How could Buran possibly be revived with buildings collapsing on them or sitting in a park for years as an attraction. The US Shuttles are at least serviceable... you can't say that about the Buran vehicles.
Just like the US space shuttle, I cost far too much and have very little to show for it. The Russians just figured it out faster. You can have hundreds of Soyuz or Falcon9 launches for the price of one Shuttle launch.
One more casualty of the fall of the Soviet Union....which proved by Gorbachev and Yeltsin only to be a huge and unnecessary setback to the progress of humanity.
@LordKaisen thats your opinion, and there's nothing much wrong with it, everyone has opinions. But considering the Iron curtain, and that the Soviet system affected differently the various republics(they were after all, under different policies and leadership), the notion that the Soviet Union was a failure is a relatively refutable stereotype, that has been explained by plenty of former soviets themselves, but even among the former Soviet citizens, they have their viewpoints.
@sovietkotek Im not saying the idea wasn't noble, but the communist system collapsed due to how it was set up. Besides, it wasn't real communism to begin with. Soviet lawmakers, leaders, vips were given preferential treatment, not exactly a government of the proletariat.
@LordKaisen yeah i do know that in the later years,small counter revolutionary reforms changed things such as health care to be prioritized for the higher members of the government and other things like that. And no it wasn't communism, it was the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST republics. Due to human nature, communism would be extremely difficult to uphold. The USSR collapsed because of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. Their reforms caused suffering, starvation, inflation,death,disease,drugs, killing millions
The space plane concept is inferior to the capsule. A capsule can do anything a space plane can do, and you don't need wings to go to the Moon or Mars. Resources should be used to further develop Soyuz and complete Orion.
Without the Russian's the International Space Station wouldn't have ever been built
(The Yank's spent The Entire 1980's & over Eleven Billion of their Currentcy trying to Catch up with the Russian's who had First "Skylab" Then "MIR" and didn't get anything Built [A good thing Mrs Thatcher said NO to any co-investment with NASA When asked by Ragen])
@TSR1989FF why dont you post something that NO ONE KNOWS ABOUT..THE British space program..again how many times has a Brit been to the moon? Oh by the way how many Brit astronauts have hitched a ride on the US space shuttle...YOUR WELCOME!!..CURIOUS how does GB get its satellites into space..??
Why do you bash things you NO NOT HAVE??..jealous?
@hitide286 Now why your backing up a Bigot is beyond me
(Since you've proven before you're not one)
Attually Great Britain after WWII Did persue a Space Programme of Her own (The Only problem was that the Country had been Bankrupted by the War & ""Cirtain Reperations"" to the US which Limited the Scope of what was Realistically Possible on a Purely Financial Level).
Britain is Historically the Third ever country to Launch a Satilite into Orbit
@hitide286 & The "Blue Streak" / "Dark Knight" & "Black Arrow" Rockets had in their day Unparaleled Saftey & Success Record (unlike the Kerosine & otherwise Powered Rockets of the US & USSR).
The Goverments Lack of Interest in Space Programme Development & Convergent Crippleing Cutback's in the Defence Budget in the late 1960's & early 1970's Killed off the Operation's already under way at the time.
"Blue Streak" However was used by the Europian Space Agency & formed the Basis for the Ariane
@TSR1989FF : No Mr. Prime Minister you are wrong again..why is when "historical facts dont make the Soviets ( or today's Russia) look like angels you get your "panties" in a wad? Just like I'm MATURE ( and knowledgeable) to admit when the US screws up, which lately has been alot. 2nd. I've been on many RT vids,especially anything to do with their space program, & Buran. BTW it only flew once, wow.and was destroyed when its building collapsed on it.
@hitide286 The Buran Shuttle may have only flown once but that was due to the fact that after the Cold War the Russians were in no Position to afford a Full scale Space programme or much else
(Dissapointing given that they had many very Interesting Projects on the Agenda).
Besides Unlike the US Shuttle the Buran's "Energia" Launch System was/is Completely
Re-useable & doesn't have the same flaw's which caused the loss of "Challenger" & "Columbia".
@TSR1989FF Well, you finally wrote something we can agree upon when you stated, "after the Cold War the Russians were in no position to afford a Full scale Space program or much else"
The best that the Russians can do is to try to play "catch up" to the U.S., but they can never equal what we accomplished.
Er dude, the reason we have accidents like the loss of Challenger and Columbia, is because we did more. It's called "the laws of averages".
A Home Grown Genius who is to thank for almost every single Russian Space Success between the late 1940's & 1966 (When he died from a Heart Condition which was due to the Time he was Inprisioned in the Gulag during Stalin's Notorious Purges of the late 1930's, which are the Primary
Reason why the Soviet's were almost Defeated by the Germans in WWII & why Korolev didn't live longer)
You've proven to be quite knowlegeable on other Subject's, Don't mess it up now.
@THUD086 Besides what do you mean that this is the First time we've agreed on Something!?!??
You are quite well versed on the Military History of your own Country but don't start going after
""the old enemy"" like this (It's Purile & Pointless, that & unbecoming).
Why can't the US admit that the Russians were (& still are since the Core modual's of the International Space Staition are 100% Russian, & that the USSR was the first to have a Space Station in orbit to begin with) just as Adept.
@THUD086 Now that is an Objective Question (always good).
Contrary to what many think the Soviets had plans to send Cosmonauts to the Moon just like the US,
They encountered the same problems as their rivals when Designing a Rocket that was Powerfull
enough for the Job (the Saturn-5 also being on the Edge of what was Plauseable then) & came up with a Different Solution. Their "M-1" Rocket tried to solve the same Design Differculties as the
@THUD086(Whoops i ment "N-1" [not M-1]) .... Smaller Rocket Engines (30 in total) to do the same overall job.
The "N-1" However was an overall failure, when the First Example was Launched a Single Bolt was
Sucked into a Fuel pump & led to a Enormus Explosion which Destroyed it & sent Debri (some peices the size of a Four Bedroomed house) Flying in all directions over a mile from the Launch site.
To be fair though the Sat-5 was designed with multiple componants Failures expected ...
@THUD086 .... To fail or not work as expected (The stresses & strains experianced during launch making such Fault's inevitable & something to be countered by Exaustative Backup's).
The Main flaw of N-1 Was simpley that the Sheer Number of Engines & Componants made this Problem just too Likley for it to ever really be viable
(in other words it was overcomplexity which was why it never worked).
The USSR Abandoned Moon mission plans about two years after Apollo-11 & moved on to other Projects
@hitide286 Besides I've Studied "Buran" & Soviet Technology for Years so don't start getting all condisending on me i find such Arrogance (a Unsavourary US Tendancy) annoying & Boorish.
Since about 79% of Anti-Russian Bigotry is from Yankee's i find it hard not to want to ring the Neck's of these Arrogant & Indoctrinated Bastards since i've Studied "Geopolitical & Military History/Technology" since the age of 11 & know that most US Based Info is a load of Propagandist Crap.
@hitide286 I Have nothing against you personally (or most US'ite's) so do me a favour by staying out of Business that is nothing to do with you.
I View what i call "Yankee Supremasist's" (People from the US or dependants of who constantly Slander & denegrate anything & everything that isn't yank with no form of logical reasoning) as
Worse than Pig's & the Scum of Terran Kind (something you're not, at least not as i can see) so how i deal with these miserable Garbage is my Business & not yours.
@TSR1989FF So you are a "mild mannered british unionist". So you are one of the folks responsible for the downfall of Britain.
"Anti-Russian Bigotry". The Russians have a history of being pretty fucking mean to their own people. Having said this, Russia will never and can never match what the United States has done in space. I'm glad you've studied "Geopolitical & Military History/Technology" since the age of 11 (Funny). If Energia is such a great vehicle, why isn't it flying?
@hopeurforfreedom It seems i was right about Yankee's starting a Arguement where None Existed
Before for no reason other than Boredom & a strange form of amusement.
Lest you forget that the USSR Did before you...
First Sattilite / First Living Mammal in space /First Human to Orbit the Earth / / First Space man /First Space Woman / First Space walk / First Automated Probe to land on another Planet /
& so on & so on.
Plus next time you blabber leave the Petty Insults behind will you.
@TSR1989FF when someone calls me a yankee supremacist, they annoy me. To begin with, I'm a Southerner and Choctaw Indian. No self respecting Southerner would put up with your tripe. You insult me, I'll insult you. However, my insults are correct, you are a moron. To say that manned space flight is cheaper than robotics is outright stupid. Your lists of firsts? So what, we were first with what counted, man on the moon.
@TSR1989FF Your Energia sure looks alot like the Space Shuttle. Gee...... I wonder where they got the design? You mental midget, you can't compare a Soviet program that never fully developed to the American shuttle. Who's to say their shuttle was superior? Hell it flew twice, the first flight was a failure.
@hopeurforfreedom Typical yank, Thinking that your lot know's everything & Invented Everything.
A Little Something called "Convergent Evolution". Besides the USSR & the US Shuttles Are very different in many aspects & both have Different Advantages & Disadvantages as such.
The Russians Developed the Programee quite considerably attually. The Buran is to this day the ONLY Shuttle to be Flown from start to finish under Remote control for a start (i doubt the US One could do that or ever could).
@TSR1989FF Hey moron, you might want to delve a little further into our program. The reason we sent up people is to actually do something in space. Remote control is a way of doing it cheaper, thats it.
@TSR1989FF Calling you a moron isn't swearing, you idiot. Manned flights are a hellava' lot more complicated and a hellava lot more expensive. That post alone shows you are a moron.
I might disapoint you bu Russians had this designs in 1957's ( the same time Korolev designed his space craft) The project was called Burja ( Storm) and was in fact transcontinental missaile but there is a stricking similarity in configuration. And this is 25 years before US space shuttle program was even on a drawing board
look for a video "Burja Russian Aviation" This is for real. Project was closed because country could not afford two programs and because Korolev had sucsessful tests firs
Did you see the video? It did fly :) In fact all this work ( Korolev and Burja) also had a goal to deliver nuclear charge to US but Korolev acheaved the results first. Then Burja had several sucessfull test flights before project was closed.
Of cause it was built for a diff purposes but it just says that the configuration was not something new for Russians which they had to "steal" from the western world. I just hate when people start saying that Russians stole this and that and never had their own ideas. Science is universal and it would be stupid not to borrow the knowledge gained by somebody before you. As mentioned before both sides borrowed a lot from Germans (Sorry for my spelling errors I am just lazy )
@kalaw12 Agreed because it goes both ways. One could say that the US stole the ideas from Nazi Germany since Werner Von Braun was german. And you are right that science is indeed universal, but that is how it was back in the day. Now thankfully everyone is working together. The Hadron Collider, or Atom Smaher in Switzerland is such an international achievement. As for Buran... Who said that the past does not teach us anything new :-)
why would NASA adopt something not nearly as advanced as the STS. Either way it doesn't matter because Orion/Ares will be cheaper, safer, and superior to both.
@TSR1989FF it is dominated by the european/American empire... Russia is already in it.. Coincidence?
domination is what we want and what we have for the future...
Look at africa/asia... they are decades behind... africa dont even have a program yet.. Coincidence... no way! But africans cant see they are being dumb down!
@Drpepper687 This is true, the only other flight worthy Russian shuttle (1.02 Ptichka) which was almost completed has been sitting in storage for many many years and is also in a state of dis-repair and would require far too much work to be able to fly and no one has or wants to spend the amount of money required to complete & repair it anyways.. And neither the X-37 I don't believe will fly or be of any economically viable use to anyone and either.. Sadly the age of the Space Shuttle is over.
there is nothing left 2 bring out of mothballs im afraid. because russias space shuttles, energia boosters, vehicle assemble plants & entire infrastructure no longer even excised.
The us space shuttle did not completely fulfill it's intended mission, but is far from a failure. It has outlived it's designed lifespan of twenty years. I'm in favor of taking the Russian shuttle out of mothballs updating it's electronics and finding out what it's really capable of doing. Let's find out if it is as good as advertised, Money talks bullshit walks.
Baloney. The Russians only train those riding their Soyuz craft on how their ship works to and from orbit. American training for the ISS occupants is superior to what the Russians could provide.
Europian manned spacecraft is to be ready about at 2010, after 50 years of Gagarin launch and also: Salute, Mir, ISS, Saturn V, Space Shuttle, Buran and etc, Russia did not stop space investigation.
Dude... American tv, including discovery and geographic stated the soviet space technology was and is superior to the US... even now, the Russians train the international space astronauts..
Baloney. The Russians only train those riding their Soyuz craft on how their ship works to and from orbit. nearly all other ISS occupantsare trained in America, in particular at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. The reasons are 1) the majority of the ISS is American made, and 2) Zarya, which is the Russian-made core module of ISS, features significantly older technology. American training is superior to what the Russians provide.
is this a putin unilateral wet dream or something? buran is a rust belt joke. The surviving orbiters are all gift shops in amusment parks. The guys who built it are like 50+ at least if not retired. The technology will be soviet 1982 stuff which is like US 1972, which is when the nicked the blueprints.
And it has ALL the same issues the shuttle has. Ice, no escape profiles worth dick, relatively low cargo and high cost.
that is unless the trolls here now think that shuttles are a good idea
that's over 850 pounds of faked moonrocks from 6 moonwalk missions...i am starting to deeply deeply hate every single russian and serbian troll on youtube!/milwaukee
Hi Mike, it was fun reading your 'Buran is best' comments. How did you become so unhinged? Everytthing you stated is ludricrous. But it was funny! Tell you what: I'll take up a collection to buy a rope for our great American Space Shuttle to tow your pitiful, copycat Buran into orbit. That way, you Buran fanatics can finally and at last truly claim that Buran flew an 'operational' flight in orbit. Hey, we're Americans! We're generous like that.
If automating humans out of spaceships was the goal of the Soviets, Jvarela, one wonders why they bothered to design the Buran to carry humans at all?
The Buran saga is a long one. All the space people thought it was uneeded. Brezhnev's son-in-law rammed it through. Soviet computer chip technology was very primitive at the time and the whole project was beyond the capabilities of the country. When it was launched by computer Gorbachev refused to even watch the lift-off as did many Communist Party theologians at the time who saw Buran as heresy to Marxist ideals. Lots of sound design when in to Buran, it was better than Space Station Mir.
Here's three reasons why the Soviet prime leadership did not bother to travel to Baikounir to watch the launch. One: what would have been the point? To watch a launch of an incomplete spaceship carrying no humans or cargo would have seemed silly. Two: Buran already was beaten into space by our great American Space Shuttle seven whole years earlier, so Buran would have been anticlimatic. Three: Soviet rockets were dangerous. They tended to explode during their first launch, killing dignitaries.
The U.S. plans to retire the Space Shuttle following completion of the ISS and delivery of on-orbit spare parts - end of 2010 but likely not until 2011 due to delays. The Ares rockets won't be ready until 2014 at the earliest, but with delays, who knows. The Russian Soyuz will be the only way to get humans to and from the ISS. Buran, like the Shuttle, would never be cost effective. Better to go with standard rockets and pursue hypersonic research to develop future technology.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
A86, perhaps you need serious mental therapy. Buran indeed was & remains a colossal failure, a spacecraft that never was completed (no life support system) & never flew into space in any way that is proveable. Even you fanatics admit Buran never was launched more than once, and carried no cargo or cosmonauts. Our great Space Shuttle has flown more than 100 times, & upgraded the Hubble Telescope 300 miles above the Earth this week. Your beloved Buran? it's collecting pigeon poop in Gorky Park.
"and carried no cargo or cosmonauts" Not quite correct. It had cargo imitation. Reason is simple. Regulations in the USSR demanded at least one successfull flight of a new space system before human could be taken.
"Our great Space Shuttle" - propaganda.
Fact: 5 flyable crafts build, 2 gone lost killing the crews (40%) I just imagine what you would say if Souyz had such a ratio.
Financially? Target was 200USD per kg, achieved - 16.000USD per kg (20K in some sources).
Aach, using your logic, if we (America) never flew any astronauts aboard our great Space Shuttle, why, we would have had lost no one, exactly like your beloved Buran! So which was better, our Space Shuttle or Buran? Let's see, which has flown over a hundred operational missions and which flew zero? And which was more affordable? Gee whiz, it's a landslide, our Space Shuttle wins. But we Americans are magnaminous. We will generously tow your Buran into orbit with a rope from our Space Shuttle.
Soyuzes will fly for about 20 years more. Shuttles... there are 3 working hulls left, operation will end 2011 latest. Save your rope, maybe you will need it to pick up on soyuz ;)
Hi Aach, granted, the Soyuz craft are pretty sturdy, although prone to reentry emergencies like have happened twice in the last several years. Until the current craziness subsides within our country over what shape the next generation of manned space rocketry will take, we likely will have to pay for rides on the Soyuz.. Unfortunate. It didn't have to be this way; the Shuttle seems perfectly fine for five or more years of flights. Worse, our current president seems to hate the space sciences.
Good point about those reentry emergencies... you can consider it from different angles: on one hand, its bad that it happened at all, on other hand the system provided survival for the crew even in critical situation.. Reentry is a critical procedure, you know why I'm saying that.
I didnt know, Obama has low interest to the space programs - you are closer to the happenings. Perhaps he is acting according to the priorities, and those are on the earth at the moment.
I read in the news that United States Astronauts are going to have to hitch rides on Soyuz to ISS, the government will have to pay Russian government something like 30 million dollars per astronaut per flight. This will be until 2012 or so when they estimate they can get a new replacement to the shuttle. Not saying for sure this will happen, just what they are talking about now but if thats the case I guess the Russians are doing alright.
Pay no mind to Plutoplatter. He hates all things Soviet and always deems Russian craft "inferior" or "failures". I and other space nerds have spent hours debunking his irrational arguments against the Energia-Buran craft and he just started accusing us of being Stalinsts. I think he even claimed the Buran is a "failure" because it didn't fly at full altitude the first flight. That's like saying a car is a "failure" if you don't drive at top speed at all times.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Serbian, you make a clear, ringingly-sensible case for Buran over our Space Shuttle....except it's all wrong. Buran & Energia never demonstrated ANY useablility or safeness. Buran was only 'flown' once, so it never showed it could be re-used. And Energia clearly was a hyper-expensive flop. Elsewise, Russia or other nations or even private corporations would have either continued to use it or purchased them. Our Space Shuttle was & remains superior; over 100 flights and still rockin' & rollin'.
This idea is crazy! Buran was an abject technological and budget-busting failure. Restarting it would bankrupt the Russian space program, and there would be no guarantee that it would ever work. A better alternative would be to extend the program for our wonderful American Space Shuttle, the most successful manned space vehicle program ever, at $250 million per launch. Buran would cost a billion dollars per launch because of the hyperexpensive Energia. Even the Russians are not that crazy.
Think about it again. Buran would be cheaper to launch and reuse several times than US Space Shuttle. It's overall design is much better and that is because of the Energia rocket. With using Energia Russians got the main engines out of the orbiter, they got rid of the problematic external tank, they got rid of the dangerous Solid Rocket Boosters. They made a system that is 100% reusable(US Shuttles are reusable but the external tank isn't), cheaper AND SAFER.
Well, SerbianPaladin, please bless us with your rocket-science wisdom? Kindly explain why 1) Buran never flew a single manned cargo mission into space, 2) the Soviet Union and then Russia abandoned the program, 3) Russia has not revived the Buran, 4) no other nation or private enterprise has either offered to buy the Buran system or even at least tried to lease it, and 5) the Energia was not a glorified, grand-scale external tank (face it; it was). We got ours to work. What happened to yours?
I am a aerospace engineering student so why not try:
1) It was too expensive for a country which faced complete disintegration and economic meltdown
2) Read 1)
3) Russia has improved it's economy, but it's budget is too low for this AND US Space Shuttle has proved that the whole concept was too expensive and a mistake
4)read 3)(second part)
5) Energia is a rocket that is big and expensive, but in a environment it was disegned to perform in it is a very good solution.
5)(continued) Energia was a part of the Buran project, it is superior to the US concept of external fuel tank for two reasons:
(a) It has got it's own engines so the Buran engines can be much smaller, thus saving weight and space (increasing payload by 5 tons)
(b) It was meant to be used as a heavy lifter too, but it was not because of a previously mentioned disintegration of the USSR and economic problems. When Buran got canceled Energia lost all of it's economic advantages(read next post)
Energia became too expensive, because the economy of scale factor was no longer present, it's different if you build 10 rockets for both Buran program and ordinary launches and build only 1 for a few launches. You got yours to work, Russians got theirs to work even better(it got up there and proved it).
"What happened to yours?" I do not understand this question. I am not from Russia, but from SERBIA(Serbia is completely different from Siberia), my country was not in the USSR, nor allied with it
And I'm Albert Einstein. Please, keep your phony education claims to yourself. Even if you indeed are an 'aerospace engineering student', that does not mean that you are a clear thinker blessed with good judgement talents. Proof of my point: Buran never flew a single operational mission, yet you brag about its bigger payload capacity. Well, hey...I say I can lift five more tons than you, but I don't have to bother proving it! That's how 'Buran Braggers' try to make their point. It never works.
You know very well why it didn't fly for the second time, yet, you keep saying that same thing over and over again, ignoring all other arguments(because you have nothing to put against them).
And I just wanted to see you talking abut "phony education", it's irrelevant if I am or am not what I said, it's more than clear that my judgement talents faaar outrank your stone age era "my club is bigger than your club" kind of logic.
Hi Serbian, gee whiz, you're are all worked up about not being allowed to get away with the horsepoop that Buran was better. Now you may not like it, dear friend, but the fact that my facts beat up your facts about which flew more, Buran or our great American Space Shuttle, shows that your high-falutin' reference to your being an 'aerospace engineering student' disproves your credibility. Anyone who says that a spacecraft that never flew a single operational mission is superior is an idiot.
What fact? The only fact you keep mentioning over and over again is " Buran flew only once". That fact was discredited long ago, but since you have nothing more to say you keep repeating yourself. As was said a million times before, Buran programe was stopped because Sovet Union collapsed and their economy plunged into misery. Of course, you want to listen only to the things you like. I never said that US Space Shuttle was garbage, I only said that Buran was a better engineering solution.
And you, Aach, keep missing the glaring, cosmic truth about the loser Buran: nobody wanted it back then, and absolutely nobody in any national or corporate position of power anywhere in the world wants it now, either. Now, you accuse me of repeating this same point. It's true, but it's only me trying to help you, my Buran-brained friend, from embarassing yourself out in polite society. Ranting out in public that your insane insistence that Buran was superior could get you branded as a kook.
Plutoplatter. Do you know that US Shuttle is a copy of Soviet MIG 105? Do you know that Shuttle is the best of makeing barbecue from the Astronauts? Do you also think like many Americans that, ancient greek god Apollo was named with the name of US spacecraft. (Fucking Greeks stole the name of your spacecraft) It's that thrue that, moon was to WINDY for the Americans to make porno movies on it? All you fucking, stupid, brainwashed Americans shut up for good please!!!
you've proven my point you stupid peasant farmer. Pull your dick out of your goat and go read a book. You might learn why everyone in your life thinks you are such an inbred moron. Better yet, just kill yourself now before you breed. God all we need are more delusional peasants like you.
You Energia delusionalists can bluster and rant very well that the Energia was this and that, the most powerful, the least expensive, etc. You do have passion in your beliefs! But strong feelings don't change the fact that Energia flew only twice. Moreover, we don't know how it performed, since both flights were secret (ya gotta love those paranoid Soviets). No new plans to use it have been announced by anyone. And Energia is not a failure, you say? Seems clear it was a boondoggle & still is.
You obviously hate Sovets and are an American nationalist(comin' from Texas maybe?). And yet you talk about strong feelings. All that I draw my conclusions from is DATA, and "Soviet paranoia" made some of it secret, but "American paranoia" made Saturn V or STS data secret, so it's about the same. It's not called paranoia in civilized discussions, but you can call it whatever you want.
P.S. Come on, please give me more of that logic, it reminds me of my way of thinking when I was 5 years old.
Hi Serbian, to say that I have not only no respect but utter contempt for the lying, oppressive, murderous, evil, communist bastards who ran the Soviet Union would be a true statement. Now that I've given my mea culpa, please share why anyone, even 5 years old, should have any respect for the Soviets or their sympathisizers like you? You do sleep with a Buran blanket, yes?
You can think anything you want about their government, I don't like it either(I don't like the US government too). The fact that you hate their government must not make you hate everything out there. I hate the US government, but I wouldn't bomb USA, nor say that Saturn V or STS was a piece of shit. If you hate SU you don't have to hate everything that came from it, Buran for example, or Soyuz. It was a engineering and scientific marvel, but you are too blinded with nationalism to see that.
Actually, I love Russia and its' now free people. If only they can hold on to their freedom and keep that KGB-agent bastard Putin from stealing it all away, in his fevered efforts to return Mother Russia to the dark days of the old USSR. You know, that period of time when walls appeared and people disappeared? Soviet devaluation of life made the design and construction of Buran too unreliable to fly with humans aboard. That is why it was a piece of junk back then, and remains so now.
Buran is not wanted now, yes, but the same stands for the US Shuttle, they were both projects which completely missed their main goal: put people and cargo to orbit CHEAPLY. Buran would have been somewhat cheaper(due to some engineering advantages I already mentioned, but an unstable country made it impossible), but still not good enough(that's why restarting the program now would be just plain stupid). I know what I'm saying and have said it to many people, no embarassment present.
Buran was built to be very safe(it never had a chance to prove it tough),main engines out of the shuttle itself,ejection seats(usable on launch only,of course, and only on low altitude),with no solid propellant boosters...I know you will say again that it lifted no people to space,that's true,the whole Buran-Energia program was a failure,but not because of engineering problems,but because of political ones.Engineering was great,but the country it was built for dissapeared before it could be used
Serbian, again you ignore the indisputable fact that even after the USSR broke up all those years ago, no other nation or corporation since has bought, rented, borrowed, or even bothered to steal the Buran. So, it can't be 'superior'. Now, you argue here quite forcefully that Buran was beautiful. However, international political and commercial spheres of influence clearly think otherwise. That is why arguing in here is meaningless. You're advocating the wrong shuttle to the wrong audience.
Serbian, you don't know what you're talking about at all. Your claim that our Space Shuttle (SS) was overly expensive to use does have some merit...but as opposed to what? The Buran? Let's look at it: our SS costs $200 million per launch. But, since Buran never flew a single operational mission, that means its cost per flight is 'infinite' rubles (as an engineering student, you will recognize the consequences of division by zero). That is why the USSR abandoned Buran. It was a budget wrecker.
USSR itself made its budget into a wreck which couldn't support itself and when it implodes on its own it surely cannot support such a big and expensive programme as Buran, Buran helped, of course, as did any other major development program. US Space Shuttle was waaay more expensive than it's PROJECTED cost was, simmilar story WOULD surely stand for Buran IF the country it was built in didn't cease to exist(with economy plunging into nation-wide starvation).
All that I'm saying is that Buran was an ENGINEERING success, it flew, completely automated, got up there, did the tests and landed safely, with that it proved that it was WELL BUILT. Sadly, well built is not equal to well concieved, because the whole concept of space shuttle(USA or USSR) proved to be a financial dead-end, the only difference is that US economy could sustain it's shuttle, and Soviet economy couldn't. Buran was an engineering success, but an economic(and thus practical) failure.
There is no proof that Buran was a success. Even the one 'flight' was conducted in secrecy. And it likely was falsified. Here's why: Soviet videos show only a few moments of the nighttime liftoff, and short shadowing in the brief landing footage, indicating the landing occurred about noon. But it was only a two-orbit mission. Each orbit takes 90 minutes. So Buran had to have lifted off no earlier than 9 AM in daylight, not at night. That's impossible. The launch likely failed. Some success.
Amazing. Buran is a better concept, with no engines in the orbiter, it suffers less stress on launch and the all-liquid fuel Energia is safer than the dangerous SRB's the space shuttle uses.
@monkeyman1140 Disadvantages: Most expensive parts or Buran/Energia combo are destroyed during the launch. US Shuttle only looses fuel tank. And there is no proof that Energia rocket is safer than solid fuel boosters. How many flights did it do?
i think its a good step for russia, they have used the suyz for so long it would be very useful for bothe NASA and the russian space agency to get this on the roll.
I think we should peruse a new shuttle like RLV and a nuclear powered space only shuttle for going to the moon as in the movie 2001 vs Orion which is a technological dead that will already be obsolete by the time it flies.
shoulda coulda woulda. That was a lame attempted by russia to one up the americans. But, a very successful act of spying. It's a structual clone of u.s. shuttle. Had jet engines. Landed under power. had no crew. Because it never had life support. some poor Ivans ass was on the line. Gotta give'm credit. They got that white elephant off the ground once. The billions they thru away helped burry ussr into the history books.
Damn that totally sucks man. Mybee we should give our space shuttles to russia when were finished with them in 2010 to make way for our new spacecraft which takes asronuats to the moon. Our 3 shuttles are still good for 20 or more launched each.
The american space shuttle would be better off if we gave them to russia because we are sharing a space station that we built together and we need a shuttle for the station when we retire our shuttle program in 2010. We might as well just hand our shuttle to russia because if we didn't they would have no use except stay in museum which is dumb if the shuttles can be used 20 more times each.
No, shuttle is already flying on overtime. They have to use it, because they have no alternatives. Bush spent billions in Iraq, that was promised to NASA. Barry said he might not approve any sort of vehicle, for another 10 years. 40 million are starving, and there are better ways to spend the money.
damn that totally sucks man. Mybee we should give our space shuttles to russia when were finished with them in 2010. Our 3 shuttles are good for 20 or more launched each.
You know what would bail NASA out even more than any Soviet? A kick in the arse from the brass and an actual mission plan to go somewhere other than high Earth orbit for the last 20 years
It isnt a competition. All knowledge is human knowledge it isnt American knowledge or Russian knowledge. The world must work together in order to create lastly peace for all humankind.
USSR military know-how and technology was so advanced and far ahead of US (except only microelectronics)
that even now, after more than 15 years of
stall and destruction,
after US and west stole large part of our most advanced technology through various "science support" projects (INTAS etc.) and bribing our best scientists,
Russia still has very competitive or superior
weapons.
US and western military tech is a huge, super expensive bluff!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Not really. The U.S started the tech industry. So to say were behind Russia is a joke. We have things far better then Russia. F-22, stealth bomber, super carrier, Apache, Dragon skin, and many others. NASA is already making a replacment. Its just that with this crisis it may take it longer to come out.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I was talking about things like cell phones, Tv, computers, Ipods. Jesus your a moron. Most big tech industrys are either American, Japanese or korean. And America started them.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The industrys you fucking moron. What do you not understand? The industrys were invented by Americans. these things would not be what they are today if it wernt for us. Jesus your fucking retarded. I have already been to Japan fuck tard. I lived there on base. OMG I used your the wrong way. Who gives a fuck. So when I rape you here your going to go all nazi about spelling and usage?
Actually the modern electronic television was invented by Philo T. Farnsworth an American.
Paul Nipkow did submit one of the earliest patents for a mechanical television though Charles F. Jenkins may have built the earliest functioning unit.
First computer ever designed was by Charles Babbage in 1871 though Konrad Zuse built the Zuse 1 in 1938 which may have been the first working computer.
The first electronic computers were Colossus built in the UK and the AtanasoffBerry Computer in the US.
hey now last i checked germans, japanese, and americans have worked together for many beneficial (and not so beneficial ) projects. why so much hate and discontent?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I guess Afghanistan was the strongest nation in the world then. Russia couldn't capture the country with their entire military. US did it with a handful of special ops.
Anyway, Russia/USA thing is over. My only concern now is crazy leaders who want to take over the world (that includes GW Bush... what a dumbass).
ohh yeah we capture the entire country,,,put a dirty suck in your mouth, because of these war and ours way of invinsibility though you soon will be standing in the unemployment line..give your paycheck to that special op to keep on trying to capture the country,,idiot.
Don't project your future on me... I certainly will not be standing in the unemployment line with you.
"These wars" had little to do with the problems facing the US. In fact, "these wars" are the only thing preventing total chaos in the US. Could you imagine what would happen if every soldier currently over seas was brought home and released from duty?
What got the US out of the Depression, war. What has kept the US out of another depression, continuous war.
USA Shuttle like to blow up on take off and when landing crappy made usa shuttle
FUCKAMERISCUM666 5 days ago
@FUCKAMERISCUM666 What has America done to you?
Mr41432 5 days ago
How could Buran possibly be revived with buildings collapsing on them or sitting in a park for years as an attraction. The US Shuttles are at least serviceable... you can't say that about the Buran vehicles.
johanlaurasia 7 months ago
Comment removed
KonChul 8 months ago
Just like the US space shuttle, I cost far too much and have very little to show for it. The Russians just figured it out faster. You can have hundreds of Soyuz or Falcon9 launches for the price of one Shuttle launch.
ti994apc 11 months ago
Buran was destroyed when it's hanger fell on top of it... so much for upkeep.
Dogmeat1950 1 year ago
One more casualty of the fall of the Soviet Union....which proved by Gorbachev and Yeltsin only to be a huge and unnecessary setback to the progress of humanity.
sovietkotek 1 year ago
@sovietkotek well the soviet union was a failed policy..wouldn't work under its system.
LordKaisen 9 months ago
@LordKaisen thats your opinion, and there's nothing much wrong with it, everyone has opinions. But considering the Iron curtain, and that the Soviet system affected differently the various republics(they were after all, under different policies and leadership), the notion that the Soviet Union was a failure is a relatively refutable stereotype, that has been explained by plenty of former soviets themselves, but even among the former Soviet citizens, they have their viewpoints.
sovietkotek 9 months ago
@sovietkotek Im not saying the idea wasn't noble, but the communist system collapsed due to how it was set up. Besides, it wasn't real communism to begin with. Soviet lawmakers, leaders, vips were given preferential treatment, not exactly a government of the proletariat.
LordKaisen 9 months ago
@LordKaisen yeah i do know that in the later years,small counter revolutionary reforms changed things such as health care to be prioritized for the higher members of the government and other things like that. And no it wasn't communism, it was the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST republics. Due to human nature, communism would be extremely difficult to uphold. The USSR collapsed because of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. Their reforms caused suffering, starvation, inflation,death,disease,drugs, killing millions
sovietkotek 9 months ago
The space plane concept is inferior to the capsule. A capsule can do anything a space plane can do, and you don't need wings to go to the Moon or Mars. Resources should be used to further develop Soyuz and complete Orion.
voltagedrop 1 year ago
lol may be revived?
a propaganda act to rekindle russias dying space program
monimstarfox 1 year ago
@monimstarfox Ignorant Fool/Baka!
Without the Russian's the International Space Station wouldn't have ever been built
(The Yank's spent The Entire 1980's & over Eleven Billion of their Currentcy trying to Catch up with the Russian's who had First "Skylab" Then "MIR" and didn't get anything Built [A good thing Mrs Thatcher said NO to any co-investment with NASA When asked by Ragen])
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF why dont you post something that NO ONE KNOWS ABOUT..THE British space program..again how many times has a Brit been to the moon? Oh by the way how many Brit astronauts have hitched a ride on the US space shuttle...YOUR WELCOME!!..CURIOUS how does GB get its satellites into space..??
Why do you bash things you NO NOT HAVE??..jealous?
hitide286 1 year ago
@hitide286 Now why your backing up a Bigot is beyond me
(Since you've proven before you're not one)
Attually Great Britain after WWII Did persue a Space Programme of Her own (The Only problem was that the Country had been Bankrupted by the War & ""Cirtain Reperations"" to the US which Limited the Scope of what was Realistically Possible on a Purely Financial Level).
Britain is Historically the Third ever country to Launch a Satilite into Orbit
(Prospero with a Black Arrow Rocket) TBC...
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@hitide286 & The "Blue Streak" / "Dark Knight" & "Black Arrow" Rockets had in their day Unparaleled Saftey & Success Record (unlike the Kerosine & otherwise Powered Rockets of the US & USSR).
The Goverments Lack of Interest in Space Programme Development & Convergent Crippleing Cutback's in the Defence Budget in the late 1960's & early 1970's Killed off the Operation's already under way at the time.
"Blue Streak" However was used by the Europian Space Agency & formed the Basis for the Ariane
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@hitide286 Besides why are you on a Page which is Clearly of no Interest to you??
Besides all that i Stated was the Simple Truth which any Well versed Historian will know,
nothing to get your Underwear in a knot for.
Plus most of our Satilites are launched by Europian & Russian Rockets, Not US So what your point is i'm at a loss to understand.
I Should make it clear that i have no time for those who speak I'll of the Russians out of nothing more than Outdated Cold War Jealousy & Hatrid.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF : No Mr. Prime Minister you are wrong again..why is when "historical facts dont make the Soviets ( or today's Russia) look like angels you get your "panties" in a wad? Just like I'm MATURE ( and knowledgeable) to admit when the US screws up, which lately has been alot. 2nd. I've been on many RT vids,especially anything to do with their space program, & Buran. BTW it only flew once, wow.and was destroyed when its building collapsed on it.
hitide286 1 year ago
@hitide286 What you say... & your actions don't seem to be in Sync on this matter.
(Besides your the one who backed up a Bigot who was unsulting this so what do you expect?)
What give's you the Impression that i Idealise the Russian's???
I Just beleave in credit where credits due (something which many Yankee's i've encountered (mominstarfox for one) seem yet to cotton on to yet).
T.B.C.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@hitide286 The Buran Shuttle may have only flown once but that was due to the fact that after the Cold War the Russians were in no Position to afford a Full scale Space programme or much else
(Dissapointing given that they had many very Interesting Projects on the Agenda).
Besides Unlike the US Shuttle the Buran's "Energia" Launch System was/is Completely
Re-useable & doesn't have the same flaw's which caused the loss of "Challenger" & "Columbia".
Practice what you preach "High&Mighty286"
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF Well, you finally wrote something we can agree upon when you stated, "after the Cold War the Russians were in no position to afford a Full scale Space program or much else"
The best that the Russians can do is to try to play "catch up" to the U.S., but they can never equal what we accomplished.
Er dude, the reason we have accidents like the loss of Challenger and Columbia, is because we did more. It's called "the laws of averages".
The Russkies can't do shit.
THUD086 1 year ago
@THUD086 May i remind you that until the Moon landing Thuddy old chap the USSR Had beaten
the US Everywere else & with everything else ("Sputnik" / "Yuri Gugarin" etc).
The ex Nazi/SS Member & head of the US Space Programme "Verner Von Braun" once said...
"If we don't do something Serious soo theyl'e be Several Planets up there Flying the Hammer & Sickle Flag"
It's a Simple fact that the US had to rely on a Ex-German Scientist to get them into Space while the Soviets had ... TBC
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@THUD086 .... "Sergei Korolev",
A Home Grown Genius who is to thank for almost every single Russian Space Success between the late 1940's & 1966 (When he died from a Heart Condition which was due to the Time he was Inprisioned in the Gulag during Stalin's Notorious Purges of the late 1930's, which are the Primary
Reason why the Soviet's were almost Defeated by the Germans in WWII & why Korolev didn't live longer)
You've proven to be quite knowlegeable on other Subject's, Don't mess it up now.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@THUD086 Besides what do you mean that this is the First time we've agreed on Something!?!??
You are quite well versed on the Military History of your own Country but don't start going after
""the old enemy"" like this (It's Purile & Pointless, that & unbecoming).
Why can't the US admit that the Russians were (& still are since the Core modual's of the International Space Staition are 100% Russian, & that the USSR was the first to have a Space Station in orbit to begin with) just as Adept.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF I see you put up a list of firsts for the Soviet Union.
I didn't see the Soviets as first on the moon.
Why not?
THUD086 1 year ago
@THUD086 Now that is an Objective Question (always good).
Contrary to what many think the Soviets had plans to send Cosmonauts to the Moon just like the US,
They encountered the same problems as their rivals when Designing a Rocket that was Powerfull
enough for the Job (the Saturn-5 also being on the Edge of what was Plauseable then) & came up with a Different Solution. Their "M-1" Rocket tried to solve the same Design Differculties as the
Saturn-5 by useing a larger number of... TBC
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@THUD086(Whoops i ment "N-1" [not M-1]) .... Smaller Rocket Engines (30 in total) to do the same overall job.
The "N-1" However was an overall failure, when the First Example was Launched a Single Bolt was
Sucked into a Fuel pump & led to a Enormus Explosion which Destroyed it & sent Debri (some peices the size of a Four Bedroomed house) Flying in all directions over a mile from the Launch site.
To be fair though the Sat-5 was designed with multiple componants Failures expected ...
TBC
s
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@THUD086 .... To fail or not work as expected (The stresses & strains experianced during launch making such Fault's inevitable & something to be countered by Exaustative Backup's).
The Main flaw of N-1 Was simpley that the Sheer Number of Engines & Componants made this Problem just too Likley for it to ever really be viable
(in other words it was overcomplexity which was why it never worked).
The USSR Abandoned Moon mission plans about two years after Apollo-11 & moved on to other Projects
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@THUD086 I hope that you are Satisfied with the Explaination. (kept brief as it was)
I'm off to get a Bite to eat & will see you tomorrow (hopefully back on Brit Carriers or something).
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF Satisfied enough, but you could've simplified it by simply saying, "they failed".
How do you spell failure?
Let's see, I think its F A I L U R E.
See how simple it is?
THUD086 1 year ago
@hitide286 Besides I've Studied "Buran" & Soviet Technology for Years so don't start getting all condisending on me i find such Arrogance (a Unsavourary US Tendancy) annoying & Boorish.
Since about 79% of Anti-Russian Bigotry is from Yankee's i find it hard not to want to ring the Neck's of these Arrogant & Indoctrinated Bastards since i've Studied "Geopolitical & Military History/Technology" since the age of 11 & know that most US Based Info is a load of Propagandist Crap.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@hitide286 I Have nothing against you personally (or most US'ite's) so do me a favour by staying out of Business that is nothing to do with you.
I View what i call "Yankee Supremasist's" (People from the US or dependants of who constantly Slander & denegrate anything & everything that isn't yank with no form of logical reasoning) as
Worse than Pig's & the Scum of Terran Kind (something you're not, at least not as i can see) so how i deal with these miserable Garbage is my Business & not yours.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF So you are a "mild mannered british unionist". So you are one of the folks responsible for the downfall of Britain.
"Anti-Russian Bigotry". The Russians have a history of being pretty fucking mean to their own people. Having said this, Russia will never and can never match what the United States has done in space. I'm glad you've studied "Geopolitical & Military History/Technology" since the age of 11 (Funny). If Energia is such a great vehicle, why isn't it flying?
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
@hopeurforfreedom It seems i was right about Yankee's starting a Arguement where None Existed
Before for no reason other than Boredom & a strange form of amusement.
Lest you forget that the USSR Did before you...
First Sattilite / First Living Mammal in space /First Human to Orbit the Earth / / First Space man /First Space Woman / First Space walk / First Automated Probe to land on another Planet /
& so on & so on.
Plus next time you blabber leave the Petty Insults behind will you.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF when someone calls me a yankee supremacist, they annoy me. To begin with, I'm a Southerner and Choctaw Indian. No self respecting Southerner would put up with your tripe. You insult me, I'll insult you. However, my insults are correct, you are a moron. To say that manned space flight is cheaper than robotics is outright stupid. Your lists of firsts? So what, we were first with what counted, man on the moon.
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF Your Energia sure looks alot like the Space Shuttle. Gee...... I wonder where they got the design? You mental midget, you can't compare a Soviet program that never fully developed to the American shuttle. Who's to say their shuttle was superior? Hell it flew twice, the first flight was a failure.
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
@hopeurforfreedom Typical yank, Thinking that your lot know's everything & Invented Everything.
A Little Something called "Convergent Evolution". Besides the USSR & the US Shuttles Are very different in many aspects & both have Different Advantages & Disadvantages as such.
The Russians Developed the Programee quite considerably attually. The Buran is to this day the ONLY Shuttle to be Flown from start to finish under Remote control for a start (i doubt the US One could do that or ever could).
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF Hey moron, you might want to delve a little further into our program. The reason we sent up people is to actually do something in space. Remote control is a way of doing it cheaper, thats it.
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
@hopeurforfreedom So when you can't win an Arguement you start Swearing!?!?
Oh well i guess that just proves how low your Intelligence Quotient really is then.
Remote control isn't really that ""Cheap"" attually & with a Craft of such size & Complexity it's also no Simple feat
Besides Manned Flights werwe on the Agenda but the Post cold war Situation made almost all programmes Financially Impossible to Maintain.
That & i know FAR More on both USSR & US Programmes Than you Ever Will BAKA.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF Calling you a moron isn't swearing, you idiot. Manned flights are a hellava' lot more complicated and a hellava lot more expensive. That post alone shows you are a moron.
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
@hopeurforfreedom "Everything you say... like glue... sticks back to you"
Work it out.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
I might disapoint you bu Russians had this designs in 1957's ( the same time Korolev designed his space craft) The project was called Burja ( Storm) and was in fact transcontinental missaile but there is a stricking similarity in configuration. And this is 25 years before US space shuttle program was even on a drawing board
look for a video "Burja Russian Aviation" This is for real. Project was closed because country could not afford two programs and because Korolev had sucsessful tests firs
kalaw12 1 year ago
@kalaw12 I'll certainly make you feel disappointed, but designing and actually building one are miles apart.
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
@hopeurforfreedom
You did not get me :) IT WAS BUILT . Look for the video
kalaw12 1 year ago
@kalaw12 Did it fly? It was incapable of space flight......
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
@hopeurforfreedom
Did you see the video? It did fly :) In fact all this work ( Korolev and Burja) also had a goal to deliver nuclear charge to US but Korolev acheaved the results first. Then Burja had several sucessfull test flights before project was closed.
kalaw12 1 year ago
Of cause it was built for a diff purposes but it just says that the configuration was not something new for Russians which they had to "steal" from the western world. I just hate when people start saying that Russians stole this and that and never had their own ideas. Science is universal and it would be stupid not to borrow the knowledge gained by somebody before you. As mentioned before both sides borrowed a lot from Germans (Sorry for my spelling errors I am just lazy )
kalaw12 1 year ago
@kalaw12 Agreed because it goes both ways. One could say that the US stole the ideas from Nazi Germany since Werner Von Braun was german. And you are right that science is indeed universal, but that is how it was back in the day. Now thankfully everyone is working together. The Hadron Collider, or Atom Smaher in Switzerland is such an international achievement. As for Buran... Who said that the past does not teach us anything new :-)
KonChul 8 months ago
0:55 anyone noticed the pig just bellow the liquor cabinet?
Orthodoxcrusader 1 year ago
why would NASA adopt something not nearly as advanced as the STS. Either way it doesn't matter because Orion/Ares will be cheaper, safer, and superior to both.
SPYK3O 1 year ago
this would be a disaster for united states! If russia is the only power in space, then danger is ahead!
timesplitters333 1 year ago
@timesplitters333 I'd say the same if it were the other way round.
Terran Space Should not be Dominated by any one Power, (Regardless of Who or what is is).
Besides the Cold war is long over,Such ways of thinking are Archaic & Long Outdated.
TSR1989FF 1 year ago
@TSR1989FF it is dominated by the european/American empire... Russia is already in it.. Coincidence?
domination is what we want and what we have for the future...
Look at africa/asia... they are decades behind... africa dont even have a program yet.. Coincidence... no way! But africans cant see they are being dumb down!
timesplitters333 1 year ago
@timesplitters333 If you want a good look at Africa, go to my site and see my featured video.
hopeurforfreedom 1 year ago
fuck russia! we got our own stuff!
phantom1000A 1 year ago
Never. Gonna. Happen.
The shuttle served it's purpose for 3 decades. It's time to move on. If we need to retrieve anything from space, we'd use the X-37.
Drpepper687 1 year ago
@Drpepper687 This is true, the only other flight worthy Russian shuttle (1.02 Ptichka) which was almost completed has been sitting in storage for many many years and is also in a state of dis-repair and would require far too much work to be able to fly and no one has or wants to spend the amount of money required to complete & repair it anyways.. And neither the X-37 I don't believe will fly or be of any economically viable use to anyone and either.. Sadly the age of the Space Shuttle is over.
calaiscruiser 1 year ago
there is nothing left 2 bring out of mothballs im afraid. because russias space shuttles, energia boosters, vehicle assemble plants & entire infrastructure no longer even excised.
wall2wall99 1 year ago
The us space shuttle did not completely fulfill it's intended mission, but is far from a failure. It has outlived it's designed lifespan of twenty years. I'm in favor of taking the Russian shuttle out of mothballs updating it's electronics and finding out what it's really capable of doing. Let's find out if it is as good as advertised, Money talks bullshit walks.
jerkyturkey007 1 year ago
russia-vs-usa . ucoz . com
ReDDDgo 2 years ago
The shuttle CAN be landed fully automatically. Final approach is done manually for the same reasons airline pilots land manually.
synonys 2 years ago 4
@synonys ... and pigs can fly
huh... was there one?
ah.. no ... it was another piece of bullshit
gazakind 1 year ago
Baloney. The Russians only train those riding their Soyuz craft on how their ship works to and from orbit. American training for the ISS occupants is superior to what the Russians could provide.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Europian manned spacecraft is to be ready about at 2010, after 50 years of Gagarin launch and also: Salute, Mir, ISS, Saturn V, Space Shuttle, Buran and etc, Russia did not stop space investigation.
idcs5000 2 years ago
Lol, although I admit that RT can be biased at times, they're right in this respect.
The funny thing is that NASA's space shuttle program has been abandoned, while the Soviet-style rockets live on.
RFXCGZZ 2 years ago
@RFXCGZZ
Abandoned? Get it right: Buran was abandoned more than 20 years ago. The US Shuttle is being retired after 3 decades of service.
Drpepper687 1 year ago
U.S. shuttles will soon be replaced.
ytalexomir 2 years ago
NASA, ESA and SpaceX are more active than ever. Ariane 5, Ares 1x and falcon 9 launch successfully. The Russians have no chance.
ytalexomir 2 years ago
NASA is actually suffering enormous set backs with the state of the US budget at the moment.
ESA is, as it always was, had no ambition. Although it is aqueductly funded it does not seem to be trying as hard to keep up with Russia and the US.
Russia now launches more rockets than the US and ESA combined.
RFXCGZZ 2 years ago
Dude... American tv, including discovery and geographic stated the soviet space technology was and is superior to the US... even now, the Russians train the international space astronauts..
sybertronlionhawk 2 years ago
Baloney. The Russians only train those riding their Soyuz craft on how their ship works to and from orbit. nearly all other ISS occupantsare trained in America, in particular at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. The reasons are 1) the majority of the ISS is American made, and 2) Zarya, which is the Russian-made core module of ISS, features significantly older technology. American training is superior to what the Russians provide.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
is this a putin unilateral wet dream or something? buran is a rust belt joke. The surviving orbiters are all gift shops in amusment parks. The guys who built it are like 50+ at least if not retired. The technology will be soviet 1982 stuff which is like US 1972, which is when the nicked the blueprints.
And it has ALL the same issues the shuttle has. Ice, no escape profiles worth dick, relatively low cargo and high cost.
that is unless the trolls here now think that shuttles are a good idea
rossco1966 2 years ago
Can you get ice cream from that Buran there in Gorky Park?
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
that's over 850 pounds of faked moonrocks from 6 moonwalk missions...i am starting to deeply deeply hate every single russian and serbian troll on youtube!/milwaukee
rocketshipstud2 2 years ago
And what's the difference? All trolls are equally stupid....
ArmAFan 2 years ago
that's what I call a gentlemen's conversation!
it's fun though!
varcan5 2 years ago
Hi Mike, it was fun reading your 'Buran is best' comments. How did you become so unhinged? Everytthing you stated is ludricrous. But it was funny! Tell you what: I'll take up a collection to buy a rope for our great American Space Shuttle to tow your pitiful, copycat Buran into orbit. That way, you Buran fanatics can finally and at last truly claim that Buran flew an 'operational' flight in orbit. Hey, we're Americans! We're generous like that.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
A Communist Space Shuttle that automates the humans/cosmonauts out of existence.............................
jvarela965 2 years ago
If automating humans out of spaceships was the goal of the Soviets, Jvarela, one wonders why they bothered to design the Buran to carry humans at all?
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
The Buran saga is a long one. All the space people thought it was uneeded. Brezhnev's son-in-law rammed it through. Soviet computer chip technology was very primitive at the time and the whole project was beyond the capabilities of the country. When it was launched by computer Gorbachev refused to even watch the lift-off as did many Communist Party theologians at the time who saw Buran as heresy to Marxist ideals. Lots of sound design when in to Buran, it was better than Space Station Mir.
jvarela965 2 years ago
Here's three reasons why the Soviet prime leadership did not bother to travel to Baikounir to watch the launch. One: what would have been the point? To watch a launch of an incomplete spaceship carrying no humans or cargo would have seemed silly. Two: Buran already was beaten into space by our great American Space Shuttle seven whole years earlier, so Buran would have been anticlimatic. Three: Soviet rockets were dangerous. They tended to explode during their first launch, killing dignitaries.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Do you beleive yourself what you said.
shuha24 2 years ago
they should build buran in china it would cost about 40 or 50 euro
cluideman 2 years ago
The U.S. plans to retire the Space Shuttle following completion of the ISS and delivery of on-orbit spare parts - end of 2010 but likely not until 2011 due to delays. The Ares rockets won't be ready until 2014 at the earliest, but with delays, who knows. The Russian Soyuz will be the only way to get humans to and from the ISS. Buran, like the Shuttle, would never be cost effective. Better to go with standard rockets and pursue hypersonic research to develop future technology.
MusicalFan1701 2 years ago
Good comment, and free of the too-typical Buran-is-superior insanity that too often spews forth from some idiots here.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
A86, perhaps you need serious mental therapy. Buran indeed was & remains a colossal failure, a spacecraft that never was completed (no life support system) & never flew into space in any way that is proveable. Even you fanatics admit Buran never was launched more than once, and carried no cargo or cosmonauts. Our great Space Shuttle has flown more than 100 times, & upgraded the Hubble Telescope 300 miles above the Earth this week. Your beloved Buran? it's collecting pigeon poop in Gorky Park.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
"and carried no cargo or cosmonauts" Not quite correct. It had cargo imitation. Reason is simple. Regulations in the USSR demanded at least one successfull flight of a new space system before human could be taken.
"Our great Space Shuttle" - propaganda.
Fact: 5 flyable crafts build, 2 gone lost killing the crews (40%) I just imagine what you would say if Souyz had such a ratio.
Financially? Target was 200USD per kg, achieved - 16.000USD per kg (20K in some sources).
Sharp looking spacecraft
Aachensee 2 years ago
Aach, using your logic, if we (America) never flew any astronauts aboard our great Space Shuttle, why, we would have had lost no one, exactly like your beloved Buran! So which was better, our Space Shuttle or Buran? Let's see, which has flown over a hundred operational missions and which flew zero? And which was more affordable? Gee whiz, it's a landslide, our Space Shuttle wins. But we Americans are magnaminous. We will generously tow your Buran into orbit with a rope from our Space Shuttle.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Steve, I didn't speak about Buran.. ;)
My comparison was about Soyuz.
Soyuzes will fly for about 20 years more. Shuttles... there are 3 working hulls left, operation will end 2011 latest. Save your rope, maybe you will need it to pick up on soyuz ;)
Aachensee 2 years ago
Hi Aach, granted, the Soyuz craft are pretty sturdy, although prone to reentry emergencies like have happened twice in the last several years. Until the current craziness subsides within our country over what shape the next generation of manned space rocketry will take, we likely will have to pay for rides on the Soyuz.. Unfortunate. It didn't have to be this way; the Shuttle seems perfectly fine for five or more years of flights. Worse, our current president seems to hate the space sciences.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Good point about those reentry emergencies... you can consider it from different angles: on one hand, its bad that it happened at all, on other hand the system provided survival for the crew even in critical situation.. Reentry is a critical procedure, you know why I'm saying that.
I didnt know, Obama has low interest to the space programs - you are closer to the happenings. Perhaps he is acting according to the priorities, and those are on the earth at the moment.
Have a nice day..
Aachensee 2 years ago
I read in the news that United States Astronauts are going to have to hitch rides on Soyuz to ISS, the government will have to pay Russian government something like 30 million dollars per astronaut per flight. This will be until 2012 or so when they estimate they can get a new replacement to the shuttle. Not saying for sure this will happen, just what they are talking about now but if thats the case I guess the Russians are doing alright.
kingbarrydg 2 years ago
Pay no mind to Plutoplatter. He hates all things Soviet and always deems Russian craft "inferior" or "failures". I and other space nerds have spent hours debunking his irrational arguments against the Energia-Buran craft and he just started accusing us of being Stalinsts. I think he even claimed the Buran is a "failure" because it didn't fly at full altitude the first flight. That's like saying a car is a "failure" if you don't drive at top speed at all times.
A86 2 years ago
Thanks for advice - I already started conversation with him. But now I see its a medical case ;) Waste of time. lol
Aachensee 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Serbian, you make a clear, ringingly-sensible case for Buran over our Space Shuttle....except it's all wrong. Buran & Energia never demonstrated ANY useablility or safeness. Buran was only 'flown' once, so it never showed it could be re-used. And Energia clearly was a hyper-expensive flop. Elsewise, Russia or other nations or even private corporations would have either continued to use it or purchased them. Our Space Shuttle was & remains superior; over 100 flights and still rockin' & rollin'.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
This idea is crazy! Buran was an abject technological and budget-busting failure. Restarting it would bankrupt the Russian space program, and there would be no guarantee that it would ever work. A better alternative would be to extend the program for our wonderful American Space Shuttle, the most successful manned space vehicle program ever, at $250 million per launch. Buran would cost a billion dollars per launch because of the hyperexpensive Energia. Even the Russians are not that crazy.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Think about it again. Buran would be cheaper to launch and reuse several times than US Space Shuttle. It's overall design is much better and that is because of the Energia rocket. With using Energia Russians got the main engines out of the orbiter, they got rid of the problematic external tank, they got rid of the dangerous Solid Rocket Boosters. They made a system that is 100% reusable(US Shuttles are reusable but the external tank isn't), cheaper AND SAFER.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
Well, SerbianPaladin, please bless us with your rocket-science wisdom? Kindly explain why 1) Buran never flew a single manned cargo mission into space, 2) the Soviet Union and then Russia abandoned the program, 3) Russia has not revived the Buran, 4) no other nation or private enterprise has either offered to buy the Buran system or even at least tried to lease it, and 5) the Energia was not a glorified, grand-scale external tank (face it; it was). We got ours to work. What happened to yours?
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
I am a aerospace engineering student so why not try:
1) It was too expensive for a country which faced complete disintegration and economic meltdown
2) Read 1)
3) Russia has improved it's economy, but it's budget is too low for this AND US Space Shuttle has proved that the whole concept was too expensive and a mistake
4)read 3)(second part)
5) Energia is a rocket that is big and expensive, but in a environment it was disegned to perform in it is a very good solution.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
5)(continued) Energia was a part of the Buran project, it is superior to the US concept of external fuel tank for two reasons:
(a) It has got it's own engines so the Buran engines can be much smaller, thus saving weight and space (increasing payload by 5 tons)
(b) It was meant to be used as a heavy lifter too, but it was not because of a previously mentioned disintegration of the USSR and economic problems. When Buran got canceled Energia lost all of it's economic advantages(read next post)
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
Energia became too expensive, because the economy of scale factor was no longer present, it's different if you build 10 rockets for both Buran program and ordinary launches and build only 1 for a few launches. You got yours to work, Russians got theirs to work even better(it got up there and proved it).
"What happened to yours?" I do not understand this question. I am not from Russia, but from SERBIA(Serbia is completely different from Siberia), my country was not in the USSR, nor allied with it
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
And I'm Albert Einstein. Please, keep your phony education claims to yourself. Even if you indeed are an 'aerospace engineering student', that does not mean that you are a clear thinker blessed with good judgement talents. Proof of my point: Buran never flew a single operational mission, yet you brag about its bigger payload capacity. Well, hey...I say I can lift five more tons than you, but I don't have to bother proving it! That's how 'Buran Braggers' try to make their point. It never works.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
You know very well why it didn't fly for the second time, yet, you keep saying that same thing over and over again, ignoring all other arguments(because you have nothing to put against them).
And I just wanted to see you talking abut "phony education", it's irrelevant if I am or am not what I said, it's more than clear that my judgement talents faaar outrank your stone age era "my club is bigger than your club" kind of logic.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
Hi Serbian, gee whiz, you're are all worked up about not being allowed to get away with the horsepoop that Buran was better. Now you may not like it, dear friend, but the fact that my facts beat up your facts about which flew more, Buran or our great American Space Shuttle, shows that your high-falutin' reference to your being an 'aerospace engineering student' disproves your credibility. Anyone who says that a spacecraft that never flew a single operational mission is superior is an idiot.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
What fact? The only fact you keep mentioning over and over again is " Buran flew only once". That fact was discredited long ago, but since you have nothing more to say you keep repeating yourself. As was said a million times before, Buran programe was stopped because Sovet Union collapsed and their economy plunged into misery. Of course, you want to listen only to the things you like. I never said that US Space Shuttle was garbage, I only said that Buran was a better engineering solution.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
And you, Aach, keep missing the glaring, cosmic truth about the loser Buran: nobody wanted it back then, and absolutely nobody in any national or corporate position of power anywhere in the world wants it now, either. Now, you accuse me of repeating this same point. It's true, but it's only me trying to help you, my Buran-brained friend, from embarassing yourself out in polite society. Ranting out in public that your insane insistence that Buran was superior could get you branded as a kook.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Plutoplatter. Do you know that US Shuttle is a copy of Soviet MIG 105? Do you know that Shuttle is the best of makeing barbecue from the Astronauts? Do you also think like many Americans that, ancient greek god Apollo was named with the name of US spacecraft. (Fucking Greeks stole the name of your spacecraft) It's that thrue that, moon was to WINDY for the Americans to make porno movies on it? All you fucking, stupid, brainwashed Americans shut up for good please!!!
mikeplay007 2 years ago
What an ignorant fuck. You need to educate yourself.
tampatek 2 years ago
Shut you fucking, cocksucker mouth up. You are uneducated, brainwashed cocksucker.
mikeplay007 2 years ago
you've proven my point you stupid peasant farmer. Pull your dick out of your goat and go read a book. You might learn why everyone in your life thinks you are such an inbred moron. Better yet, just kill yourself now before you breed. God all we need are more delusional peasants like you.
tampatek 2 years ago
Wich book I should read, about great America?
America is fake, like moon landing, everything is just for show you delusional IDIOT. You suck moron.
mikeplay007 2 years ago
Energia was not 100% reusable the core was expendable only the Zenit strapon boosters and the Buran orbiter were to be reusable.
The vehicle though expensive was less then 1/3 the cost of a Saturn V.
Energia 2 an advanced follow on was to be nearly 100% reusable.
Membrane556 2 years ago
You Energia delusionalists can bluster and rant very well that the Energia was this and that, the most powerful, the least expensive, etc. You do have passion in your beliefs! But strong feelings don't change the fact that Energia flew only twice. Moreover, we don't know how it performed, since both flights were secret (ya gotta love those paranoid Soviets). No new plans to use it have been announced by anyone. And Energia is not a failure, you say? Seems clear it was a boondoggle & still is.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
You obviously hate Sovets and are an American nationalist(comin' from Texas maybe?). And yet you talk about strong feelings. All that I draw my conclusions from is DATA, and "Soviet paranoia" made some of it secret, but "American paranoia" made Saturn V or STS data secret, so it's about the same. It's not called paranoia in civilized discussions, but you can call it whatever you want.
P.S. Come on, please give me more of that logic, it reminds me of my way of thinking when I was 5 years old.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
Hi Serbian, to say that I have not only no respect but utter contempt for the lying, oppressive, murderous, evil, communist bastards who ran the Soviet Union would be a true statement. Now that I've given my mea culpa, please share why anyone, even 5 years old, should have any respect for the Soviets or their sympathisizers like you? You do sleep with a Buran blanket, yes?
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
You can think anything you want about their government, I don't like it either(I don't like the US government too). The fact that you hate their government must not make you hate everything out there. I hate the US government, but I wouldn't bomb USA, nor say that Saturn V or STS was a piece of shit. If you hate SU you don't have to hate everything that came from it, Buran for example, or Soyuz. It was a engineering and scientific marvel, but you are too blinded with nationalism to see that.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
Actually, I love Russia and its' now free people. If only they can hold on to their freedom and keep that KGB-agent bastard Putin from stealing it all away, in his fevered efforts to return Mother Russia to the dark days of the old USSR. You know, that period of time when walls appeared and people disappeared? Soviet devaluation of life made the design and construction of Buran too unreliable to fly with humans aboard. That is why it was a piece of junk back then, and remains so now.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Buran is not wanted now, yes, but the same stands for the US Shuttle, they were both projects which completely missed their main goal: put people and cargo to orbit CHEAPLY. Buran would have been somewhat cheaper(due to some engineering advantages I already mentioned, but an unstable country made it impossible), but still not good enough(that's why restarting the program now would be just plain stupid). I know what I'm saying and have said it to many people, no embarassment present.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
Buran was built to be very safe(it never had a chance to prove it tough),main engines out of the shuttle itself,ejection seats(usable on launch only,of course, and only on low altitude),with no solid propellant boosters...I know you will say again that it lifted no people to space,that's true,the whole Buran-Energia program was a failure,but not because of engineering problems,but because of political ones.Engineering was great,but the country it was built for dissapeared before it could be used
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
Serbian, again you ignore the indisputable fact that even after the USSR broke up all those years ago, no other nation or corporation since has bought, rented, borrowed, or even bothered to steal the Buran. So, it can't be 'superior'. Now, you argue here quite forcefully that Buran was beautiful. However, international political and commercial spheres of influence clearly think otherwise. That is why arguing in here is meaningless. You're advocating the wrong shuttle to the wrong audience.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Serbian, you don't know what you're talking about at all. Your claim that our Space Shuttle (SS) was overly expensive to use does have some merit...but as opposed to what? The Buran? Let's look at it: our SS costs $200 million per launch. But, since Buran never flew a single operational mission, that means its cost per flight is 'infinite' rubles (as an engineering student, you will recognize the consequences of division by zero). That is why the USSR abandoned Buran. It was a budget wrecker.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
USSR itself made its budget into a wreck which couldn't support itself and when it implodes on its own it surely cannot support such a big and expensive programme as Buran, Buran helped, of course, as did any other major development program. US Space Shuttle was waaay more expensive than it's PROJECTED cost was, simmilar story WOULD surely stand for Buran IF the country it was built in didn't cease to exist(with economy plunging into nation-wide starvation).
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
All that I'm saying is that Buran was an ENGINEERING success, it flew, completely automated, got up there, did the tests and landed safely, with that it proved that it was WELL BUILT. Sadly, well built is not equal to well concieved, because the whole concept of space shuttle(USA or USSR) proved to be a financial dead-end, the only difference is that US economy could sustain it's shuttle, and Soviet economy couldn't. Buran was an engineering success, but an economic(and thus practical) failure.
SerbianPaladin 2 years ago
There is no proof that Buran was a success. Even the one 'flight' was conducted in secrecy. And it likely was falsified. Here's why: Soviet videos show only a few moments of the nighttime liftoff, and short shadowing in the brief landing footage, indicating the landing occurred about noon. But it was only a two-orbit mission. Each orbit takes 90 minutes. So Buran had to have lifted off no earlier than 9 AM in daylight, not at night. That's impossible. The launch likely failed. Some success.
Plutoplatter 2 years ago
Buran/Energia FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Joe35983 2 years ago 7
Amazing. Buran is a better concept, with no engines in the orbiter, it suffers less stress on launch and the all-liquid fuel Energia is safer than the dangerous SRB's the space shuttle uses.
monkeyman1140 2 years ago 11
@monkeyman1140 Disadvantages: Most expensive parts or Buran/Energia combo are destroyed during the launch. US Shuttle only looses fuel tank. And there is no proof that Energia rocket is safer than solid fuel boosters. How many flights did it do?
syeager9 1 year ago
i think its a good step for russia, they have used the suyz for so long it would be very useful for bothe NASA and the russian space agency to get this on the roll.
rwp16db 3 years ago
I think we should peruse a new shuttle like RLV and a nuclear powered space only shuttle for going to the moon as in the movie 2001 vs Orion which is a technological dead that will already be obsolete by the time it flies.
Membrane556 3 years ago
crude technology cumbersome and expensive like a motorhome with wings to heavy to fly looks like were goin back to rockets again lol
rmarsutube 3 years ago
The only reason the program ended was because of the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Buran Energia was a system the LV by it's self was an HLLV more powerful then the Two Stage Saturn V INT-21.
The Soviets had plans to use Energia for manned mission to Mars.
They even developed nuclear electric drives for the mission.
If the USSR did not collapse there likely would have been some Russian guy on Mars by now.
Membrane556 3 years ago 5
shoulda coulda woulda. That was a lame attempted by russia to one up the americans. But, a very successful act of spying. It's a structual clone of u.s. shuttle. Had jet engines. Landed under power. had no crew. Because it never had life support. some poor Ivans ass was on the line. Gotta give'm credit. They got that white elephant off the ground once. The billions they thru away helped burry ussr into the history books.
ISHOULDAKNOWN 3 years ago
If the loan came from anywhere, it came from the federal reserve... which last I check, was not China.
WCCobra 3 years ago
Damn that totally sucks man. Mybee we should give our space shuttles to russia when were finished with them in 2010 to make way for our new spacecraft which takes asronuats to the moon. Our 3 shuttles are still good for 20 or more launched each.
britisharegay 3 years ago
The russian space shuttle couldn't even manuever or dock with the russian space station in space without a soyuz spacecraft.
The american shuttle is better.
britisharegay 3 years ago
thats because buran was only for tasks soyuz couldnt do
kashgurkha 3 years ago 3
The american space shuttle would be better off if we gave them to russia because we are sharing a space station that we built together and we need a shuttle for the station when we retire our shuttle program in 2010. We might as well just hand our shuttle to russia because if we didn't they would have no use except stay in museum which is dumb if the shuttles can be used 20 more times each.
britisharegay 3 years ago
I think Endeavour alone may be capable of covering the required gap between 2010 and the introduction of Orion.
falconwings1982 3 years ago
No, shuttle is already flying on overtime. They have to use it, because they have no alternatives. Bush spent billions in Iraq, that was promised to NASA. Barry said he might not approve any sort of vehicle, for another 10 years. 40 million are starving, and there are better ways to spend the money.
drake2919 3 years ago
shuttle is actually being retired early. each orbiter was designed for 100 launches each.
rwp16db 3 years ago
damn that totally sucks man. Mybee we should give our space shuttles to russia when were finished with them in 2010. Our 3 shuttles are good for 20 or more launched each.
britisharegay 3 years ago
could work
amsoho75gr 3 years ago 3
ha a hanger destoryed it. Nice way to take care of your monuements...if it was.
SmittyxXx007 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
those russians are into building something new from old pieces. they also use a lot of pieces to make a piece of junk that than fails.
They should donate the buran to the museum, and start making toasters or invent a vibrating vigiana
NewOrder915 3 years ago
You know what would bail NASA out even more than any Soviet? A kick in the arse from the brass and an actual mission plan to go somewhere other than high Earth orbit for the last 20 years
gribae 3 years ago 4
It isnt a competition. All knowledge is human knowledge it isnt American knowledge or Russian knowledge. The world must work together in order to create lastly peace for all humankind.
Phys1905 3 years ago 3
USSR military know-how and technology was so advanced and far ahead of US (except only microelectronics)
that even now, after more than 15 years of
stall and destruction,
after US and west stole large part of our most advanced technology through various "science support" projects (INTAS etc.) and bribing our best scientists,
Russia still has very competitive or superior
weapons.
US and western military tech is a huge, super expensive bluff!
PutinProper 3 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Not really. The U.S started the tech industry. So to say were behind Russia is a joke. We have things far better then Russia. F-22, stealth bomber, super carrier, Apache, Dragon skin, and many others. NASA is already making a replacment. Its just that with this crisis it may take it longer to come out.
warcraft1920 3 years ago
You are probably 10 year old American and do not know what you are talking about.
The "tech industry" was not started by any one country, but ancient times, you are American loser, it is unfortunate.
Takiwatsi86 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I was talking about things like cell phones, Tv, computers, Ipods. Jesus your a moron. Most big tech industrys are either American, Japanese or korean. And America started them.
warcraft1920 3 years ago
Electronic computers were invented by Germans.
Television units were invented by Germans.
Satellites in space . . invented by Soviets.
Anything else foolish American? By the way! English is not my language, and yet even I know "your" is wrong usage.
Don't ever go to Japan I don't need to see redneck Americans here.
Takiwatsi86 3 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The industrys you fucking moron. What do you not understand? The industrys were invented by Americans. these things would not be what they are today if it wernt for us. Jesus your fucking retarded. I have already been to Japan fuck tard. I lived there on base. OMG I used your the wrong way. Who gives a fuck. So when I rape you here your going to go all nazi about spelling and usage?
warcraft1920 3 years ago
Typical AmeriKKKan reply, warcrap1920?
BaseStationZero 3 years ago
the industries(not industrys, learn to spell), were not started by Americans, you'd have to be an idiot to think so
azndestroya77 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
And an idiot like yourself is probably to stupid to google it.
warcraft1920 3 years ago
Actually the modern electronic television was invented by Philo T. Farnsworth an American.
Paul Nipkow did submit one of the earliest patents for a mechanical television though Charles F. Jenkins may have built the earliest functioning unit.
First computer ever designed was by Charles Babbage in 1871 though Konrad Zuse built the Zuse 1 in 1938 which may have been the first working computer.
The first electronic computers were Colossus built in the UK and the AtanasoffBerry Computer in the US.
Membrane556 3 years ago
hey now last i checked germans, japanese, and americans have worked together for many beneficial (and not so beneficial ) projects. why so much hate and discontent?
rwp16db 3 years ago
USSA was more Powerful USA. If was start WW3 we (russian) has won it. RUSSIAN FOREVER!!!!
321Endeavor123 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I guess Afghanistan was the strongest nation in the world then. Russia couldn't capture the country with their entire military. US did it with a handful of special ops.
Anyway, Russia/USA thing is over. My only concern now is crazy leaders who want to take over the world (that includes GW Bush... what a dumbass).
WCCobra 3 years ago
Are all Americans so stupid like you are ?
MultipleEFP 3 years ago
ohh yeah we capture the entire country,,,put a dirty suck in your mouth, because of these war and ours way of invinsibility though you soon will be standing in the unemployment line..give your paycheck to that special op to keep on trying to capture the country,,idiot.
hispanicuscorpus 3 years ago
Don't project your future on me... I certainly will not be standing in the unemployment line with you.
"These wars" had little to do with the problems facing the US. In fact, "these wars" are the only thing preventing total chaos in the US. Could you imagine what would happen if every soldier currently over seas was brought home and released from duty?
What got the US out of the Depression, war. What has kept the US out of another depression, continuous war.
WCCobra 3 years ago
this is not WWII, beside where is the money to pay for it, the bail was borrow from china,,pay attention when taking economy 101 dont fall sleep
hispanicuscorpus 3 years ago
Quite Interesting.
1happiness 3 years ago 4
i am an Australian what would i know about bor'ran
OrphanPaper 3 years ago
for some people Hosank the truth is like a slap in the face, for them there is no reality ,only fairyland.
dave777blaster 3 years ago
lunar-khod. check it out., the russians beat us to the moon and rover program to mars. they beat us deeply
12valvepower1 3 years ago
CCCP
12valvepower1 3 years ago