Soviet "Buran" Space Shuttle (History)

Aerospaceweb.org ^ | 7 December 2003 | Jeff Scott

[mym]

The Soviet Union did indeed build its own version of the American Space Shuttle that was known as Buran ("snowstorm" in Russian). The US had made the decision to develop its reusable spacecraft in 1972. Since the US Defense Department had plans to use the Shuttle for military missions, Moscow felt the need to respond with a comparable craft in order to maintain strategic parity with the West. The Reusable Space System (MKS) was subsequently approved in June 1974 with NPO Energia given responsibility for the project the following October. Though only the first spaceworthy vehicle built was actually named Buran, the entire project came to be known by this designation.

[brivette]

Lack of maintenance will do it every time.

[Mount Athos]

This burden was so enormous and put such a strain on the national economy that it was likely a contributing factor to the demise of the Soviet Union itself.

That's interesting. I've heard historians speculate that the trans-siberian railroad was so costly that it brought down the Russian Government.

[Cincinatus]

Just goes to show you that bad ideas have a life of their own and never go to a willing death.

[mym]

For me the last picture is very sad.

[DBrow]

From what I've read, another major difference between Shuttle and Buran was that the Buran could fly remotely.

The Shuttle must be manned to take off and land.

[CodeToad]

First flew in 1988? I thought for sure it flew before that and burned up over Australia.

[SJSAMPLE]

The ONLY flight of the system was unmanned.

With all their experience in long-term space habitation, they couldn't copy the US life support system as well. Sad.

[Old Sarge]

What an excellent article, THANK you! I followed the Buran for years, and wondered what happened to the craft after the Columbia went down. This just brought me up to date.

This, however, jumps out at me:

this owner also went bankrupt and was forced to abandon the Analog Buran in a Bahraini junkyard ...There the vehicle remains to this day...

What a terrible way for a dream-ship to end.

[mym]

==I've heard historians speculate that the trans-siberian railroad was so costly that it brought down the Russian Government.==

Naa, I'll never beleive this point.
Trans-siberian railroad was built by 1903. And Russian revolution was in 1917.

Railroads are profitable, while spacecrafts (to be honest) practically not.

[Steely Tom]

From what I've read, another major difference between Shuttle and Buran was that the Buran could fly remotely.

That, and the capacity to carry several extra crew members. I'm guessing they would have been "political officers" who could make sure the Buran was piloted to a landing on the correct runway, so to speak.

(steely)

[mym]

==With all their experience in long-term space habitation, they couldn't copy the US life support system as well.==

Russian engineers didn't need to copy US life support system.
Lack of money is the answer. Collapsing USSR is background.

[Mount Athos]

Naa, I'll never beleive this point. Trans-siberian railroad was built by 1903. And Russian revolution was in 1917.

The main route, the Trans-Siberian, runs from Moscow to Vladivostok via southern Siberia and was built between 1891 and 1916.

[DBrow]

No, unmanned flight is a plus, not a minus.

If some awful thing happened abord a shuttle that disabled the crew, nobody could bring it down.

And, if all you are doing is a restocking mission, most of the 30 tons could be supplies, without wasting weight on food, water, oxy, people, and the fuel to boost all that.

There is no evidence that the Buran enviro stuff was lacking.

[bmwcyle]

[cripplecreek]

[bobdsmith]

The configuration comparison picture looks like it has come out of a unit list in the manual of an RTS game.

[mym]

www.buran.ru - lot of info with photo and video

The main differences between the space aeroplane Buran and Suttle-orbiter are follows:
- the automatic landing of Buran from orbit onto airdrome;
- the absence ot the main rocket engine on the orbital aeroplane. The main engine was placed onto a central block of a carrier-rocket ENERGIA which is able to launch into an orbit 120 tonns of payload against 30 tonns for Space Shuttle;
- the hight lift-drag ratio of the space aeroplane Buran is 6.5 against 5.5 for Space Shuttle;
- the space aeroplane Buran returned 20 tonns of payloads against 15 tonns for Space Shuttle orbiter from an orbit to an aerodrome;
- the cutting lay-out pattern of thermoprotection tiles of Buran is optimal and longitudinal slits of tile belts are orthogonal to the flow line. Sharp angles of tiles are absent. The tile belts of the Buran fuselage and fin have an optimal position.

[mym]

==The main route, the Trans-Siberian, runs from Moscow to Vladivostok via southern Siberia and was built between 1891 and 1916.==

Yes, right. Sorry for wrong info.

[OXENinFLA]

Moscow felt the need to respond with a comparable craft

Comparable?

It's practically a copy!