Europe to Join Russia in Building Next Space Shuttle

Scott M. Kozel wrote:
These are enough - the most advanced bomber of WWII, the first
supersonic transport, and the first space shuttle.

One useful acquisition out of three ain't bad

Cardman wrote:
I am now wondering if we stole some Soviet designs?

What I can never figure out is why nobody copied the T-34, not only the
best tank of World War 2 but a relatively simple design that wouldn't
have been that hard to copy.

--
"Always look on the bright side of life."
To reply by email, replace no.spam with my last name.

Russell Wallace ) writes:
Scott M. Kozel wrote:
These are enough - the most advanced bomber of WWII, the first
supersonic transport, and the first space shuttle.

One useful acquisition out of three ain't bad

Cardman wrote:
I am now wondering if we stole some Soviet designs?

What I can never figure out is why nobody copied the T-34, not only the
best tank of World War 2 but a relatively simple design that wouldn't
have been that hard to copy.

The German Panther tank had not a few T-34 elements included in it's
design, as the Panther was intended to counter the T-34, once the
German Army found out that the Soviets had the T-34.

The US tank lineage was a separate thing, and the M-26 Pershing
was the starting point that led to the M-47/48/49/60 series.

Andre

--
" I'm a man... But, I can change... If I have to... I guess. "
The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Russell Wallace wrote:


What I can never figure out is why nobody copied the T-34, not only
the best tank of World War 2 but a relatively simple design that
wouldn't have been that hard to copy.


Actually, the T-34 had some drawbacks- for one thing, its periscopes and
gun sighting systems sucked- but it was pretty good and you could make
it in huge numbers using fairly low-tech production techniques.
The best WW II tank? Probably the Panther, although it was prone to
mechanical problems.
When the Germans ran into the T-34, they did give thought to making a
copy of it. They couldn't handle armor castings of the size used for its
turret though, and its aluminum block engine (based on an Italian
aircraft engine design) was beyond their engineering abilities. So they
built the Panther instead.

Pat

MAKS 2005 photos.
Kliper and other stuff
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/c...42/index.shtml

Mike Dennis wrote:
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Brian Thorn wrote:

A new name should be chosen for the CEV/Soyuz/Kliper class of
spacecraft. "Ferry" mentioned elsewhere doesn't seem quite right,
either.


Space Van?

Pat

How about Space Minivan?

SUV!

Space Utility Veichle

- Nils

Might it make sense for NASA to use Kliper (if it happens) for access
to Low Earth Orbit?

Kliper could be launched on an exisitng EELV platform, so would avoid
the need to develop the Stick / Kebab / White Elephant.

Or is it the other way round? The need to justify the Stick means NASA
can't use Kliper.

It seems competition for Kliper at concept stage presently comes from
T-Space's air launch option.