbit and service existing equipment in space.

It has ended up being very expensive to operate and we have lost two of them to catastrophic failures.

But launching a reusable space transport like the shuttle ( or any space launch) has never been routine. Millions of things can go wrong that could result in a loss. The shuttle is enormously complex and any space launch is a risk.

Maybe the next generation shuttle ( or space-plane) will come closer to the original idea of providing a reusable, cost- effective platform.

I know one thing, and that's that we won't give up or give in when we run into setbacks along the way.

muckmaw · « **Reply #140 on:** May 15, 2003, 10:35:37 PM »

Oh...nevermind.

I lost track of what this was all about.

Naso · « **Reply #141 on:** May 16, 2003, 02:42:55 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by muckmaw
Oh...nevermind.

I lost track of what this was all about.

I'll help you, it's the usual noodle lenght contest.

~~Scootter.~~

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #142 on:** May 16, 2003, 02:57:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Boroda

So far R-7/Soyuz is the safest launch vehicle ever made, technology perfectied after almost 50 years of production...

I heard that R-7 rockets by Korolev Design Beauro is also inexpensive to launch.

I predict that the Russian Space Agency will bounce back at "Soviet" levels (1960s and 80s) if USA's talented artist, actors, and entrepeneurs were to go for a 20 million dollar joy ride on a Soyuz (but i want the Buran

) every year:D

Boroda · « **Reply #143 on:** May 16, 2003, 06:56:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE

Overall the shuttle has been a failure IMO. It was intended to be a cost-saving way to get payloads into orbit and service existing equipment in space.

It has ended up being very expensive to operate and we have lost two of them to catastrophic failures.

Exactly what I meant. Buran was a failure, but it's good we didn't abandon "disposable" spaceships and launchers.

OTOH, Buran was a quite different concept. If not the 1992 "separation" disaster, we could have a pretty cheap launcher capable of bringing 200-250 tons into orbit.

Buran was a 99% military project (just as space shuttle). But I think the whole concept was much better designed and didn't repeat some of the American mistakes. Well, you guys were the first to make a reusable vessel...

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE

But launching a reusable space transport like the shuttle ( or any space launch) has never been routine. Millions of things can go wrong that could result in a loss. The shuttle is enormously complex and any space launch is a risk.

Maybe the next generation shuttle ( or space-plane) will come closer to the original idea of providing a reusable, cost- effective platform.

I know one thing, and that's that we won't give up or give in when we run into setbacks along the way.

We already have a project of a reusable ship launched from an An-224 Mriya. It's already on the drawing board, if not in the production plans.

BTW, what about European "Hermes" project and Japanese shuttle?

NUKE · « **Reply #144 on:** May 16, 2003, 09:54:06 PM »

Buran is a copy of the Shuttle no matter what you try to say Boroda.

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #145 on:** May 16, 2003, 11:36:49 PM »

Since Molyina Design Beauro can't come up with a solution to improve their original design, they selected a straight aerodynamic copy of the US space shuttle for the Buran configuration (maybe to save time and money).

Buran Timeline
http://k26.com/buran/Info/Timeline/_72-82/_72-82.html

On the bright side though, the Buran/Energya configuration is way different to the US SSO. The "Energya" rocket is powered by liquid propellant (which is safer than the US's S.B.R.) and it's designed to carry the prototype shuttle orbiter by Molyina. The Buran orbitter is also different to the US SSO. The main engine is not present to the Buran orbiter and she has an on-board computer that can be use to land the Buran by herself without a pilot on board:)

I think the Buran project would be revived if USA's brightest and talented artists, actors, and multi billionare entrepeneurs were to go for a 20 million dollar joy ride on a Soyuz "throw-away" capsule every year for 10 years:D

NUKE · « **Reply #146 on:** May 17, 2003, 05:43:35 AM »

The important thing to remember is that the Buran is a shuttle copy, despite Borada's claims that it is a totally unique concept.

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #147 on:** May 17, 2003, 09:42:38 PM »

Energya would be used someday by NASA for Mars manned mission (if the Russians let them). Energya is the only rocket out there that meets NASA's requirement to have a lifting power of at least 100 tons (the Energya had 55 more tons of lifting power with 8 boosters + Energia-M upper stage) for a proposed Mars manned mission. NASA proposed to develop their own heavy lift rocket of their own but technically inferior to the Energya called "Magnum". The cost of developing such a rocket will run into billions of dollars for the American taxpayer. Worse still, Magnum will only be half as powerful as Energia and take years to develop and test. The whole Mars manned mission program has to wait on Magnum (or permision from Russia to use the Energya) being built.

Energya

Buran + Energya

Boroda · « **Reply #148 on:** May 18, 2003, 12:39:44 PM »

Nuke, the concept is the same, I mean the main purpose: ability to steal sattelites from the orbit. Completely "cold-war"-type 100% military thing. The implementation is absolutely different. Ike posted a picture of Energiya launcher above, with four booster rockets. Is it possible to use Shuttle with 4 boosters?...

Ike, unfortunately, Buran will never fly again. In 1992, when "independant" Kazakhstan tried to seize Baikonur, Russian military destroyed all ground fueling structures. Square kilometers of kryogenic equipment were simply cut off and brought to Russia on cargo planes...

I told you that my Father was a scientific director of ground capital construction (concrete stuff, launch facility and runways), and retired from the Army in Dec. 1987, four months before the first launch. But he has dozens of friends and students (some of them leading military scientific instituts and other research organisations now) who worked there, so he had first-hand accounts on what happened there.

Buran was a great effort for the whole Union. Millions of people worked on it... It costed us maybe almost like WWII, and definetly more then a Bomb. It's very sad that all this heroic (sorry for this word, but IMHO it's right) effort went down the drain when the great Empire felt apart

BTW, most of the pilots trained for Buran flights are dead now

Only the few of them left, like Magomed Tolboyev. They were probably the most professional flight team in history of mankind, ready and able to fly and safely land anything lifted into the air. Their typical excercise was landing MiG-25 without engines, or IL-62 airliner as a glider too...

If you are interesten in it - please visit http://www.buran.ru

Ike 2K# · « **Reply #149 on:** May 18, 2003, 01:35:34 PM »

is Buran's exit doors at the rear?