Russian, American & Chinese space shuttles

The Americans typically use space shuttles such as the Discovery, Endeavor,
Atlantis as their means of transportation into space. The Russians used
space shuttles such as the Soyuz, Vostok and Buran. Since Russia and the
United States have such a big lead on China in the race for space, what
capabilities do space shuttles like the Discovery & Buran have that the
Shenzhou does not? Are the Chinese planning to build an advanced space plan
like the Discovery or perhaps the Locheed Martin X11?

"Chris Blair" wrote in message
...
The Americans typically use space shuttles such as the Discovery,
Endeavor,
Atlantis as their means of transportation into space. The Russians used
space shuttles such as the Soyuz, Vostok and Buran. Since Russia and the
United States have such a big lead on China in the race for space, what
capabilities do space shuttles like the Discovery & Buran have that the
Shenzhou does not? Are the Chinese planning to build an advanced space
plan
like the Discovery or perhaps the Locheed Martin X11?

Well, they're overly complex, they don't fail gracefully, and their mass
fraction stinks. Soyuz/Shenzhou, OTOH, can survive a guidance failure and
ballistic descent (assuming Shenzhou can due to its obvious Soyuz
commonality).

Anything with wings is way too complex for simple LEO ops.

"Chris Blair" wrote in message
...
The Americans typically use space shuttles such as the Discovery,
Endeavor,
Atlantis as their means of transportation into space. The Russians used
space shuttles such as the Soyuz, Vostok and Buran. Since Russia and the
United States have such a big lead on China in the race for space, what
capabilities do space shuttles like the Discovery & Buran have that the
Shenzhou does not? Are the Chinese planning to build an advanced space
plan
like the Discovery or perhaps the Locheed Martin X11?


Get a clue. Buran doesn't exist, and 90% of the rest of your questions
could be answered with some basic web searches. Do your own homework.

I'll add something to that: a SHUTTLE has wings.
Vostok/Soyuz/Shenzhou are/were ****ing CAPSULES, you idiot. Get
your basic semantics correct, at least! There have been TWO
'shuttles'. One is on life-support, the other is dead and buried...


Get a clue. Buran doesn't exist, and 90% of the rest of your questions
could be answered with some basic web searches. Do your own homework.



--
remove KILLSPAMMERS to reply!

Guy's Space Shuttle Payload Bay page:

http://www.netspace.net.au/~pargoo/

"Chris Blair" wrote in message
...
The Americans typically use space shuttles such as the Discovery,
Endeavor,
Atlantis as their means of transportation into space. The Russians used
space shuttles such as the Soyuz, Vostok and Buran

Those are three separate classes of vehicles. Vostok was a much earlier
capsule design that hasn't flown in over three decades.

Buran was very much a copy of the US design, but only flew once, unmanned.

Soyuz is the current workhorse capsule flown by the Russians. Note each one
that flies is a NEW vehicle, not a reuseable one.

. Since Russia and the
United States have such a big lead on China in the race for space, what
capabilities do space shuttles like the Discovery & Buran have that the
Shenzhou does not? Are the Chinese planning to build an advanced space
plan
like the Discovery or perhaps the Locheed Martin X11?

"Ned Pike" wrote in
:

Well, they're overly complex, they don't fail gracefully, and their
mass fraction stinks. Soyuz/Shenzhou, OTOH, can survive a guidance
failure and ballistic descent (assuming Shenzhou can due to its
obvious Soyuz commonality).

I'm curious - since you are obviously an expert on entry guidance, what
*does* happen to the US space shuttle if primary guidance fails?

grin

--
JRF

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

In message
"Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)" wrote:


"Chris Blair" wrote in message
...
The Americans typically use space shuttles such as the Discovery,
Endeavor,
Atlantis as their means of transportation into space. The Russians used
space shuttles such as the Soyuz, Vostok and Buran

Those are three separate classes of vehicles. Vostok was a much earlier
capsule design that hasn't flown in over three decades.

Not under the Vostok name maybe, but a Foton materials processing
satellite went up a year and a day ago and the last Bion was only 7
years ago.

Anthony

--
| Weather prediction will never be accurate until we |
| kill all the butterflies |

"Jorge R. Frank" wrote:

"Ned Pike" wrote in
:

Well, they're overly complex, they don't fail gracefully, and their
mass fraction stinks. Soyuz/Shenzhou, OTOH, can survive a guidance
failure and ballistic descent (assuming Shenzhou can due to its
obvious Soyuz commonality).

I'm curious - since you are obviously an expert on entry guidance, what
*does* happen to the US space shuttle if primary guidance fails?

grin

/me Wonders if Ned even sees the chasm yawning before him....

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Jorge R. Frank" wrote:

"Ned Pike" wrote in
:


/me Wonders if Ned even sees the chasm yawning before him....


Probably not, because I'm no space scientist. I was trying to refer to the
recent ISS/Soyuz descent that went ballistic instead of lifted (for lack of
a better word or two). I obviously spoke well out of my depth. Sue me.

"Ned Pike" wrote in
:

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Jorge R. Frank" wrote:

"Ned Pike" wrote in
:

/me Wonders if Ned even sees the chasm yawning before him....

Probably not, because I'm no space scientist. I was trying to refer
to the recent ISS/Soyuz descent that went ballistic instead of lifted
(for lack of a better word or two).

Right. The primary guidance system failed, so the spacecraft re-entered
ballistically and landed safely, just with higher Gs and many km off
course.

The implication of your post, for any reasonable reader, is that the
shuttle could not survive a similar failure. This is incorrect. The
shuttle has a backup system called the BFS. If the primary system fails,
the crew engages the backup and lands safely, on the same runway, and after
pulling the same Gs.

The moral of the story is, there's more than one way to engineer fault-
tolerance into a system. Soyuz and shuttle use different methods but both
are fault-tolerant.

--
JRF

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