3 ms·
> "the Buran was no "attempt". It was a working shuttle that flew to space" Once. Does that even count as reusable?
by handelaar 12y ago
> "the Buran was no "attempt". It was a working shuttle that flew to space"
Once. Does that even count as reusable?
- vinceguidry 12y agoAnything's reusable if you throw as much resources into maintaining it as you would have rebuilding it every time. The Soviets just realized how stupid an idea that was. We didn't.
- toomuchtodo 12y agoThe Shuttle was a jobs program that has the side effect of going to space.
- sandworm 12y agoThey did keep it around for the two things only it and shuttle could do: bring things back from orbit and execute single orbit missions (ie the cross-range ability to return to base after a single orbit.)
- iSnow 12y agoWell, the Buran flew once in 1988, after that the country of its origin developed cracks and was deemed unsalvageable. It was later scrapped.
- anovikov 12y agoSo did Buran itself. Its wing needed replacement after that flight. That's why it didn't flew with people in 1989 when it was still politically/economically possible. Then, it was too late.
- ommunist 12y agoMore than once my friend. And if thing works - why should you care. Buran was a very top tech, superior to US shuttles in so many ways (capable of fully unmanned two-way trip for starters). The whole "Energia" complex is still unmatched by any spacecraft system in the world. The loss of this tech is unrecoverable though.
- lambdadmitry 12y ago>capable of fully unmanned two-way trip for starters Nope. Technology and precision required for fully-automatic landing of such aircraft becomes available only now. That particular landing was remote-controlled by a closely following plane.