Buran Launch and Landing

Launch of Buran-Energia system; landing of the Buran orbiter.
Note that the whole flight was fully automatic, with no human pilots aboard. Low quality.
I don't hold the credit for neither the video nor the background music at the landing (song "Magic Fly" by "Space")

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Buran
• Energia
• Launch

[HeathLedgersChemist]

@chillaxer1993 The Russians don't copy everything. Take Sputnik, the first man in space, the first woman in space as three examples. If you wish to be pedantic, most of the US space program is based upon WW2 German ideas and technology. Ever heard of Wernher von Braun?

[MrSrgj]

Incredibly, the shuttle landed at an unmanned version.

Shuttle is not controlled from the ground, he flew to the Soviet version of artificial intelligence. During landing, due to side winds, the shuttle itself went to the second run.

[pilotXdesign]

@HeathLedgersChemist yeah its based on ideas. WWII was influential to EVERY countries development. But this... this isn't based on idea they look exactly the same!

[Ilicium]

@crazybastard82 Actually, the Saturn 5 delivered 10 times the payload to LEO. It had fewer pad failures and no fatalities in which the basic design was the cause. The shuttle was an awesome machine. However, it did everything poorly, and the engineering and logistics were sops to various agencies, especially DOD. The SRBs cost more to recycle than to build new. The shuttle engines had to thrust off-axis. Most of what left the pad was thrown away or lost utility at LEO.

[crazybastard82]

@Ilicium The Saturn V was the only Saturn variant with a greater payload capacity than the orbiters, and it was twice as big. It also failed one out of its 13 flights, meaning it had a worse record than the shuttle. Granted, the shuttle costs were way worse than expected, but I'm talking about how awesome the machine itself was, not if it was a good idea to build it.

[Ilicium]

@crazybastard82 Yes, considering that they had to be rebuilt after every mission, had an enormous cost per pound of payload, couldn't reach geosynch, broke down on the pad a significant number of times, and were frankly an engineering joke from the beginning. Ever looked at a picture of a shuttle boosting? Notice anything wrong? The smaller Saturn vehicles had a better safety record, threw a greater payload, cost less per launch, were built with previous generation technology.

[crazybastard82]

@Ilicium I assume you're referring to the American shuttle. That piece of shite held up surprisingly well considering there were only two accidents in the 30 years the orbiters were in service. Find me any other machine in the world which that can last 30 years rocketing up to 17,000+ mph, withstanding 13,000+ degree F re-entry, and only break down twice. The space shuttle was one of the most complex, powerful, and reliable machines humankind ever built.

[CodeGreen47]

00:53 Boob stickers :P

[TheAlexlamont]

@KweedetNiet I guess you are Napoleon. Look at the nose and tail sections. Very Diffrent designs.

[ffej980]

one flight...for the USSR...30 Years for the US space shuttle program...and could there be a more complete... copy...the only difference is the Energia rocket..

[Ilicium]

They re-engineered a piece of shite.

[Shipocute]

It is really amazing! an unmanned control shuttle! Just amazing!!! Sadly, this orbiter was destroyed when Buran's shuttle hangar roof was collapsed... Really sad...