"Glory to Ukraine! Glory to heroes!" (Ukrainian “Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the heroes!”) is a Ukrainian patriotic greeting. The first part of the greeting "Glory to Ukraine" was actively used by the Ukrainian national liberation movement at the beginning of the 20th century and during the time of the Ukrainian People's Republic (1917-1920)[1][2]. Option "Glory to Ukraine!" with the answer "Glory to the Heroes!" was adopted as an organizational password-greeting among members of the OUN and UPA at the beginning of World War II
Chriz V. Yes, but the difference is, that a glider like the Space Shuttle is much harder to controll and it was able to calculate a new route depending on the weather data it self recognised and landed. The Space Shuttle wasn't able to fly in Autopilot. It was only able to execute programms for burnings and liftoff by Autopilot.
But what good is a space plane if all you're doing is launching satellites etc? The shuttles were intended to ferry crews to orbit and back. The Soviets just weren't confident enough in the craft to risk human crew on the first launch. And whatever data was gleaned from that first flight obviously didnt impress them enough to try it again. That speaks volumes.
@@razorfett147 americans were not enough confident to cinstruct autopilot for Space shuttle so they have to risk people life. Soviets made it safer way.
Russians believed that no spacecraft or rocket can be developed without explosions. They expected explosions and prepared for them. Imagine the faces of those engineers at launch control when they realize nothing went wrong. That's a lot of wtf faces.
It's a shame what happened to it. The Buran had so much potential as a shuttle that could make a round trip from Earth to orbit and back completely unmanned (in the late 80s mind you), something that our own shuttles couldn't do.
actually the US space shuttle could land automatically too, with the MLS (Micro-wave Landing System) that is now used by the military. But the astronauts wanted to fly the shuttle during the landing phase, wich is understandable. It would be silly to have US space shuttle do all the maneuvers during the reentry done by the computer, but couldn't land itself like airliners (the autoland was already in use at that time).
@@ГеоргийМурзич you're wrong, automated landing are even required in CAT2 and CAT3 approaches. Sometimes even in CAT1 for systems check or a quota so pilots know how to use it from to time. In my country (Belgium), the smog in the morning is so tuck, you can't land there without autoland land. The autoland is part of the ILS system.
@@SnaxDesAvions What's required today wasn't required 30 years ago. Actually, it was pretty much impossible to land ( touchdown and till full stop) a gliding (!) airliner automatically
The Buran was the first unmanned space drone to ever exist, it could circle the earth's orbit and land automatically via it's sophisticated computer programs and there were also smaller drones (Nuclear Space Drones) in the cargo bay of the buran, amerika or any other country had nothing like it, it was 30 years ahead of it's time
And yet, it never flew again. Everyday ailiners, even back in the 80s, had pretty sophisticated autopilot and auto nav systems. NASA may have lost 2 craft, but it was because of human negligence and pencil pusher ideology....not because of poorly designed spacecraft. The shuttles operated all the way into the last decade on 70s technology....and even Columbia damn near survived catastrophic damage to its wing sufaces. It flew true until the wing was almost completely gone.Another 30 sec and it would have made it home. Tough ship
@@dylanmccallister1888 Dude the only one looking like a "tard" right now is you. Clearly the only way you know how to present an argument is with name calling and clapback
0Kostyan Глупо думать, что американцы за это время не получили наработок в постройке челноков. Давайте уже смотреть правде в глаза. Просто СССР пошла по другому пути одноразовых ракет. Зато это позволило постоянно модернизировать наши ракеты. Американцы вон до сих пор покупают наши двигатели рд-180 (по крайней мере до последних событий). Так что хватит ВАМ нести чушь. У наших стран разный опыт в космосе и сравнивать беспредельно глупо.
Будут у России и гораздо более масштабные проекты. Всему свое время, друзья. Промышленность свою возродим, укрепим безопасность, создадим Евразийский Союз - и вот тогда полетим исследовать дальний космос :))
Весь полет Бурана прошел в автоматическом режиме, экипажа на борту не было. Советская автоматика была лучшей на тот момент :) All flight "Buran" took place in the automatic mode, the crew on board was not. Soviet automatics was the best at that time.
I had some talks with guys involved in Buran program. All in all, economics aside, it was a well-engineered concept. Full auto landing, apogee capability of 2000 km...but expensive as hell.
Space Shuttle and Buran were way too expensive to operate. However, aerospace technology has advanced a good amount since the 1970s. We could redesign and build a much cheaper version of the shuttle now. I wouldn't make it as large, nor to support 6 people for 3-4 weeks. In a way Space Shuttle was designed to sometimes play the role of temporary 'small' space station, which is an obsolete capability with ISS in orbit. Most of the modules on ISS don't even come close to filling the length of the Space Shuttle or Buran cargo bays, so why have it that long? Design it for just three crew to make relatively quick deliveries to ISS etc., unless it carries a MPLM type module in the cargo bay that could bring more people plus supplies for inside the station. The orbiter itself should just be built around the idea of being able to support 3 crew for 1 week in orbit; two pilots and a mission specialist. It would be quite a bit lighter, and thus require a smaller launch vehicle assembly. Make the entire launch vehicle assembly reusable with fast turnaround time. Either give the 1st stages wings and landing gear, or do what SpaceX is doing with vertically landing the 1st stage. If US, Russia, ESA, and Japan collaborated on design and production, it would be the most cost effective. US and Russia have done the space plane before, and have the most experience. ESA and Japan have experience designing small space planes before, but neither quite got to building them, so I would include those guys in the effort. Participating countries would each get their own fleet to operate.
All in all, I agree. Reusable LV is a great goal (better if single stage to orbit). But, honestly, if we want to speak seriously about delivering significant mass to the space (and it means first to LEO) - we have to get rid from chemical rockets. Way too weak. Only nuclear engines will play a feasible goal here. USSR and USA had both programs for nuclear thermal rockets (NERVA, RD-410). We could have nuclear launch vehicles by 1975. Twice the payload!
Nasa claims to have successfully tested a reaction less drive called the EM or electromagnetic. This is based on Miguel Alcubierre's "space bubble" hypothesis. It is what he often refers to as the warp drive.
It would be rad to see a modern take on Buran where the launch system "SpaceXes" back to the pad with modern materials. Sadly, that probably will never happen. If a couple billion dollars happened to slip into my back pocket, who knows lol.
Александр Малахов This spaceship is not designed to deliver or carry nuclear weapon, your assumption is based on speculation not on the design and engineering data of that shuttle.
Mohammed Alghamdi I'm Russian, and I know little bit more than you about our space program. Just trust me. Our documentaries and articles (Russian documentaries and articles is not american documentaries and articles, buddy). Just for example.
Buran fully automated, the Energia rocket it flew on could have been used for other uses, such as a manned lunar mission. This is more like space shuttle 2.0. A shame this bird was moth balled after one flight.
Its stupid for people to argue over who has the best vehicle. When people enter space it should not be as Americans, Russians etc. iIt should be as terrans or earthlings. When it comes to space exploration we are all in this together.
@conacal rubdur you can argue the definition of communism. The Soviet Union was more state capitalist. Profits were reinvested back into the economy rather than being spent luxuriously. The real point is understanding the role of the leadership. How they acted instead of what they said.
I really wished that this shuttle was used more than once. It would of been neat to have scene this shuttle together in space next to a American shuttle. Even if it was just a fly by.
+steve v and we are told apparently that it was the soviets who waisted money on a race against the west, whilst their people lived in "poor" conditions... but the 'incompitent' soviets realized that the shuttle programe is too expensive and inefficient a couple of decades before the 'smart and efficient' americans and rather perfected a privious system developed by them, which is still in use today... by evrybody... including the 'efficient' americans... wonder why i'm geting this strong smell of bull shit here... =))))
@@splifstar85 holy fucking hell, I have never seen a cope this strong. Your country didn’t do a second trip with the Buran because your country fucking imploded, the idea that your country altruistically ceased the program to help the people is almost downright delusional.
The russian shuttles were junk anyhow,, the only one that flew had almost burned up on reentry WHY? because the russian copy (stolen) was made from false data fed to russian spies...and that's history fact. The russians copied phony data fed to them once it was discovered they were stealing info. The copy the russians made at the end of the day was junk at best
The US have touched the miles that for sure but what Russia did in that time line will never be beaten by any other nation. Russia you absolute beauty, They know how to make things and how to make them big , Respect from India
Das Buran/Energja Projekt hatte die UdSSR 1988 wieder an die Spitze der Raumfahrtnationen gebracht. Was für eine menschliche, technische und Ingenieurstechnische Meisterleistung. Viele neue Technologien wurden erfunden und teilweise auch am Energia/Buran Projekt umgesetzt. Der vollautomatische unbemannte Start, Flug und die vollautomatische Ladung mit Kurskorrektur der Computer im Buran war ein Novum.👍
To manage the planting process, in addition to ground control and management, we used our own computer (Buran digital computer) Burana Biser-4. The military order determined the architecture of the BTSVM - it was implemented in the form of four parallel independent computational channels and a comparator that continuously compared the results at the output channels. In case of deviation of the results of any of the channels from the other three, it was switched off and the computer continued to work in its normal mode. In the same way, one more damaged computational channel could be disabled, than the automatic redundancy and fault tolerance of the computer was achieved. Computing channels (or kernels, in modern terminology) operated at a frequency of 4 MHz and had 128 KB of RAM and 16 KB of permanent program memory. Such architecture allowed the computer to control the landing process of the Buran even in the conditions of nuclear war (this was part of the TK at the request of the military).
Very impressive. I don't care who designed this machine, more space travel is good for all of us, and just as exciting. It is a shame it was abandoned.
***** just think if they got it back up and running again .. how that would make use feel in the USA .. there still setting around over there and if they wanted could upgrade them and never know ... make a bigger spy plane then ares
***** Your comment brought a question to my mind: If Russia had a bottomless bank vault and could afford to rebuild the Buran program, I wonder if they have the technology to resurrect the Buran or would they have to start over from scratch. I have heard and read reports that the United States would have to start over from scratch if they wanted to build a super-rocket like the Saturn V because they did not preserve the blueprints or the technology to build it. I wonder if Russia was equally backward in its thinking as concerns the Buran.
+Bill Chambers They didn't preserve the blueprints? They preserved many of the entire rockets including the lunar modules. Just take a tour of Cape Canaveral, they have the original tracked crawlers they used to transport the Saturn V to the launchpads, and that's just what they let the public see.
At 0:58 you can see the difference in the fuels used on this beast, the blue flame belongs to the 4 RD-0120 Hydrogen/oxygen rocket engines which powered the core stage, while the yellow flames belong to the 4 Kerosene/oxygen booster rockets.
TOTALLY different design from the American shuttle. As you can clearly see, the nose gear is much further back compared to the American shuttle. Pretty obvious they don't look anything alike.
The west was not prepared for this. Energija Buran was more modern and powerful than anything the west had. So they had to stop it. The Soviets had flown it unmanned by its own computer program. It worked like a charm. Imagine Energija-Buran-Baikal, a fully re-usable launch system around 1995, 20 years before Falcon 9 became reusable.
I have no problem with the Buran. The STS was a great design. Now the opportunity is to 'get out there'. The world learned a bunch of engineering and saw the risks and costs... we can go forward and fulfill the ideas and ambitions of why all this stuff was built in the first place. When you go to orbit and beyond, we are no longer just a citizen from some nation... Your a human from Earth traveling our common solar system. 500, 1000, 10 thousand years from now...will be fantastic!
One misconception about the Soviet shuttle was that it had air breathing jet engines for landing. This was not correct. One of the test orbiters (akin to the Shuttle Enterprise) did have jet engines that would alow it to fly to high altitude and then cut the engines and glide back to the runway. It was easier than having to use a 747.
Часто пересматриваю эти и другие видео с Бураном и мысленно возвращаюсь в те далекие годы, тогда по радио в он-лайне слушал посадку Бурана и был безмерно горд за свою Родину . . . а сейчас - ракетоноситель под хохлому.
J Cheatham Your translator is not working properly. I'm just saying, all the achievements of the Buran so far no one has surpassed. Buran is often confused with the drone, but this is a mistake. Buran was not a drone. Buran is a fully automated robot, they are not ruled from earth as drones.
Глонасс не работал так как работает сейчас. Там требуется не только большое количество спутников но и огромное количество наземных станций приемников. СССР хоть и планировал запуск глонасс но все же он не работал должным образом. Буран летел на автоматике, на таком принципе уже не строят беспилотники. Буран сам корректировал свой полет и посадку с уходом на второй круг, этими действиями слегка ошарашив своих создателей.
Пилотирование и навигация это разные задачи) Что бы произвести пилотирование нужно знать текущие координаты судна, скорость, угол атаки, тангаж и т.д. Эти данные имеют случайный характер, поэтому не могут быть занесены в боротовой компьютер или точно измерены исключительно бортовыми средствами. Если судить по информации в интернете, то при посадке использовались "трассовый радиолокационный комплекс "Скала-МК", аэродромный обзорный радиолокатор "Ильмень" и посадочный радиолокационный комплекс "Волхов-П"". Первый обеспечивает дальность 600км. Остальные действуют только в районе аэродрома. Что использовалось при пилотировании за этой областью, вопрос открытый.
I just wish everyone would get along. I've been around the world and I think every country and culture I've encountered is great have made great accomplishments that anyone would be proud of. When I see comments that degrade and insult other people because they are from somewhere else or there beliefs are different pisses me off. Humans are suppose to be the dominant life form on the planet, but when I see comments like these. It makes me wonder.
@@uio890138 welcome back, the statement was the Russian shuttle was fully automated, including landing, the comparison was the us shuttle wasn't automated, that was all.
@@eblevinda What is that based on though? Who says the US shuttle couldn't be auto piloted from start to finish? It's not like that technology was mastered only by the Russians. I think the Russians had to use it since they knew their shuttle design was so raw and unreliable that it likely couldn't support a manned mission, even a mission that involved a single orbit.
You seem to be mistaking ejector seats with an escape capsule,I only remarked on ejector seats on fighters to point out that the Russians had a better one for decades and it took that long for the west to copy it. The Burans cockpit was a one big re-enforced escape capsule,designed to detach or be blown away from the rest of the spacecraft and fall back or re-enter like a Soyuz capsule. No one in his right mind will put ejector seats on a space vehicle.
You got to admire the Russians, their budget has never matched that of NASAS but they have built and created some amazing machines and structures, from an engineering point, look at 0:32 that's an amazing structure, only an advanced first rate nation can built such a structure and machine, a rocket that can put 100 tons in orbit.
This is not russian space shuttle, THIS IS THE SOVIET UNION SPACE SHUTTLE.... PLEASE RESPECT THOSE 15 FORMER SOVIET UNION REPUBLIC COUNTRIES IT WAS SET BY OUR BIG SOVIET UNION COUNTRY. BUT NOT RUSSIAN ONLY......
Buran is the first programmable shuttle, but Columbia was the first ever shuttle. Columbia first flew in 1981 not to space but it was a test flight which most people call the STS-1 after that the engines were designed, next were the thermal tiles and than some new super glue. However, in my opinion, the Columbia disaster was probably the worst space disaster in history. I mean could you imagine trying to control a severely damaged spacecraft that is disintegrating in earths atmosphere.
The main problems were partly down to politics and economics. Rockets aren't simply 'better' but are much more cheaper to run. Manned STS's of the reusable type are incredibly expensive to run and their costs increase as they age. Of course, as safety becomes a much more important factor costs increase further. The US STS was also created because of a set of defined parameters from all sections of US Defence and had to be built for various jobs. It was a truck, a science lab, an obs station....
Awesome video. It would be interesting to know how safe and affordable this platform would have been had it lived to fly along side the US space shuttle for more than a few missions. As with most Russian engineering (Which I respect just as deeply as US engineering) it seems a little over-engineered (bigger :) ) in regards to every detail, even the support for the grounded shuttle, and the stadium lights :) I would love to know more about the Buran and its history!
@creativeprojects720 It is hard to find the answer to that question. Probabli only a few people know for sure. But it is believed that at that time "The Democracy" came in USSR."The Buran program was formally closed in 1993, but Mikhail Gorbachev's negative attitude towards the program had already left little doubt that its first launch would be the last as well, according to the memoirs of acad. Chertok."(wikipedia). And we all know who was paying him and where he lives now...
Fantastic music to express these soviet to Russian craft achievement! I can see a space program take this Braun craft, turn it larger, into a starcraft/ship, just by giving it a main wing wrapping over its body, with mini sets of verticle boosters at the dermis skin of the belly, to land on low gravity moons & planets as *Buran Starship* , more effective with the fuel of SN. But smaller cargo.
@sovietskies69 glad u asked... the Russians built the buran AFTER america's space shuttle... and yes u can learn allot about air foils and angles by pictures alone... which is why lots of their aircraft looks like stuff we built previously... look at the havoc and the apache helicopters as another example. having said that copy paste was both ways during the cold war.. and is still that way... but the reason soviets copied the shuttle was partly to show that they could
The Buran space shuttle was very advanced, it had a artificial intelligence computer, the Buran was able to land on it's own, but it also made several maneuvers to slow the orbiter so it could land precisely on the runway, Russian engineers were very proud of this.
The main difference - automatic orbital flights. Therefore Shuttle and Buran - are fundamentally different products. All speculation about the reasons for the similarities look logical, consider your experience with the existing Shuttle. We can say that the Buran - Shuttle is the second generation.
the designs are similar because it's the only design that can work in that size, the blunt stubby wings the angle of attack, the vertical stabilizer the tiles. you can't have a different wing aspect ratio or high mounted wings on reentry, they would simply break up. This design or similar is the only way to do this.
I wish the Russians would come up with their own designs. the AN225 is a C-5 with an extra engine and twin rudders. The Buran looks exactly like an American shuttle. Impressive nonetheless.
Who's technology landed on a Comet and who's technology is circling Jupiter ryt now. I'll give u a hint. Not russia. Russians landed probes on other planets and kept people in space for ridiculous amounts of time. For what? How many Russians died in space program? American technology on Mars, moon, and comet is far more advanced.
The AMERICANS did away with the space shuttle program to cut costs. WE use rustic Russian vehicles to propel us into space because there are so many Russian engines from decommissioned transcontinental missiles to use. NASA is working on the next Gen transporter which will take off and land under its own power. It will revolutionize and make space travel affordable to the upper middle class. The U.S. Will bury the competition once more. Thanks for the interest and you are welcomed for the free lesson, whatever the fuck your name is.
I don't use it. NASA uses it. Buran does not look similar. more like exactly. Still, Soviet technology was effective and rugged. Their probes landed on other heavenly bodies and sent back information. that was 45 years ago. Americans landed a ROVER on Mars and it climbed over the Martian landscape for Months! Sending back countless bits of information. Whats important is that Humans are curious and look to the heavens for answers and are always searching.
How many Russians died in the space program? 4. How many has NASA killed? 17. One of the best things to come out of the Soviet Union was their contribution to space exploration. It was a rare gathering of some of the most brilliant minds on this planet, and you only have to take a look at some of the space "firsts" to see this- First man in space First to orbit First to space walk First to the moon (probe) First satellite (Sputnik) First space station (Mir) First to land on another planet! (Venera) The Russian Soyuz system is what lifts Americans into space today. It has an unmatched safety record. Don't let media propaganda colour your perceptions. A lot more truth, beauty and freedom will be yours if you simply do your own research, questioning and THINKING for yourself!
Buran was obviously a copy of the US space shuttle. But it was also a massive improvement of it. In appearance, it was similar, and pretty much served the same purpose, but in many ways, and in reality, it was completely different. It never flew again because of lack of budget after the collapse of the USSR. And because the Russians realized that such type of vehicle was an economic disaster, as the American space shuttle program turned out to be. But the first an only flight of Buran was an absolute success.. Period. Give credit where credit is due..
Actually the Buran was better. Judging by two factors. First It could be piloted full unmanned and this was shown by its maiden flight. No other Shuttle could do that. The next factor was that the whole cockpit was build as an escape capsule,something that NASA never bothered with and raises the question if the two crews lost by them could be saved by coping the Russian concept.The Russian are really good at this.Took NATO ages to use the Russian K-36DM ejector seat concept on their seats
К тем кто вопиет что "Все просрали!..", "Горбачев слил!..": - Считаю ничего не слито. Вся ценность не в самом нашем потерянном шатле, а полученых знаниях, технологиях и приобретенном опыте. Их теперь и надо использовать при новых разработках! А "Буран", признаемся, это ведь военная машина. Холодная война кончилась и он стал ненужен. Бомбить с космоса некого. А если сейчас и будет кого то дешевле будет эскадрилью шатлов купить в Китае. ))
+kadatka Знания есть, нету людей кто это ручками умеет делать, плюс отсутствует производственная база для всех компонентов. Сейчас мы можем только нефть качать и лес рубить . . .
It is amazing that is was completely automated. Anyone who has any experience with programming and loves space technologies is amazed, for me this is jawdropping because achieving that is very hard because it is so complex problem. And even doing it with computers which are a joke when they are compared to modern ones. Hats off to the engineers who worked on the Buran.
All those replies about copying design from NASA are plain BS. Both machines had the same flight envelopes and purpose, thus they look similar as a consequence. All cars are very similar, but this does not mean they've all been copied from a single source. Get a little education before posting, please.
The Ruskies have a history of "Copying" remember the B29's that landed in russia the C47's the Studebaker trucks etc..ALL COPIES>>> wow Russian engineering ! ! !
GeoSciful Maybe so, but that does not disqualify it from being a copy either. Its not just the general airframe of Buran but the cargo bay layouts, crew cabin layouts and directional thruster placements are identical as well. Its not like western companies didn't grab good ideas from the Soviets. Soviets could really come up with great ideas. But they didn't have the money to pore into R&D the way the west did. So often they copied an idea from the west then studied it for improvements. Hint! Hint! Buran.
Проект "Буран"/"Энергия" вернул СССР в 1988 году на первое место среди стран, совершающих космические путешествия. Это был человеческий, технический и инженерный шедевр. В проекте "Энергия"/"Буран" было изобретено и частично реализовано множество новых технологий. Полностью автоматический беспилотный запуск, полет и полностью автоматическая загрузка с коррекцией курса с помощью компьютера в "Буране" были новинкой. 👍🥇
The Russians had developed this concept long before the americans, also the Energia system was different from American one, Energia rocket could place heavy payloads in space, where as American STS system could only fly with the space shuttle attached which mean it could launch 25 tons to orbit, Energia on the other hand could place 100 tons in space, which makes it the second most powerful rocket in history.
The Buran/Energja project brought the USSR back to the top of the space travelling nations in 1988. What a human, technical and engineering masterpiece. Many new technologies were invented and partially realised in the Energia/Buran project. The fully automatic unmanned launch, flight and fully automatic loading with course correction by computer in the Buran was a novelty. 👍🥇
The Russians saw the space shuttle, and then they made an even better Space Shuttle for themselves and called it Buran witch sounds even better then Space Shuttle lets be honest, it flew one time, almost to perfection, landed even in windy weather, only lost 5 of its 38.000 heat tiles! and then the Russians decided the following : lets store our mighty Buran space craft in one of our most crappy hangars, and that one collapsed in 2002, destroying the only Buran that flew into space!...only in Russia lol
Because they were in a financial and political crisis, and launching a space shuttle-like thingy is too expensive, the reason why the Space Shuttle Program was terminated in 2011. The Russians rapidly saw that and stuck back to capsules. The problem is that today the Soyuz is almost the same thing it ever was, when it could be more advanced. If USA did the same, they wouldn't have this problem of not having their own spacecraft to send astronauts to the ISS.
Buran is not based on Shuttle. Aerodynamics used for space airplanes is based on Soviet Spiral project which came way before Shuttle. Saying Buran is based or copy of Shuttle just because of its looks, is like saying thousand car manufactures are copying some other hundred car manufacturer designs just because of vehicle physic need for such looks.
The russian shuttles were junk anyhow,, the only one that flew had almost burned up on reentry WHY? because the russian copy (stolen) was made from false data fed to russian spies...and that's history fact. The russians copied phony data fed to them once it was discovered they were stealing info. The copy the russians made at the end of the day was junk at best.
@@starview1 I strongly believe you just didn't grasp the level of complexity which spacecraft building involves. Shooting the breeze is way easier task
@DoctorWhoMaster999 It was scrapped because the idea of shuttle is extremely cost-ineffective. Usual rockets costs about 10% (i.e. 10 times less) for the same weight to orbit compared to what shuttle would require.
One thing is for sure he did not work under oppressed conditions in the U.S.A. USSR had plenty of top notch German scientists that enabled them to have their firsts in space as well. Their moon rocket blew up on the pad and who has sent multiple landers to mars? I think both sides have produced great space achievements utilizing German expertiese so lets just leave it at that.
I think the Russians understood that space planes would never put anything into orbit at lower cost than mass produced disposable rockets. Shuttles had no viable escape systems if anything went wrong. Russia was not prepared to lose cosmonauts and this is why the one flight Buran made into space was remote controlled. It took 30 years and two lost crews for America to learn that. Only Russia can put men in space now and service the ISS.
yes you are right, the past should be laid to rest, i guess all nations suffered in that stupid war one way or the other, we all have the same goals friend, lets move forward and not look back.
Был один запуск, потому что нам этот Буран никуда не впёрся. Его сделали чтобы показать, что мы и умеем. Шаттл - это дорогой и неэффективный способ доставки грузов на орбиту. По-этому мы его и не использовали.
The original Buran is located in Technikmuseum Speyer in Germany. I have seen it back then, when they transferred it from the river to the Museum and also went to the museum a few times to see it. It's actually not far from my home....
At this point, it isn't possible with any reasonable amount of money. Technology is lost, people that worked on the project are probably mostly dead by now. The cost would be the same like going to Mars if not more. And if somebody was willing to give such amount of money to space program - it's better if they invest it into Mars expedition :)
Nov. 4, 1997 - When U.S. space shuttles started linking up with Russia's Mir space station in 1995, both sides owed a small debt to the old Soviet secret police, the KGB. According to documents obtained by NBC News, it was the KGB that successfully stole the U.S. shuttle design in the '70s and '80s. That theft permitted the Soviet Union to build its own carbon copy of the U.S. system, called the Buran, thus unintentionally laying the groundwork for the compatibility between the U.S. and Russian systems. Although the Soviet shuttle flew only once in 1990, it was planned in part as a space ferry to link up with Mir. That all-Soviet linkup never took place, and the Soviet shuttle was finally abandoned in 1994. But because the Soviet craft was so similar to the U.S. version, designing a Mir linkup for Atlantis and other U.S. shuttles proved simple and efficient. In fact, the first linkup between the Mir and the shuttle Atlantis in 1995 used the very system the Russians designed for their own shuttle. The story of the Soviet shuttle is really the story of the competition between the two great space powers in microcosm, complete with Cold War intrigue and paranoia, mirror-image competition and all manner of spies, both human and electronic. It may also be the first recorded example of spying online. Brezhnev's paranoia The story begins in 1974 with a secret meeting at the Kremlin. Vladimir Smirnov, head of the Soviet Union’s powerful Military-Industrial Commission, or VPK, was laying out priorities for the next year to Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev. The VPK was the body that directed not only the military projects but also laid out strategies for obtaining the technologies.
shame this epic beast was never preserved for all mankind :'( its a triumph of engineering and so much more cool than the floored space shuttle from america. even though data was scraped from there! call it a mk2 if you will ;)
I havent even read any comments below but I can imagine the exchange went something like this. "Thats just a copy of the space shuttle! , USA USA USA!" "F***k Off of Yankee, this is 100% Soviet Russian" and repeat! Got to love humanity :/
Good job the Russians saw the shuttle concept for what it was otherwise they would not be able to put men in space either and the ISS abandoned. They realised that the future of space was in relatively low cost production line made expendable rocket systems. The US shuttle cost more than expendables and the crew had no escape if anything went wrong.
***** Because Soviet union was destroyed, and no one think about Buran after that. But the flow of Buran was very succesful and show that this Shuttle exceeds US version. However both country refused to exploitate this spaceship. To no purpose/
+Mike Paulk Hehe, is that why the space shuttle program was shut down? And im not going to start about the US relying on Russian rockets to boost their spacecraft for years. And even now you guys dont even have anything to go to space with... Except the Soyuz rockets. And guess what, theyre also Russian.
🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦
Support Ukraine! Support ZSU!
Donate for military, humanitarian causes here:
war.ukraine.ua/support-ukraine/
Slava ZSU!
🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦
Слава Україні! Героям слава!
hi
"Glory to Ukraine! Glory to heroes!" (Ukrainian “Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the heroes!”) is a Ukrainian patriotic greeting. The first part of the greeting "Glory to Ukraine" was actively used by the Ukrainian national liberation movement at the beginning of the 20th century and during the time of the Ukrainian People's Republic (1917-1920)[1][2].
Option "Glory to Ukraine!" with the answer "Glory to the Heroes!" was adopted as an organizational password-greeting among members of the OUN and UPA at the beginning of World War II
@@Zant1anиздoxHи, opk
страна попрошайка)
Не позорился бы, дебил.
the first (And last) launch of Buran was completely automatic, no crew was onboard. This is the most amazing thing for me.
starview1 nope it went safely back and had better specs than the space shuttle.
kublya9 It's not that amazing. A lot airliners had self piloting automatic systems back then
Chriz V. Yes, but the difference is, that a glider like the Space Shuttle is much harder to controll and it was able to calculate a new route depending on the weather data it self recognised and landed. The Space Shuttle wasn't able to fly in Autopilot. It was only able to execute programms for burnings and liftoff by Autopilot.
But what good is a space plane if all you're doing is launching satellites etc? The shuttles were intended to ferry crews to orbit and back. The Soviets just weren't confident enough in the craft to risk human crew on the first launch. And whatever data was gleaned from that first flight obviously didnt impress them enough to try it again. That speaks volumes.
@@razorfett147 americans were not enough confident to cinstruct autopilot for Space shuttle so they have to risk people life. Soviets made it safer way.
Russian Buran was a full automate...no man onboard.... a giant space drone controlled from earth all the way....
Itz was supposed to , they just wanted to kill no one in the shuttle
Russians believed that no spacecraft or rocket can be developed without explosions. They expected explosions and prepared for them. Imagine the faces of those engineers at launch control when they realize nothing went wrong. That's a lot of wtf faces.
In fact, Buran was not controlled from the ground. The entire flight was made in fully automatic mode.
It's better to tell about American astronauts in diapers and without toilets.
There's no doubting the Soviet/Russian space program has been far more successful than the American one.
It's a shame what happened to it. The Buran had so much potential as a shuttle that could make a round trip from Earth to orbit and back completely unmanned (in the late 80s mind you), something that our own shuttles couldn't do.
It gets a lot more complicated when you execute meaningful operations from a space shuttle. Any 'drone' and make 2 orbits and land again.
actually the US space shuttle could land automatically too, with the MLS (Micro-wave Landing System) that is now used by the military. But the astronauts wanted to fly the shuttle during the landing phase, wich is understandable.
It would be silly to have US space shuttle do all the maneuvers during the reentry done by the computer, but couldn't land itself like airliners (the autoland was already in use at that time).
Airlines allowed only automated approach to the airfield, not fully automated landing
@@ГеоргийМурзич you're wrong, automated landing are even required in CAT2 and CAT3 approaches.
Sometimes even in CAT1 for systems check or a quota so pilots know how to use it from to time.
In my country (Belgium), the smog in the morning is so tuck, you can't land there without autoland land.
The autoland is part of the ILS system.
@@SnaxDesAvions What's required today wasn't required 30 years ago. Actually, it was pretty much impossible to land ( touchdown and till full stop) a gliding (!) airliner automatically
I want the space race back.
+tjpld You can step into a Buran Orbiter @ Speyer Technik Museum !
Micha eyL I have been there and done that! I live in the Rhein Neckar Area. Sinsheim Technik Museum is pretty cool too. They have the Concord.
+tjpld me too , friggin' awesome , now i am struggling to go to star village/city (idk how its called) to step in soyuz or at least mir
USSR - fully automated shuttle in 1989. USA - 2011 - fully zero.
Felipe Franco
China space station it is copy Soviet spase station (min) 1990 years old)))
The Buran was the first unmanned space drone to ever exist, it could circle the earth's orbit and land automatically via it's sophisticated computer programs and there were also smaller drones (Nuclear Space Drones) in the cargo bay of the buran, amerika or any other country had nothing like it, it was 30 years ahead of it's time
***** What sophisticated programs did it use? Were they at all like the ones you used to make your post, and read mine? :)
And yet, it never flew again. Everyday ailiners, even back in the 80s, had pretty sophisticated autopilot and auto nav systems.
NASA may have lost 2 craft, but it was because of human negligence and pencil pusher ideology....not because of poorly designed spacecraft. The shuttles operated all the way into the last decade on 70s technology....and even Columbia damn near survived catastrophic damage to its wing sufaces. It flew true until the wing was almost completely gone.Another 30 sec and it would have made it home. Tough ship
@@dylanmccallister1888 Dude the only one looking like a "tard" right now is you. Clearly the only way you know how to present an argument is with name calling and clapback
@@razorfett147
Mic Krout bull shit, it done nothing.....
You are comparing reality to fantasy
This breaks my heart, I wish if this program continued
Мы сами расстроены
Валерий Залевин
you guys had a really nice shuttle
if we could run it with the aircraft fuselage, then yes. And so to the U.S. shuttle too far. It was a project of experimentation
0Kostyan Глупо думать, что американцы за это время не получили наработок в постройке челноков. Давайте уже смотреть правде в глаза. Просто СССР пошла по другому пути одноразовых ракет. Зато это позволило постоянно модернизировать наши ракеты. Американцы вон до сих пор покупают наши двигатели рд-180 (по крайней мере до последних событий). Так что хватит ВАМ нести чушь. У наших стран разный опыт в космосе и сравнивать беспредельно глупо.
Будут у России и гораздо более масштабные проекты. Всему свое время, друзья. Промышленность свою возродим, укрепим безопасность, создадим Евразийский Союз - и вот тогда полетим исследовать дальний космос :))
Весь полет Бурана прошел в автоматическом режиме, экипажа на борту не было. Советская автоматика была лучшей на тот момент :)
All flight "Buran" took place in the automatic mode, the crew on board was not. Soviet automatics was the best at that time.
United together in friendship and labor, out mighty republics shall ever endure, the great Soviet Union will live through the ages...
I had some talks with guys involved in Buran program. All in all, economics aside, it was a well-engineered concept. Full auto landing, apogee capability of 2000 km...but expensive as hell.
Space Shuttle and Buran were way too expensive to operate. However, aerospace technology has advanced a good amount since the 1970s. We could redesign and build a much cheaper version of the shuttle now. I wouldn't make it as large, nor to support 6 people for 3-4 weeks. In a way Space Shuttle was designed to sometimes play the role of temporary 'small' space station, which is an obsolete capability with ISS in orbit. Most of the modules on ISS don't even come close to filling the length of the Space Shuttle or Buran cargo bays, so why have it that long? Design it for just three crew to make relatively quick deliveries to ISS etc., unless it carries a MPLM type module in the cargo bay that could bring more people plus supplies for inside the station. The orbiter itself should just be built around the idea of being able to support 3 crew for 1 week in orbit; two pilots and a mission specialist. It would be quite a bit lighter, and thus require a smaller launch vehicle assembly. Make the entire launch vehicle assembly reusable with fast turnaround time. Either give the 1st stages wings and landing gear, or do what SpaceX is doing with vertically landing the 1st stage.
If US, Russia, ESA, and Japan collaborated on design and production, it would be the most cost effective. US and Russia have done the space plane before, and have the most experience. ESA and Japan have experience designing small space planes before, but neither quite got to building them, so I would include those guys in the effort. Participating countries would each get their own fleet to operate.
All in all, I agree. Reusable LV is a great goal (better if single stage to orbit). But, honestly, if we want to speak seriously about delivering significant mass to the space (and it means first to LEO) - we have to get rid from chemical rockets. Way too weak. Only nuclear engines will play a feasible goal here. USSR and USA had both programs for nuclear thermal rockets (NERVA, RD-410). We could have nuclear launch vehicles by 1975. Twice the payload!
Nasa claims to have successfully tested a reaction less drive called the EM or electromagnetic. This is based on Miguel Alcubierre's "space bubble" hypothesis. It is what he often refers to as the warp drive.
It would be rad to see a modern take on Buran where the launch system "SpaceXes" back to the pad with modern materials. Sadly, that probably will never happen. If a couple billion dollars happened to slip into my back pocket, who knows lol.
@@Aprilmarcloud are there detailed material and blueprints to read about the buran and energia in russian? Can you link em if you know em?
Sad to see this incredible fully automated shuttle abandoned
Mohammed Alghamdi This thing was designed as space nuclear weapon carrier.
Александр Малахов That is completely not true
Mohammed Alghamdi And of course as a spaceship .
Александр Малахов This spaceship is not designed to deliver or carry nuclear weapon, your assumption is based on speculation not on the design and engineering data of that shuttle.
Mohammed Alghamdi I'm Russian, and I know little bit more than you about our space program. Just trust me. Our documentaries and articles (Russian documentaries and articles is not american documentaries and articles, buddy). Just for example.
Buran fully automated, the Energia rocket it flew on could have been used for other uses, such as a manned lunar mission. This is more like space shuttle 2.0. A shame this bird was moth balled after one flight.
Its stupid for people to argue over who has the best vehicle. When people enter space it should not be as Americans, Russians etc. iIt should be as terrans or earthlings. When it comes to space exploration we are all in this together.
That would be nice but it will never happen. The Russians aren't dumb by any means, but who the hell wants to work with communists?
Lisa N they aren't communists, and neither was the Soviet Union. Well some individuals in Russia might be true communists.
@conacal rubdur www.quora.com/Why-do-Communists-claim-that-the-USSR-wasnt-real-Communism
@conacal rubdur you can argue the definition of communism. The Soviet Union was more state capitalist. Profits were reinvested back into the economy rather than being spent luxuriously. The real point is understanding the role of the leadership. How they acted instead of what they said.
'Earthen' probably the best.
'Terran' is used in sci-fi, so a bit cringe at this point tbh.
Полностью на автомате! Без пилотов. Вот это да! Гордость и уважение конструкторам!
Над бураном работали 2 предприятия НПО энергия, НПО восточный и каждый миллиметр теплозащиты был просчитан на компьютере и это 86-88 год
@@PilotTV 😳 Намана
@@PilotTV ಠ‿ಠ Намана так руководство партии выделило средств на проект
@@PilotTV да
I really wished that this shuttle was used more than once. It would of been neat to have scene this shuttle together in space next to a American shuttle. Even if it was just a fly by.
+steve v and we are told apparently that it was the soviets who waisted money on a race against the west, whilst their people lived in "poor" conditions... but the 'incompitent' soviets realized that the shuttle programe is too expensive and inefficient a couple of decades before the 'smart and efficient' americans and rather perfected a privious system developed by them, which is still in use today... by evrybody... including the 'efficient' americans...
wonder why i'm geting this strong smell of bull shit here... =))))
Their are two left that need to be restored
Can't use it when you can't steal the rest of the American blueprints lol
@@splifstar85 holy fucking hell, I have never seen a cope this strong.
Your country didn’t do a second trip with the Buran because your country fucking imploded, the idea that your country altruistically ceased the program to help the people is almost downright delusional.
Why does trance music go so well with soviet technology? Man I love these videos
где тот человек кто закладывал в него программу полета и машинный код? покажите его по телевизору - это ГЕНИЙ
спасибо, это великий человек был...
Там целая группа была.
А говорите в России нет компьютеризации!)) вот он Буран .
foresterization сейчас только одного гения по тв показывают
The russian shuttles were junk anyhow,, the only one that flew had almost burned up on reentry WHY? because the russian copy (stolen) was made from false data fed to russian spies...and that's history fact. The russians copied phony data fed to them once it was discovered they were stealing info. The copy the russians made at the end of the day was junk at best
Видео из более цивилизованных времён 😄
The US have touched the miles that for sure but what Russia did in that time line will never be beaten by any other nation. Russia you absolute beauty, They know how to make things and how to make them big , Respect from India
Das Buran/Energja Projekt hatte die UdSSR 1988 wieder an die Spitze der Raumfahrtnationen gebracht. Was für eine menschliche, technische und Ingenieurstechnische Meisterleistung. Viele neue Technologien wurden erfunden und teilweise auch am Energia/Buran Projekt umgesetzt.
Der vollautomatische unbemannte Start, Flug und die vollautomatische Ladung mit Kurskorrektur der Computer im Buran war ein Novum.👍
Восхитительно. Видимо раньше и вправду умели делать хорошие вещи.
*The USSR was a great country. No matter what anyone says.*
SO TRUE
Then you must visit North Korea it gives you beautiful and peaceful Soviet vibes 😄
@@egg4489 Nah NK and Soviet is different.Soviet had great technology but NK hadn’t.
lol, it was great when it died with a wimper :).
To manage the planting process, in addition to ground control and management, we used our own computer (Buran digital computer) Burana Biser-4. The military order determined the architecture of the BTSVM - it was implemented in the form of four parallel independent computational channels and a comparator that continuously compared the results at the output channels. In case of deviation of the results of any of the channels from the other three, it was switched off and the computer continued to work in its normal mode. In the same way, one more damaged computational channel could be disabled, than the automatic redundancy and fault tolerance of the computer was achieved. Computing channels (or kernels, in modern terminology) operated at a frequency of 4 MHz and had 128 KB of RAM and 16 KB of permanent program memory. Such architecture allowed the computer to control the landing process of the Buran even in the conditions of nuclear war (this was part of the TK at the request of the military).
Uh what? Lmao
даже до ATmega16 не дотягивает.
Very impressive. I don't care who designed this machine, more space travel is good for all of us, and just as exciting. It is a shame it was abandoned.
***** just think if they got it back up and running again .. how that would make use feel in the USA ..
there still setting around over there and if they wanted could upgrade them and never know ... make a bigger spy plane then ares
***** Your comment brought a question to my mind: If Russia had a bottomless bank vault and could afford to rebuild the Buran program, I wonder if they have the technology to resurrect the Buran or would they have to start over from scratch. I have heard and read reports that the United States would have to start over from scratch if they wanted to build a super-rocket like the Saturn V because they did not preserve the blueprints or the technology to build it. I wonder if Russia was equally backward in its thinking as concerns the Buran.
+Bill Chambers They didn't preserve the blueprints? They preserved many of the entire rockets including the lunar modules. Just take a tour of Cape Canaveral, they have the original tracked crawlers they used to transport the Saturn V to the launchpads, and that's just what they let the public see.
At 0:58 you can see the difference in the fuels used on this beast, the blue flame belongs to the 4 RD-0120 Hydrogen/oxygen rocket engines which powered the core stage, while the yellow flames belong to the 4 Kerosene/oxygen booster rockets.
this is not russia THIS IS USSR POWER!!!
Maybe you haven't looked in the last 30 years but the Soviet space shuttle program went broke and got flushed.
Никто и не спорит, что это детище СССР так же как и ан 225 самый большой самолёт в мире, который создавался под буран
that's why they failed almost with every project they started xD ussr power XD
USSR was stolen from the Russian Empire, so stil Russia.
Лети Буран к Звёздам... Не слушай никого здесь. ты на автомате....
+Фёдор Ратиев Уже отлетался ! Скажем дружно спасибо пятнистому !
Красиво!
TOTALLY different design from the American shuttle. As you can clearly see, the nose gear is much further back compared to the American shuttle. Pretty obvious they don't look anything alike.
It's a shame she never saw manned space flight
Take a look at Almaz space station - It did sess service.
I see Buran as a he
The west was not prepared for this. Energija Buran was more modern and powerful than anything the west had. So they had to stop it. The Soviets had flown it unmanned by its own computer program. It worked like a charm.
Imagine Energija-Buran-Baikal, a fully re-usable launch system around 1995, 20 years before Falcon 9 became reusable.
Буран на автомате так мягко садился
Сейчас так реактивные модели самолётов Команды моделистов RusJet садятся там связка гироскопов, аксилирометров и GPS.
I have no problem with the Buran. The STS was a great design. Now the opportunity is to 'get out there'. The world learned a bunch of engineering and saw the risks and costs... we can go forward and fulfill the ideas and ambitions of why all this stuff was built in the first place. When you go to orbit and beyond, we are no longer just a citizen from some nation... Your a human from Earth traveling our common solar system. 500, 1000, 10 thousand years from now...will be fantastic!
One misconception about the Soviet shuttle was that it had air breathing jet engines for landing. This was not correct. One of the test orbiters (akin to the Shuttle Enterprise) did have jet engines that would alow it to fly to high altitude and then cut the engines and glide back to the runway. It was easier than having to use a 747.
Часто пересматриваю эти и другие видео с Бураном и мысленно возвращаюсь в те далекие годы, тогда по радио в он-лайне слушал посадку Бурана и был безмерно горд за свою Родину . . . а сейчас - ракетоноситель под хохлому.
буран совершал полет полностью без пилота и gps и глонасс
TheValentino975 don't think it was GPS. The Buran was before we announced it to the world.
J Cheatham Your translator is not working properly. I'm just saying, all the achievements of the Buran so far no one has surpassed. Buran is often confused with the drone, but this is a mistake. Buran was not a drone. Buran is a fully automated robot, they are not ruled from earth as drones.
Глонасс к тому времени уже функционировал, это он при Боре накрылся. Так что вполне возможно что глонасс как раз и использовался.
Глонасс не работал так как работает сейчас. Там требуется не только большое количество спутников но и огромное количество наземных станций приемников. СССР хоть и планировал запуск глонасс но все же он не работал должным образом. Буран летел на автоматике, на таком принципе уже не строят беспилотники. Буран сам корректировал свой полет и посадку с уходом на второй круг, этими действиями слегка ошарашив своих создателей.
Пилотирование и навигация это разные задачи) Что бы произвести пилотирование нужно знать текущие координаты судна, скорость, угол атаки, тангаж и т.д. Эти данные имеют случайный характер, поэтому не могут быть занесены в боротовой компьютер или точно измерены исключительно бортовыми средствами.
Если судить по информации в интернете, то при посадке использовались "трассовый радиолокационный комплекс "Скала-МК", аэродромный обзорный радиолокатор "Ильмень" и посадочный радиолокационный комплекс "Волхов-П"". Первый обеспечивает дальность 600км. Остальные действуют только в районе аэродрома. Что использовалось при пилотировании за этой областью, вопрос открытый.
I just wish everyone would get along. I've been around the world and I think every country and culture I've encountered is great have made great accomplishments that anyone would be proud of. When I see comments that degrade and insult other people because they are from somewhere else or there beliefs are different pisses me off. Humans are suppose to be the dominant life form on the planet, but when I see comments like these. It makes me wonder.
This shuttle can fly unmanned ,,fully automatic,,,
So can a paper airplane.
@@uio890138 paper plane > USA shuttle I guess then lol
@@eblevinda Our 'paper planes' went into orbit and performed 135 manned missions for over 30 years. Russian shuttle = 1 unmanned orbit.........
@@uio890138 welcome back, the statement was the Russian shuttle was fully automated, including landing, the comparison was the us shuttle wasn't automated, that was all.
@@eblevinda What is that based on though? Who says the US shuttle couldn't be auto piloted from start to finish? It's not like that technology was mastered only by the Russians. I think the Russians had to use it since they knew their shuttle design was so raw and unreliable that it likely couldn't support a manned mission, even a mission that involved a single orbit.
You seem to be mistaking ejector seats with an escape capsule,I only remarked on ejector seats on fighters to point out that the Russians had a better one for decades and it took that long for the west to copy it.
The Burans cockpit was a one big re-enforced escape capsule,designed to detach or be blown away from the rest of the spacecraft and fall back or re-enter like a Soyuz capsule.
No one in his right mind will put ejector seats on a space vehicle.
Гордость за СССР !!!
You got to admire the Russians, their budget has never matched that of NASAS but they have built and created some amazing machines and structures, from an engineering point, look at 0:32 that's an amazing structure, only an advanced first rate nation can built such a structure and machine, a rocket that can put 100 tons in orbit.
This is not russian space shuttle, THIS IS THE SOVIET UNION SPACE SHUTTLE.... PLEASE RESPECT THOSE 15 FORMER SOVIET UNION REPUBLIC COUNTRIES IT WAS SET BY OUR BIG SOVIET UNION COUNTRY. BUT NOT RUSSIAN ONLY......
Buran is the first programmable shuttle, but Columbia was the first ever shuttle. Columbia first flew in 1981 not to space but it was a test flight which most people call the STS-1 after that the engines were designed, next were the thermal tiles and than some new super glue. However, in my opinion, the Columbia disaster was probably the worst space disaster in history. I mean could you imagine trying to control a severely damaged spacecraft that is disintegrating in earths atmosphere.
У меня от грусти слёзы наворачиваются... Как можно было угробить нашу великую страну. И мы терпим новых тиранов до сих пор.
The main problems were partly down to politics and economics. Rockets aren't simply 'better' but are much more cheaper to run. Manned STS's of the reusable type are incredibly expensive to run and their costs increase as they age. Of course, as safety becomes a much more important factor costs increase further. The US STS was also created because of a set of defined parameters from all sections of US Defence and had to be built for various jobs. It was a truck, a science lab, an obs station....
Awesome video. It would be interesting to know how safe and affordable this platform would have been had it lived to fly along side the US space shuttle for more than a few missions. As with most Russian engineering (Which I respect just as deeply as US engineering) it seems a little over-engineered (bigger :) ) in regards to every detail, even the support for the grounded shuttle, and the stadium lights :) I would love to know more about the Buran and its history!
Привет)
@creativeprojects720 It is hard to find the answer to that question. Probabli only a few people know for sure. But it is believed that at that time "The Democracy" came in USSR."The Buran program was formally closed in 1993, but Mikhail Gorbachev's negative attitude towards the program had already left little doubt that its first launch would be the last as well, according to the memoirs of acad. Chertok."(wikipedia). And we all know who was paying him and where he lives now...
Fantastic music to express these soviet to Russian craft achievement! I can see a space program take this Braun craft, turn it larger, into a starcraft/ship, just by giving it a main wing wrapping over its body, with mini sets of verticle boosters at the dermis skin of the belly, to land on low gravity moons & planets as *Buran Starship* , more effective with the fuel of SN. But smaller cargo.
@sovietskies69
glad u asked...
the Russians built the buran AFTER america's space shuttle... and yes u can learn allot about air foils and angles by pictures alone... which is why lots of their aircraft looks like stuff we built previously... look at the havoc and the apache helicopters as another example. having said that copy paste was both ways during the cold war.. and is still that way... but the reason soviets copied the shuttle was partly to show that they could
The Buran space shuttle was very advanced, it had a artificial intelligence computer, the Buran was able to land on it's own, but it also made several maneuvers to slow the orbiter so it could land precisely on the runway, Russian engineers were very proud of this.
...soviet...
The main difference - automatic orbital flights. Therefore Shuttle and Buran - are fundamentally different products. All speculation about the reasons for the similarities look logical, consider your experience with the existing Shuttle. We can say that the Buran - Shuttle is the second generation.
Fantastic, thanks a lot for posting it, it´s the first time I see this images.
the designs are similar because it's the only design that can work in that size, the blunt stubby wings the angle of attack, the vertical stabilizer the tiles. you can't have a different wing aspect ratio or high mounted wings on reentry, they would simply break up. This design or similar is the only way to do this.
Когда смотрю про Советский космос, чуть не плачу.... Насколько мы были впереди!? Лет на 30? Реквием по мечте...
Буран летал в космос полностью в автоматическом режиме, ему не нужен был пилот ни для взлета ни для посадки, так он и загремел в книгу рекордов.
I wish the Russians would come up with their own designs. the AN225 is a C-5 with an extra engine and twin rudders. The Buran looks exactly like an American shuttle. Impressive nonetheless.
The AN 225 was a one-off re-design of the AN 124. The tail for a start is nothing even remotely like a C-5, nor is the AN 124's.
Who's technology landed on a Comet and who's technology is circling Jupiter ryt now. I'll give u a hint. Not russia. Russians landed probes on other planets and kept people in space for ridiculous amounts of time. For what? How many Russians died in space program? American technology on Mars, moon, and comet is far more advanced.
The AMERICANS did away with the space shuttle program to cut costs. WE use rustic Russian vehicles to propel us into space because there are so many Russian engines from decommissioned transcontinental missiles to use. NASA is working on the next Gen transporter which will take off and land under its own power. It will revolutionize and make space travel affordable to the upper middle class. The U.S. Will bury the competition once more. Thanks for the interest and you are welcomed for the free lesson, whatever the fuck your name is.
I don't use it. NASA uses it. Buran does not look similar. more like exactly. Still, Soviet technology was effective and rugged. Their probes landed on other heavenly bodies and sent back information. that was 45 years ago. Americans landed a ROVER on Mars and it climbed over the Martian landscape for Months! Sending back countless bits of information. Whats important is that Humans are curious and look to the heavens for answers and are always searching.
How many Russians died in the space program? 4. How many has NASA killed? 17.
One of the best things to come out of the Soviet Union was their contribution to space exploration. It was a rare gathering of some of the most brilliant minds on this planet, and you only have to take a look at some of the space "firsts" to see this-
First man in space
First to orbit
First to space walk
First to the moon (probe)
First satellite (Sputnik)
First space station (Mir)
First to land on another planet! (Venera)
The Russian Soyuz system is what lifts Americans into space today. It has an unmatched safety record.
Don't let media propaganda colour your perceptions. A lot more truth, beauty and freedom will be yours if you simply do your own research, questioning and THINKING for yourself!
Buran was obviously a copy of the US space shuttle. But it was also a massive improvement of it. In appearance, it was similar, and pretty much served the same purpose, but in many ways, and in reality, it was completely different. It never flew again because of lack of budget after the collapse of the USSR. And because the Russians realized that such type of vehicle was an economic disaster, as the American space shuttle program turned out to be. But the first an only flight of Buran was an absolute success.. Period. Give credit where credit is due..
да крутой Буран
был
Sergey .Aleksandrovich был и будет
ихние шатлы сами летать не могут ,а Буран мог и вывел алмаза на орбиту
Actually the Buran was better. Judging by two factors.
First It could be piloted full unmanned and this was shown by its maiden flight. No other Shuttle could do that.
The next factor was that the whole cockpit was build as an escape capsule,something that NASA never bothered with and raises the question if the two crews lost by them could be saved by coping the Russian concept.The Russian are really good at this.Took NATO ages to use the Russian K-36DM ejector seat concept on their seats
К тем кто вопиет что "Все просрали!..", "Горбачев слил!..":
- Считаю ничего не слито. Вся ценность не в самом нашем потерянном шатле, а полученых знаниях, технологиях и приобретенном опыте.
Их теперь и надо использовать при новых разработках!
А "Буран", признаемся, это ведь военная машина. Холодная война кончилась и он стал ненужен. Бомбить с космоса некого. А если сейчас и будет кого то дешевле будет эскадрилью шатлов купить в Китае. ))
+kadatka
Знания есть, нету людей кто это ручками умеет делать, плюс отсутствует производственная база для всех компонентов. Сейчас мы можем только нефть качать и лес рубить . . .
+kadatka АХХАХ. Холодная война КОНЧИЛАСЬ?? ну-ну...
бомбить с космоса некого...Бураном что ли??? все равно что микроскопом гайки закручивать
для этого есть ракеты
It is amazing that is was completely automated. Anyone who has any experience with programming and loves space technologies is amazed, for me this is jawdropping because achieving that is very hard because it is so complex problem. And even doing it with computers which are a joke when they are compared to modern ones. Hats off to the engineers who worked on the Buran.
It was a technical and human masterpiece.
Energja and Buran surpassed everything that had been constructed by humans up to 1988.
All those replies about copying design from NASA are plain BS. Both machines had the same flight envelopes and purpose, thus they look similar as a consequence. All cars are very similar, but this does not mean they've all been copied from a single source. Get a little education before posting, please.
The Ruskies have a history of "Copying" remember the B29's that landed in russia the C47's the Studebaker trucks etc..ALL COPIES>>> wow Russian engineering ! ! !
hahahahahahhaahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
GeoSciful Maybe so, but that does not disqualify it from being a copy either. Its not just the general airframe of Buran but the cargo bay layouts, crew cabin layouts and directional thruster placements are identical as well. Its not like western companies didn't grab good ideas from the Soviets. Soviets could really come up with great ideas. But they didn't have the money to pore into R&D the way the west did. So often they copied an idea from the west then studied it for improvements. Hint! Hint! Buran.
+Wilbur Finnigan Buran, Concordski, TU-4, whats next
DigitalFilm JamesT BUT.......The Buran was a failure.....it never flew !!! One glide test !!!
Проект "Буран"/"Энергия" вернул СССР в 1988 году на первое место среди стран, совершающих космические путешествия. Это был человеческий, технический и инженерный шедевр. В проекте "Энергия"/"Буран" было изобретено и частично реализовано множество новых технологий.
Полностью автоматический беспилотный запуск, полет и полностью автоматическая загрузка с коррекцией курса с помощью компьютера в "Буране" были новинкой.
👍🥇
мы доказали всему миру что мы можем
Чудачка...'мы' могли ТОЛЬКО под Алым Знаменем ...под трыкольером можно лишь стучаться в дно
Both Shuttle and Buran proved to be crazy expensive in operation.
great to see in action the launch rocket was epic
The Russians had developed this concept long before the americans, also the Energia system was different from American one, Energia rocket could place heavy payloads in space, where as American STS system could only fly with the space shuttle attached which mean it could launch 25 tons to orbit, Energia on the other hand could place 100 tons in space, which makes it the second most powerful rocket in history.
Папы и Мамы - мы гордимся вами!
Ваши беспутые дети...
да, согласен, тоже все время удивляет качество съемки тех дней - а, ведь, был же какой то ответственный товарищ за архивную киносъемку проекта
Great footage; thanks for posting. What is that ace piece of music you used?
Galaxia by Nitrous Oxide
The Buran/Energja project brought the USSR back to the top of the space travelling nations in 1988. What a human, technical and engineering masterpiece. Many new technologies were invented and partially realised in the Energia/Buran project.
The fully automatic unmanned launch, flight and fully automatic loading with course correction by computer in the Buran was a novelty. 👍🥇
The Russians saw the space shuttle, and then they made an even better Space Shuttle for themselves and called it Buran witch sounds even better then Space Shuttle lets be honest, it flew one time, almost to perfection, landed even in windy weather, only lost 5 of its 38.000 heat tiles! and then the Russians decided the following : lets store our mighty Buran space craft in one of our most crappy hangars, and that one collapsed in 2002, destroying the only Buran that flew into space!...only in Russia lol
What's left of it..............
***** Blame Joseph Stalin for being a prick, if he was nice like Tito we wouldn't have feared communism
Because they were in a financial and political crisis, and launching a space shuttle-like thingy is too expensive, the reason why the Space Shuttle Program was terminated in 2011. The Russians rapidly saw that and stuck back to capsules. The problem is that today the Soyuz is almost the same thing it ever was, when it could be more advanced. If USA did the same, they wouldn't have this problem of not having their own spacecraft to send astronauts to the ISS.
In 2002 Buran that flew into space was a property of Kazakhstan.
Buran is not based on Shuttle. Aerodynamics used for space airplanes is based on Soviet Spiral project which came way before Shuttle. Saying Buran is based or copy of Shuttle just because of its looks, is like saying thousand car manufactures are copying some other hundred car manufacturer designs just because of vehicle physic need for such looks.
Energia was a POWERFUL rocket. I wished this program continued
Первый беспилотный космический корабль в мире.
Its all good brother majority of people are awesome, random guys like that are in every country.
Super Soviet Era.
Галоши полетелиСоветские Владим Владимыч а где ваши галоши?😊
CCCP !!!
The russian shuttles were junk anyhow,, the only one that flew had almost burned up on reentry WHY? because the russian copy (stolen) was made from false data fed to russian spies...and that's history fact. The russians copied phony data fed to them once it was discovered they were stealing info. The copy the russians made at the end of the day was junk at best.
@@starview1 how is that connected to the main comment?
@@starview1 I strongly believe you just didn't grasp the level of complexity which spacecraft building involves. Shooting the breeze is way easier task
@@starview1 don't thinking that USSR same as chinese copy Lol.
@@starview1stupid Man and Bot😂🙈👎
@DoctorWhoMaster999 It was scrapped because the idea of shuttle is extremely cost-ineffective. Usual rockets costs about 10% (i.e. 10 times less) for the same weight to orbit compared to what shuttle would require.
First and full automatic landing WOW
One thing is for sure he did not work under oppressed conditions in the U.S.A. USSR had plenty of top notch German scientists that enabled them to have their firsts in space as well. Their moon rocket blew up on the pad and who has sent multiple landers to mars? I think both sides have produced great space achievements utilizing German expertiese so lets just leave it at that.
Спасибо батя заэту машину СССР .
I think the Russians understood that space planes would never put anything into orbit at lower cost than mass produced disposable rockets. Shuttles had no viable escape systems if anything went wrong.
Russia was not prepared to lose cosmonauts and this is why the one flight Buran made into space was remote controlled. It took 30 years and two lost crews for America to learn that. Only Russia can put men in space now and service the ISS.
WE RUSSIANS ALWAYS TAKE THE BEST. AND WE MAKE AN ABSOLUTE OUT OF THE BEST
И все это делали и творили Великий Советский Народ, которых уже нет на этом белом свете((((
Это мог создать только свободный народ.
What's the soundtrack called.? Cool film btw
+Lars Ove Frostad Привет из России !
music : Nitrous Oxide - galaxia .
+Lars Ove Frostad Galaxia by Nitrous Oxide
thanks:)
Good call Lars Ove
+РБМК 1000 Спасибо =D
yes you are right, the past should be laid to rest, i guess all nations suffered in that stupid war one way or the other, we all have the same goals friend, lets move forward and not look back.
I Love it!
Был один запуск, потому что нам этот Буран никуда не впёрся. Его сделали чтобы показать, что мы и умеем. Шаттл - это дорогой и неэффективный способ доставки грузов на орбиту. По-этому мы его и не использовали.
Thank you for the compliment of the automated system. I designed and built the prototype myself !
The original Buran is located in Technikmuseum Speyer in Germany.
I have seen it back then, when they transferred it from the river to the Museum and also went to the museum a few times to see it.
It's actually not far from my home....
Love the video and the tune!
@MakesTooMuchSense We had the first space station "MIR" and Yurij Gagarin, by the way Buran was full automatic!
it would be nice if some russian billonarie or arabic sheik would buy the whole program to rebuilt it.......
no money and motivation
At this point, it isn't possible with any reasonable amount of money. Technology is lost, people that worked on the project are probably mostly dead by now. The cost would be the same like going to Mars if not more. And if somebody was willing to give such amount of money to space program - it's better if they invest it into Mars expedition :)
Their are two shuttles left abandoned
We need the restored
Nov. 4, 1997 - When U.S. space shuttles started linking up with Russia's Mir space station in 1995, both sides owed a small debt to the old Soviet secret police, the KGB. According to documents obtained by NBC News, it was the KGB that successfully stole the U.S. shuttle design in the '70s and '80s.
That theft permitted the Soviet Union to build its own carbon copy of the U.S. system, called the Buran, thus unintentionally laying the groundwork for the compatibility between the U.S. and Russian systems.
Although the Soviet shuttle flew only once in 1990, it was planned in part as a space ferry to link up with Mir. That all-Soviet linkup never took place, and the Soviet shuttle was finally abandoned in 1994. But because the Soviet craft was so similar to the U.S. version, designing a Mir linkup for Atlantis and other U.S. shuttles proved simple and efficient. In fact, the first linkup between the Mir and the shuttle Atlantis in 1995 used the very system the Russians designed for their own shuttle.
The story of the Soviet shuttle is really the story of the competition between the two great space powers in microcosm, complete with Cold War intrigue and paranoia, mirror-image competition and all manner of spies, both human and electronic. It may also be the first recorded example of spying online.
Brezhnev's paranoia
The story begins in 1974 with a secret meeting at the Kremlin. Vladimir Smirnov, head of the Soviet Union’s powerful Military-Industrial Commission, or VPK, was laying out priorities for the next year to Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev. The VPK was the body that directed not only the military projects but also laid out strategies for obtaining the technologies.
The space race unintentionally created unity between enemies and created wonders, like Moon landings to space stations. We need one more space race.
VIVA RUSSIA!!
shame this epic beast was never preserved for all mankind :'( its a triumph of engineering and so much more cool than the floored space shuttle from america. even though data was scraped from there! call it a mk2 if you will ;)
Project spiral ! G. E. Lozino-Lozinsky June 29, 1966
Bourane is so much prettier than the american space shuttle...
+Bak'aara Swtor It looks just the same lol
+AlmightyCate How else it could look? Three wings?
I havent even read any comments below but I can imagine the exchange went something like this.
"Thats just a copy of the space shuttle! , USA USA USA!"
"F***k Off of Yankee, this is 100% Soviet Russian" and repeat!
Got to love humanity :/
Was the Euro-trash techno necessary?
Manuel Castro Go fuck yourself!
Good job the Russians saw the shuttle concept for what it was otherwise they would not be able to put men in space either and the ISS abandoned.
They realised that the future of space was in relatively low cost production line made expendable rocket systems.
The US shuttle cost more than expendables and the crew had no escape if anything went wrong.
Buran better)
***** buran could solve the problems which wont be completed by Space Shuttle ever.
***** Because Soviet union was destroyed, and no one think about Buran after that. But the flow of Buran was very succesful and show that this Shuttle exceeds US version. However both country refused to exploitate this spaceship. To no purpose/
+Mike Paulk Hehe, is that why the space shuttle program was shut down? And im not going to start about the US relying on Russian rockets to boost their spacecraft for years. And even now you guys dont even have anything to go to space with... Except the Soyuz rockets. And guess what, theyre also Russian.
***** Why arent they using it then? :')
***** + And why did SpaceX even sue the US Air Force..