Russian shuttle dream dashed by Soviet crash

Russia is marking a space achievement turned tragic oblivion. The Buran space shuttle was a technological triumph which became a practical failure, largely through the messy collapse of the Soviet Union.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• shuttle
• Soviet
• Union
• The
• Buran
• space
• An-225
• Orion

[nipponhouseplayer]

Buran Rocks, very complex and when you can say you have flown the friendly skys of the Soviet Union then you can talk the talk.

[daexion]

@bfmlc No, the much later is, in reality more than a couple years as the Concorde would have been capable of that before it's public launch as a commercial airliner, unlike the TU-144 which couldn't until later after it's public launch 2 years after the Concorde.

Would have evolved? It shouldn't have to evolve, they should have gotten it right the first time. I've seen what the Russians can do, and the TU-144 is a disgrace by comparison: they could have and should have done so much better.

[TheGratziani]

new russian success...

[MartianStories]

I think it's very sad that the Buran only flew once. I remember when I was a kid how shocked we were by the Buran. We had the Space Shuttle, and we were very proud of it back then. And then, suddenly, out of nowhere, you Russians have one too! It was very impressive.

However, other than building big space installations like Hubble and ISS, I think the Shuttle was a bad design, bound to kill Astronauts. I don't know if Buran would have also had such calamities. But strap on vehicles are a deadend

[helljumpr5150]

Personally, i think the buran and the US space shuttle were the wrong idea for both countries; built with military purposes in mind to deepen the divide between east and west.

Had the N-1 program continued to the moon, and Apollo grew into Mars missions, we could've been space-dwelling societies by now.

[Super9w]

I aware Russian technology might be heavy but reliable. Russian need to market just about it. American market virtually everything and make people think their product is the best. Like the Boeing. Ty-214 is the best just because it was marketed well. Boeing is all metal junk A320 is better than that. It is taking over America.

[InfiniteMushroom]

@bfmlc You're right. What I should have said was that the NASA Tu-144LL was improved over its original design. Not radically but, enough to stir the idea of resurrecting any remaining Tu-144's back into service. Their supersonic capabilities should not be wasted in mothballs.

A niche market could be certainly be created for high-speed transport of vital cargo. Such a service does not exist. Aeroflot could redo the interior for cargo and corner the market if they had the initiative to do it.

[bfmlc]

@InfiniteMushroom The most important upgrade was the new engines Kuznetsov NK-32 from the bomber Tupolev Tu-160 Blackjack. That's what made it 'better than new' although I would be cautious using such a phrase here. Whatever you do to an old out of production airplane you can't really make it better than new.

[InfiniteMushroom]

@bfmlc I'd like to interject into your exchange with daexion regarding the Tu-144. Google, "A Qualitative Piloted Evaluation of the Tupolev Tu-144 Supersonic Transport."

In short, NASA borrowed a Tu-144, restored it for testing, and gave it some interesting upgrades where original parts and systems were not available. The NASA Tu-144LL was better than new.

The Tu-144LL might have been the foundation for a revival of the type but, I didn't see any endorsement or support for such an idea.

[ThjeshtLife]

ahh cmon it looks the same as the space shuttle, i expected russians to be on their own

[bfmlc]

@daexion There's nothing the Soviets did wrong. All the flaws were due to political expediency, and the crash of 1973 wasn't by any measure a design fault. To put things in perspective, Soyuz-1in 1967 had a number of flaws, killing the cosmonaut on board, now it's by far the safest manned space transportation system. As to the fruitless dispute which one is 'worse' read this link: avsim.com/pages/0105/bearcave/­bc.htm. It says it all - also dismissing BS on being a 'copy' of Concorde.