Trust But Verify ...

In article ,
rk wrote:
Clearly Buran was not a copy of the US Shuttle...

Not *entirely*. The detailed design was all-Soviet. But the overall
resemblance in size and shape and configuration is not an accident; it's
the result of deliberate copying.
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |

rk wrote:
Clearly Buran was not a copy of the US Shuttle. So I am curious about the
rest of the book and perhaps a good topic for some, er, discussion.

It was not a copy precisely but it was very much copied
from the Shuttle. I understand that there was a lot of
impetus from on high during development to keep it as
close to a copy as possible, though this is just my
remembering from some forgotten source. I imagine it
was similar to the "Concordsky" which was different
from the Concorde in key ways, such as the canard wings,
but was still very much a copy.

"Christopher M. Jones" wrote in
:

rk wrote:
Clearly Buran was not a copy of the US Shuttle. So I am curious
about the rest of the book and perhaps a good topic for some, er,
discussion.

It was not a copy precisely but it was very much copied
from the Shuttle.

There are lots of clues of this on Buran's exterior, if you know where to
look. For example, Buran lacks the shuttle's main engines, but it still has
three cutouts in the aft fuselage where they would have gone. The Soviets
chose to put the two OMS engines through the cutouts for the left and right
engines, and the OMS tanks protrude through the center engine cutout.

Then, with no need for OMS pods, the Soviets mounted the aft RCS thrusters
on "stingers" so that their placement would roughly match those of the US
orbiter, which were mounted on the aft end of each OMS pod.

--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

rk wrote:

The Buran had been detected only by chance; the Soviets did not realize
the KH-11 was a reconnaissance satellite. Whenever a KH-9 satellite had
overflown the test center where the Buran was being built, activities had
been suspended and the Buran covered by netting ...


I sort of doubt that they wouldn't know that KH-11 was a recon sat, both
it's orbital path and altitude would have differentiated it from a
ferret satellite, plus they would have taken photos of it in orbit, and
it would have looked different from a SIGINT or RORSAT.


Clearly Buran was not a copy of the US Shuttle.

You are joking, aren't you? Even they finally admitted they had ripped
the shuttle off in the same way they ripped the B-29 off as the Tu-4,
though Buran wasn't as exact of a coy as the Tu-4 was.
Speaking of Soviet copies, the Su-25 "Frogfoot" ground attack aircraft:
http://avia.russian.ee/pictures/russia/su-25.gif
...and the Northrop A-9, the competition to the A-10:
http://avia.russian.ee/pictures/usa/northrop_a-9.gif
As to other Soviet/Russian copies, ever see something that looks like
this before?:
http://207.151.154.167/catalog/image...8/12155757.jpg
http://207.151.154.167/catalog/image...8/12155808.jpg
http://207.151.154.167/catalog/image...8/12155821.jpg
This is the Myasishchev M-67 LK-M high altitude recon plane design;
given this and the A-9, I'd say that Northrop had a mole or two on its
payroll.

So I am curious about the
rest of the book and perhaps a good topic for some, er, discussion.

That would be one way to put it. :-)

Pat

Clearly Buran was not a copy of the US Shuttle.

It was. Not because the soviet engineers were incapable, but because the
political leadership wanted an exact copy. Communist party bureau
thought that yankees are always right so their design must be the best
and is worth copying to minimize USSR costs. But the different level of
technology made this task almost impossible and it ended up being an
incredibly costly success.

It is very common in the USSR to worship US technology. Khruschev wanted
to close the gap and match the US industry in twenty years. Before that,
Stalin ordered an exact copy of the B-29, that became the Tupoljev-4,
instead of redesigning the indigenous Pe-8 bomber. Before that the
Moscow underground railway and several dams in USSR were built on US
expertise throughout the '30s.

As to other Soviet/Russian copies, ever see something that looks like
this before?:
http://207.151.154.167/catalog/image...8/12155757.jpg
http://207.151.154.167/catalog/image...8/12155808.jpg
http://207.151.154.167/catalog/image...8/12155821.jpg
This is the Myasishchev M-67 LK-M high altitude recon plane design;
given this and the A-9, I'd say that Northrop had a mole or two on its
payroll.

Rather, they hired the same LGM for consultants. Or the same nazis from
Gothaer Waggonfabrik...

"Pat Flannery" wrote in
I sort of doubt that they wouldn't know that KH-11 was a recon sat, both
it's orbital path and altitude would have differentiated it from a
ferret satellite, plus they would have taken photos of it in orbit, and
it would have looked different from a SIGINT or RORSAT.

There is a delicious story involving deliberate US deception here.

Our side misled the Russkies into NOT worrying about a bird that
obviously WAS in a reccesat-type orbit, or so it is said.

I have been assured by deep-inside veterans that a) the story is true,
and b) the story is false.

"rk" wrote
The Buran had been detected only by chance; the Soviets did not realize
the KH-11 was a reconnaissance satellite. Whenever a KH-9 satellite had
overflown the test center where the Buran was being built, activities
had
been suspended and the Buran covered by netting ...


Story goes, the carrier a/c had run off the runway and nose gear was stuck
in soft ground.

"Tamas Feher" wrote:

Clearly Buran was not a copy of the US Shuttle.

It was. Not because the soviet engineers were incapable, but because the
political leadership wanted an exact copy. Communist party bureau
thought that yankees are always right so their design must be the best
and is worth copying to minimize USSR costs. But the different level of
technology made this task almost impossible and it ended up being an
incredibly costly success.

It is very common in the USSR to worship US technology. Khruschev wanted
to close the gap and match the US industry in twenty years. Before that,
Stalin ordered an exact copy of the B-29, that became the Tupoljev-4,
instead of redesigning the indigenous Pe-8 bomber.

In that case, the USSR utilized actual B-29s that had been confiscated
from the U.S. in 1945, actually they "interned" them after making
wartime emergency landings near Vladivostok.

Tamas Feher wrote:


Rather, they hired the same LGM for consultants. Or the same nazis from
Gothaer Waggonfabrik...


More likely Horten, given the overall design. One of the Horten brothers
claims that Northrop representative came to see him in regards to why
their flying wings were more stable than Northrop's, and he put them on
to the pointed "Bat Tail" of the Horten designs as being the key feature
in their success; the original B-2 design had a single pointed bat tail
as opposed to the three that the finished design ended up with.
Meanwhile, back on the infiltration of Northrop front, a interesting
cutaway from China: http://airkiller.myrice.com/bomber/gfx/b2/b2_cv.gif
I assume that this is based on publicly released information, at least I
hope so.
I'd hate to see a back-engineered version go on sale at my local Walmart
store for $5000.00 ;-)

Pat