A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Was Buran better than the shuttle?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 25th 15, 01:10 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Greg \(Strider\) Moore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 752
Default Was Buran better than the shuttle?

http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/did-t...did-1713379466

Not really anything new here, but always a fun discussion.

He doesn’t mention the apparent frame damage done on the one and only
landing.

As for the engines, one could make an argument that recovery permitted
inspection and the like.

Other thoughts?


  #2  
Old June 25th 15, 01:42 AM posted to sci.space.shuttle,sci.space.history
Jeff Findley[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,307
Default Was Buran better than the shuttle?

In article ,
says...

http://flightclub.jalopnik.com/did-t...did-1713379466

Not really anything new here, but always a fun discussion.

He doesn?t mention the apparent frame damage done on the one and only
landing.

As for the engines, one could make an argument that recovery permitted
inspection and the like.

Other thoughts?


Claiming Buran was better in almost every respect after one unmanned
flight is a stretch. We'll never know for sure how its TPS would have
faired after repeated flights (the damage after one flight isn't a good
sign). And we all know just how problematic the space shuttle's TPS
was, especially on early fights. Actually, one could say the same about
all of Buran's systems since it only orbited earth twice before reentry.
From what I remember, the flown Buran wasn't fully equipped to carry
people (no life support system installed, or something like that).

Buran's launch vehicle, Energia, was launched only twice. So while it
was successful both times (the Polyus screwed up its orbital insertion
burn, which is why it failed to make orbit), again, no one knows for
sure how reliable it would have been in the long run.

That said, separating the launch vehicle from the orbiter did allow the
launcher to be used as a HLV, something the shuttle ET and SRBs could
never do without a huge redesign (SLS being the mother of all "shuttle
based" HLV redesigns).

The biggest problem with Energia/Buran was the price, which Russia
clearly couldn't afford.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
U.S. Space Shuttle vs Soviet Buran Dean History 12 March 7th 13 03:30 PM
The return of Buran? Andre Lieven[_3_] History 2 April 18th 09 10:29 PM
Russian Buran Shuttle on Persian Gulf! Jens Roser Space Shuttle 4 September 23rd 04 04:31 AM
Buran is better scarface Space Shuttle 11 September 8th 03 08:22 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.