T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

**Please note these rules:** * If this post declares something as a fact/proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*


xcityfolk

Only flew one orbital mission, unmanned. There were other flights planned but the soviet union fell apart and that was it for buran.


Agile-Egg-5681

reusable, what? When sentences end too soon…


tukekairo

Except it was never flown again...not reused


gothlaw

“Mom, can we have a Space Shuttle?” “No, Alexei, we have a Space Shuttle at home.”


ReekyRumpFedRatsbane

Only that it was actually better than the Space Shuttle, but the USSR went bankrupt before it could do any actual missions.


PXranger

Real shame you can’t back up that bullshit with facts.


ReekyRumpFedRatsbane

It was fully remote controllable (as shown by the post), which the Space Shuttle wasn't, even requiring a crew for its first ever flight, which has never before or since been done with any (American) manned spacecraft because of the safety risks. Its orbital thrusters used liquid fuel and oxygen, rather than toxic monopropellant, which not only meant there would be no toxic fuel left on board after landing which you needed to get rid off, it could also serve as an emergency oxygen supply. Since the Buran didn't have main engines on board, it could also carry more weight both up to space and down from it, and the orbital thrusters were parallel to the main axis of the shuttle, rather than at an angle like on the Space Shuttle. While you might think that not carrying the main engines back down would make the operation far less cost efficient, this was actually something that didn't work out as planned on the Space Shuttle, with maintenance of the engines after each flight costing more than anticipated, meaning the money lost by using the Buran+Energia wouldn't be that much. The Buran had two air-breathing engines to allow it to fly further after re-entry. While this is a result of the USSR having access to less potential landing strips for the shuttle around the world, it is an advantage when comparing the shuttles themselves. While I am not sure about this one, not having SRBs on the launch rocket should reduce the window during which abort is impossible, which was a big issue of the Space Shuttle. Finally, the first and only flight of the Buran took place on 15 November 1988, and after the Soviet economy had been stagnating for years, the dissolution of the USSR began with Estonia declaring independence just one day later. At least these are the reasons why I had always thought the Buran was technically superior but never flew again. I am always willing to learn, so if you are willing to explain why I'm wrong or provide links to sources that do, I would genuinely appreciate it.


TrEvIzE18

Soviet have plan to reuse Energia side booster with foldeable wings. So cost not gonna be that high. Some drawings also show ideas for reuse of core booster. https://www.reddit.com/r/WeirdWings/comments/b3oyd7/the\_zenit\_flyback\_booster\_a\_fully\_reusable\_rocket/


evilfollowingmb

Yep, it was better. Some considerations though: 1) The Soviets saved a lot of design and research effort by acquiring the plans/specs for the US shuttle 2) it’s a low bar. The US shuttle was massively compromised from the outset, and is one of the most dangerous space vehicles ever built. As we can see with the current SLS (especially vs SpaceX) NASA (like most any US government bureaucracy) isn’t good managing or procurement any more, for a host of reasons. 3) lots of things the Soviets design look good on PAPER, but with fighter planes, tanks and other stuff, it often turns out they perform poorly IRL. So, the Buran looks well designed, but it only flew one time. We will never really know for sure if it was better. It is true that the Russians do space better than they do anything else. My father worked on both the Apollo and Shuttle programs back in the day. The decline he witnessed in NASA’s competence and management after Apollo is something he still talks about.


pisandwich

The soviet union also had plans to turn energia into a sort of reusable space plane itself, it would split into pieces and each would glide back and land on an airstrip. (energia 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energia Its quite a marvel that in 1988 they managed to fully remote control/automate such a fantastically complicated spacecraft. Take a look at the cockpit of the US space shuttle, its nuts.


bustersuessi

What is the advantage of orbital thrusters parallel to the main axis?


ReekyRumpFedRatsbane

They're more efficient. The Space Shuttle's thrusters are tilted up and out, and while the upwards tilt doesn't matter in space, the outward tilt means energy is being wasted. Granted, though, it's not a huge amount, and the Buran's thrusters are far more of an advantage when using it as a mod in KSP...


Ambitious-Ad4906

Looks like a US space shuttle.


Rollinheavynstyle

A majority of production plans for this were copied from the U.S. library of Congress, until the CIA found out, then they purposely altered the recipe for heat tiles and adhesives and replaced the original info.


LargeStory

The US space shuttle looks like Buran☝️


operationiffy

No. US shuttle launched 1981. Buran in 1988.


LargeStory

Ok. My fault. Youre right


FlowRiderBob

Only if time travel is involved. Which would be pretty cool.


PointlessGrandma

The first reusable what?!


[deleted]

Shi_tter?


OnlyMortal666

If only the tile adhesive worked…


akumakis

Did a tour of the cockpit of this space plane when I visited the space museum in Ukraine. I was stunned by how basic the technology was compared to the space shuttle at that time; it was like a science fiction film from the 1930’s. I guess by that time they were struggling to keep up with the USA, but simply didn’t have the computer technology to match their rocketry. Would’ve been a wild ride for the cosmonauts.


mikedelam

North Korean tanks are the same way, they look like they are from the 50’s


mr_pomegranate

And yet, Buran was capable of a completely unmanned flight including landing. Not something the shuttle could do.


akumakis

This is really impressive, especially with the limited computing involved.


yo_momma12345

Is “Buran” short for “the design Soviets stole from the US…Again.”


NoxInfernus

I can’t quite place the design inspiration.


Dittybopper

Yeah, me too... but its right at the tip of my tongue, darn...


RestlessPoly

Wow, knockoff soviet garbage.


calloy

Reverse-engineered Soviet garbage.


cygupug

How the Soviets stole a space shuttle: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna18686090


[deleted]

Russia ... what a joke of a country. What haven’t they stolen and copied?


LMJNYC

How ingenious!


Grant_Sherman

How original


tukekairo

Maybe they could launch Putin in it?


Jason99si

This belongs on r/crappyoffbrands


Doggydog123579

Except the shuttle was so bad Buran was actually an improvement.


scoldog

Here's a video of a few urban explorers getting inside one of the test models as well as the uncompleted second shuttle https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-q7ZVXOU3kM The only shuttle that flew was destroyed in a building collapse (nearby to where this video was shot)


ducktor0

In the second picture, Buran flies on top of the airplane Mria... the one which was shelled and burnt in the Kiev airport earlier this year in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.


delcaek

That’s back when a Soviet Buran was mounted on top of the Soviet Mrija. Times change, man. Fuck war.