Soviet space shuttle could bail out NASA

Prime Time Russia ^ | 1/14/2010 | Prime Time Russia

[dfwgator]

Pavel Sharov from Cosmonauts News Magazine explains the advantages the Soviets had over their rivals in the U.S.

"Our Germans were better than their Germans."

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

That was first thing that caught my eye

[FormerACLUmember]

Delusional Russian Nationalist nonsense.

[Yossarian]

“The USSR surpassed the Americans in technology – U.S. shuttles can only be landed by humans, while the Buran lands automatically,” Sharov said.

So Buran landed in a crosswind before we installed this technology in the Shuttle.... big whoop. It still doesn't explain why their frame warped on re-entry!

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

I think its hilarious

[Political Junkie Too]

-PJ

[Kirkwood]

“Some of the technologies developed at the time are now used in everyday life. Fore example, several heat-resistant materials used to make deep-fryers are a direct result of the research done during Buran’s development.”

I’ll alert Presto.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

LOL

[Frantzie]

More like today - our Russians can do advanced math while NASA is filled with ACORN types in make work jobs like the US Post Office. Isn’t NASA unionized with SEIU union membership?

[Greysard]

With NASA about to retire its ageing fleet of space shuttles, there is a pressing need for viable space transport.

However Buran is not the solution, not any more than making more Shuttles, for the same reason. Too many years passed, too many people retired, and the technology changed. You can't get electronic components any more to make a single little device for anything onboard. And if you decide to go ahead and redesign what you must, you might just as well make more Shuttles, at least that's the devil we know.

Anyway, chances of building more Burans or Shuttles are around zero. Fact is, nobody really needs such an expensive vehicle; back then, when the STS program was just starting, there was hope that it will fly often, be cheap, and the military will be on board. None of that happened, and we know why - because of initial optimism and because of lack of experience with reusable spacecraft.

And even if additional STS or Buran flights were available, where would they go to? The ISS is all set even after STS closes down. There are no plans for anything more spectacular (no Moon, no Mars, no Cuiper Belt.) Why to bother? Even if Russia will want to launch its own (or an international) interplanetary expedition a decade down the road, it will be done with a specialized spacecraft, perhaps built and fueled on LEO. Buran can't be of much use there; quite the opposite, if you have the Energia booster (which ought to lift about 100 tons) then you just send the parts and the fuel up, instead of also carrying the mass of the shuttle back and forth.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

I agree. The technology on Buran is so outdated it would probably cost more money to bring it to flight status.

[James C. Bennett]

Soviet Buran:

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

if you have the Energia booster (which ought to lift about 100 tons) then you just send the parts and the fuel up, instead of also carrying the mass of the shuttle back and forth.

I agree

[MHGinTN]

Pavel Chekov would be so proud ...

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

LOL

[James C. Bennett]

I recall reading in an official report once, that the Space Shuttle was intended to be the space transport work-horse, making 50 trips a year, to make it profitable, and worthwhile.

Are you familiar with the same assertion?

[Ronin]

I am waiting to see what the Chinese do. I am sure they have plans, and I am sure whatever they plan is going to be lower tech than something we would do, but they will do something.

[gigster]

This sounds comparable to taking a ‘52 Chevy from Havana and sending it on the Cannon-Ball Run.

[ErnstStavroBlofeld]

LOL