Buran The Soviet Space Shuttle
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 07. 2010
- 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦
Some Buran clips. Enjoy!!!!!!! Rate and comment
Download Full Unit Converter for Android: play.google.com/store/apps/de....
View promo video here: • Video
View Buran The Russian Space Shuttle Part 2: • Buran The Soviet Space... !!!
I got the videos from www.buran.ru./
The song is Galaxia by Nitrous Oxide - Věda a technologie
🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦
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
@@user-qn3xu5ee3t 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)))
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...
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
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.
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 :))
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?
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
Видео из более цивилизованных времён 😄
Why does trance music go so well with soviet technology? Man I love these videos
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.
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
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.
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.
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
Лети Буран к Звёздам... Не слушай никого здесь. ты на автомате....
+Фёдор Ратиев Уже отлетался ! Скажем дружно спасибо пятнистому !
Красиво!
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
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.
Восхитительно. Видимо раньше и вправду умели делать хорошие вещи.
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.
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.
И все это делали и творили Великий Советский Народ, которых уже нет на этом белом свете((((
Это мог создать только свободный народ.
Гордость за СССР !!!
Буран на автомате так мягко садился
Сейчас так реактивные модели самолётов Команды моделистов RusJet садятся там связка гироскопов, аксилирометров и GPS.
Super Soviet Era.
Fantastic, thanks a lot for posting it, it´s the first time I see this images.
Первый беспилотный космический корабль в мире.
Great footage; thanks for posting. What is that ace piece of music you used?
Galaxia by Nitrous Oxide
мы доказали всему миру что мы можем
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.
У меня от грусти слёзы наворачиваются... Как можно было угробить нашу великую страну. И мы терпим новых тиранов до сих пор.
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)
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...
Когда смотрю про Советский космос, чуть не плачу.... Насколько мы были впереди!? Лет на 30? Реквием по мечте...
You learn something new every day.Thanks
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!
*The USSR was a great country. No matter what anyone says.*
Energia was a POWERFUL rocket. I wished this program continued
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.
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.
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
All the American Space shuttles could do was blow up, but this one Soviet shuttle could fly automatically without a pilot.
да, согласен, тоже все время удивляет качество съемки тех дней - а, ведь, был же какой то ответственный товарищ за архивную киносъемку проекта
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......
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.
thanks jcmillerable!
Папы и Мамы - мы гордимся вами!
Ваши беспутые дети...
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.
да крутой Буран
был
Sergey .Aleksandrovich был и будет
ихние шатлы сами летать не могут ,а Буран мог и вывел алмаза на орбиту
@joelgullick it's Galaxia by Nirtous Oxide:)
@MakesTooMuchSense We had the first space station "MIR" and Yurij Gagarin, by the way Buran was full automatic!
Спасибо батя заэту машину СССР .
great to see in action the launch rocket was epic
@Markov092 I really don't want to argue right now but you seem to forget that America was the first to launch the first man made objects out of the earths orbit and to other planets! Such as Mariner 4 which made it to Mars and Venus first. The U.S. sent Voyager 1 which reached Jupiter and Saturn and also used their gravity to boost its speed which Voyager 1 is now going to be the first spacecraft to reach the final frontier.
Secrecy in the N1 program can be explained. First - the USSR lagged behind the US in the moon program for different reasons so the Soviets needed secrecy to hide the existing of moon project (they didn't want to loose, of coarse, and there always was the possibility to say: "We did nothing") . Second - every rocket program in SU had "double designation" and had to be secret until it could fly and it'd be announced about that. And thirdly, there were doubts about necessity of moon project itself.
I Love it!
First and full automatic landing WOW
There were designs for a larger carrier rocket (even larger than Saturn V) for interplanetary flights with the Buran.
Buran and Antonov AN225 masterpiece of soviet engineering.
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.
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 !!!
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....
Oh yeah, man my memory is a little bad right now. By the way, I am really glad you are defending the Saturn V.
Thank you for the compliment of the automated system. I designed and built the prototype myself !
Love the video and the tune!
@4:12 it looks as if the main landing gears' suspension has a very short travel, you can see the airframe really jolt hard as it touches down.
.. a piece of construction machinery, a launch platform. It was built for an enormous number of roles with a list that seemed to get bigger as time went on. Buran was built more as a technical exercise but it was deemed unnecessary as the iron curtain came down and the countries started to co-operate (after political unrest). But consider this: Hubble could not have been repaired in situ without the US STS, and the ISS would have taken much, much longer with just Soyuz and Arianne...
VIVA RUSSIA!!
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?
The music is like the music you hear on all the Russian dash cam videos, up beat techno.
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.
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
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
Мы восстановим все!!!!!! Все
Such a wonderful shuttle copy!
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..
control c + control v
Only superficially similar. Filling completely different. "Buran" had an effective system bailouts differed from the "shuttle". But a program to develop frozen
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.
Which I do believe was going to test the DS1 ion engine.
and 14 dead people
That US space shuttle my friend not
That's American one...... soviet Buran is completely a unmanned spacecraft
Это советский шатл, а не русский, а это большая разница
Все что осталось, это гниющие и разграбленные Буря и макет в ангаре.
Идеальное сочетание того что происходит с ними и того что происходит со страной.
Потрясающе!
Was the Euro-trash techno necessary?
Manuel Castro Go fuck yourself!
Americans copy from the Germans
Russians copy from the Americans
Chinese copy from the Russians
The rocket was invented by the Chinese. The rocket on liquid fuel was invented by the Russian.
no one here are aviation experts or know anything about just on the bases of media news propaganda comenting.
who knows that cia had copied russian technology aand vice versa.
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!
Cool vid... I reckon it was an improvement of the Space Shuttle 👍🇳🇿
Слава СССР!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Copy of the UNITED STATES space Shuttle
If it is copy, please tell me any technical characteristic, which similar to Shattle, except apperiance :) I guess there is not and the technical characterisitc of BURAN are better then Shattle's one :)
AHAHAHHA, so stupid, your idiotic shuttle can't automatic fly without people on board and automatic land and our Buran done that in a 80-90. I'll tell you, that a little bit similar view don't tells that it similar in a technic view, so america suck as usual^^
Darius Maximus Russia actually has the better space tech, you should research before commenting. This is a fact. Russia has brought more people and equipment to space than any other country. In fact, the only way to get to space now is with Russian made rocket engines. They also have the most experience in space via Mir. Americans could only manage weeks at most while Russian's stayed in space for months at a time. The international space station's life supports systems are based off Russian tech, and rightfully so since they have the more mature time tested tech.
i love the space shuttle don't get me wrong, but the ussr perfected the design of it
All that the Russians do is copy the USA, When the USA built the worlds first nuclear submarine the Russians had to rush theirs in to service with disastrous consequences. The Americans built 5 working space shuttles which were years ahead of their time, the Russians built BURAN which never went in to space. Now in 2014 Russia uses SOYUZ, a relic from the 1970's and they only launch that because the USA has paid ROSCOSMOS $69 billion to always have at least one seat on every launch.
Without USA money the SOYUZ would not launch as often as it currently does.
Also this agreement between NASA and ROSCOSMOS does not expire until 2017, after this the USA will have new advanced shuttle replacements.
Would have been amazing if this had carried on. This thing could lift more to orbit than the American shuttle. Imagine the ISS, but BIGGER!
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.
Not a fan of the gay soundtrack
Better than country music
in whose mind was country music the alternative? It's all coming from you.
BarryDennen12 it's obvious if this shit sound track was not used that depressing country would be the only choice duhh...
still goes back to the Wright Brothers.
The Merlin variants (What powers the Falcon series) are an original SpaceX design. The Antares by OSC uses a Russian derived engine.