I remember historical day in November 1988 when Space Shuttle Buran flew to space for first mission. After two orbits Buran (Snow storm) landed in fully automatic mode.
Based on the Energia rocket, it was planned to create a Vulcan rocket with a payload capacity of up to 200 tons. Instead of 4 side blocks with RD-170 engines, it was supposed to install 8, and also add a third stage. Currently, Russia is developing the Yenisei rocket, which is a continuation of work on superheavy missiles
The Sad thing was that the Side boosters of Buran were to be Reusable. It was supposed to have Wings and it would glide back on a runway like a Glider.
That was Urgan (Energia 2.0), They planned on a fully reusable rocket The core would have delta wings and skip over the atmosphere, the boostets had deployavle wings
@@denzelklarenaar5883грузоподъемность определялась заданием. Система автоматической посадки сделана ещё в 1955 для самолётов в США, но нужна ли так она... Катастрофы как с Шаттлами были возможны тоже.
That's a really nice job! Recently I started to read and watch stuff about Buran, so YT keeps recommending me jewels like this one; I guess the algorythm gets smarter :) Where did you get dimentions etc. from? And would you care to share those 3D models?
@@energiam880 Hello, could you be so kind to sent me the files for Energhia&Buran , these ones. I will try to make one in 3D , but I didn't find anyware such great detalis as you have. Please help me in this project. Many thanks in advance
Buran has only one mission, but not because it was bad, but because the state that made it ceased to exist. The shuttle ended its career due to well-known catastrophic events. Following the loss of two Space Shuttle missions, the risks for the initial missions were reevaluated, and the chance of a catastrophic loss of the vehicle and crew was found to be as high as 1 in 9. In other words - you have a better chance to walk across the minefield relaxed, with your hands in your pockets, unharmed than to survive the Space shuttle mission. P.S. Quantity and quality are two different things, although you Westerners have a habit of saying that quantity itself is a kind of quality.
Нужно бы снова восстановить буран, мрию, «каспийского монстра» и других и создать корабли даже лучше.. Все были рады развалу СССР но только спустя время многие начинают понимать что мы потеряли на самом деле😊
there is only 1 reality and in this reality the Shuttle flew 135 times with humans on board and the Buran flew 0 times, there is no competition here, everything else is fictional
That's lovely, but this isn't really an ego-measuring contest. It's just my artwork But thanks for your expert opinion anyway. However, think it's probably best if you kept them to your self :)
If you already insist on formalities: Buran had one mission. Buran's safety record is 100%. Shuttle's safety record is 98,52%. Buran has 0 losses, Shuttle has, how many, 14 lost lives? So far, 24 astronauts in American missions, 5 astronauts in Soviet and 1 astronaut in Russian missions have died.
the soviets only had to fly it once to realize the basic design was far too expensive, impractical, and dangerous to be useful.. it took 30 years for the US to finally resign to that
@@RideAcrossTheRiver systems that were and still are in use today.. soyuz, atlas, etc.. and to flip the question, what did shuttle ever do that those systems can't?
Ya missed more, abt BURAN: all was done Autonomously. On way back, it senses flight line was a bit off, so flew over the airport and made 2nd attempt. Landed and even parked on its own, at the designated parking lot. 😂 Shes wayyy better.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver WHAT "it didn't"!!!???? Buran did not fly on his own and made second approach when landing? Of course it did! You know nothing and it is obvious that you are obsessed with American superiority. You are nothing more than a complete waste of time ...
I've heard that the NASA actually considered using the Buran after the Columbia disaster. But the only Buran that ever flew to space was destroyed by this time. All the other orbiter that never got completed got their components used for other projects, scrapped or abandoned.
Buran has a lower percentage of returned parts. The number of engines on boosters speaks for this. The Chinese, when they copy Starship, will do the same.
Wich was actually an improvement The shuttle was MORE expensive to repair, than just use an expendable rocket The soviets made engines more powerfull and as efficient as the shuttle's, but far less complex and cheaper to build The Shutle engines where also dead weigth in orbit
Unless you disagreed with a dictatorship or were "lesser race" according to Stalin at which point you were tortured, gulaged and/or killed ... kinda sounds like another Nazi Germany with a Hitler in power when you think about it like that.
Он вообще то один раз летал на орбиту Земли в автоматическом режиме и вернулся оттуда на аэродром, сомневаюсь что ваш шаттл был способен на это, так что глупости не пишите, раз не в курсе всего...
@@yurakondratuk253 тут под этим видео некоторые писали что он вообще не летал, поэтому и написал что он всё таки разок слетал, а причём тут строительство МКС? Речь вообще не о нем.
The Energiya Super heavy rocket can take off over 100 tons into the space. Space Shuttle it is not a rocket at all. Energiya can fly without Buran. Surprise! Can the orange fuel tank fly without Space Shuttle? Definitely not. Yep, Soviet engineers was copy body and wings, like Formula One copy your family van :) four tires, steering system, drivers chair, pedals on the floor, engine. Obviously if you do not see deeply than F1 and van are same thing. And Buran was completely automatic space craft from 1988! Think about it. Soviet Union can do it. And now nobody have it and can`t make system automatic landing. Maybe soon. Maybe. Buran touch down in automatic mode without engine with hard crosswind making its own decision due to the changed weather for additional maneuver. When Columbia have disaster and Space Shuttle program have been closed (NASA?) think about resurrection Buran. But they don`t do that after counting money and effort. Well, Soviet Union build it, others can`t repair it. Ahhh! One more I just remember. The fuel for Energia was oxygen and hydrogen. Energiya is first from series super heavy rocket for Lunar expansion. I understand you, you are offended that this system was not created in your country and not your engineers. But right now, it's just a history. Relax.
The Buran was a heavily improved Space Shuttle. It fixed many of the Shuttle's fatal flaws and could even land automatically. The Energia rocket which the Buran would launch on could even fly without the Buran, allowing for much heavier payloads.
Наука
I remember historical day in November 1988 when Space Shuttle Buran flew to space for first mission. After two orbits Buran (Snow storm) landed in fully automatic mode.
The Buran its very similar to Space Shuttle, but the Energia its fantastic, a massive rocket.
Based on the Energia rocket, it was planned to create a Vulcan rocket with a payload capacity of up to 200 tons. Instead of 4 side blocks with RD-170 engines, it was supposed to install 8, and also add a third stage. Currently, Russia is developing the Yenisei rocket, which is a continuation of work on superheavy missiles
Существовал проект Шаттл-С, саrgo, тоже без "самолётика". Надо бы - сделали бы.
No comparison needed, Buran is obviously better
Agree
Because it trashed all of its engines every flight?
Energia is so awesome
Did you know there are attempts to bring it back?
The Sad thing was that the Side boosters of Buran were to be Reusable. It was supposed to have Wings and it would glide back on a runway like a Glider.
why is that sad? i have often wondered if wings would be better than powered landings for recovered rockets
@@peabody3000 The Sad thing was that this was scrapped, and we don't know if we can make this again.
Thats Energia 2.0, but yeah. The main tank was also supposed to skip across the atmosphere and land as well.
That was Urgan (Energia 2.0), They planned on a fully reusable rocket
The core would have delta wings and skip over the atmosphere, the boostets had deployavle wings
@@doodleboi7034 Well i have good news for you: ruclips.net/video/P9Xh5iyLZ3Y/видео.html
No doubt BURAN is the best!!!
Ничем не лучше
then you must be russian
buran is like the secound generation of space shuttle so it is very clear that buran is better
Nah it looks like a cheap Chinese knock off that tries to look better but just isn’t
@@masonrowden9730 larger payload capacity, automatic landing and designed in a way that both sts disasters wouldn’t have happened
Ничем не лучше, даже без многоразовых двигателей.
То же поколение, удалось криво повторить через 7лет.
@@denzelklarenaar5883грузоподъемность определялась заданием.
Система автоматической посадки сделана ещё в 1955 для самолётов в США, но нужна ли так она...
Катастрофы как с Шаттлами были возможны тоже.
Fucking yes bro! YES you are are on the right track to the future
That's a really nice job!
Recently I started to read and watch stuff about Buran, so YT keeps recommending me jewels like this one; I guess the algorythm gets smarter :)
Where did you get dimentions etc. from? And would you care to share those 3D models?
I got them from scaled blueprints from a Russian forum.
@@energiam880 Hello, could you be so kind to sent me the files for Energhia&Buran , these ones. I will try to make one in 3D , but I didn't find anyware such great detalis as you have. Please help me in this project. Many thanks in advance
Hello Sir, I'm interested too for these plans...design....if I may. Could you be so kind to share with us, please. Many thanks in advance.
Buran is better but when the time of it's building process soviet union is.......let's say bankrupt 😅
People keep saying burin is better than the shuttle but the shuttle served 135 missions
Buran has only one mission, but not because it was bad, but because the state that made it ceased to exist. The shuttle ended its career due to well-known catastrophic events. Following the loss of two Space Shuttle missions, the risks for the initial missions were reevaluated, and the chance of a catastrophic loss of the vehicle and crew was found to be as high as 1 in 9. In other words - you have a better chance to walk across the minefield relaxed, with your hands in your pockets, unharmed than to survive the Space shuttle mission.
P.S. Quantity and quality are two different things, although you Westerners have a habit of saying that quantity itself is a kind of quality.
Cool now put them in ksp
While I like the Buran, I'm gonna be honest there that reminds me of the N1
Its just soviet liquid propellant thechnology. From below it looks more like a soyuz
mOaR EngInEs
And the buran shuttle can take off......
....both of them....
Buran is very underrated
How many missions did Buran perform?
Zero. The only flight it did was only testing.
the energia launched a military sat that crashed ( the sat not energia) the energia launced the buran once but it was a huge sucess
Он один раз слетал в космос в автоматическом режиме...
Buran 1
Energia 2
Нужно бы снова восстановить буран, мрию, «каспийского монстра» и других и создать корабли даже лучше.. Все были рады развалу СССР но только спустя время многие начинают понимать что мы потеряли на самом деле😊
Буран - гораздо более дорогая система без многоразовых двигателей.
there is only 1 reality and in this reality the Shuttle flew 135 times with humans on board and the Buran flew 0 times, there is no competition here, everything else is fictional
That's lovely, but this isn't really an ego-measuring contest. It's just my artwork
But thanks for your expert opinion anyway. However, think it's probably best if you kept them to your self :)
@@energiam880 my comment refers to the delusional commenters below me not your modelling work
Неправда, Буран один раз слетал в космос в автоматическом режиме и он был явно лучше вашего шаттла
If you already insist on formalities: Buran had one mission.
Buran's safety record is 100%. Shuttle's safety record is 98,52%.
Buran has 0 losses, Shuttle has, how many, 14 lost lives?
So far, 24 astronauts in American missions, 5 astronauts in Soviet and 1 astronaut in Russian missions have died.
the soviets only had to fly it once to realize the basic design was far too expensive, impractical, and dangerous to be useful.. it took 30 years for the US to finally resign to that
Seriously, US does not Accept anything.
Shuttle did more than any spacecraft ever did. It was a total loss to retire that capability.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver anything shuttle ever did could have been done far more safely and cheaply, with other systems
@@peabody3000 What other systems?
@@RideAcrossTheRiver systems that were and still are in use today.. soyuz, atlas, etc.. and to flip the question, what did shuttle ever do that those systems can't?
tau.
Buran was better? It flew two orbits, just 85,000 km, just once, and unmanned, almost 40 years ago.
Collapse of the Soviet Union stopped Buran progress. That is really sad :(
Ya missed more, abt BURAN: all was done Autonomously.
On way back, it senses flight line was a bit off, so flew over the airport and made 2nd attempt. Landed and even parked on its own, at the designated parking lot. 😂
Shes wayyy better.
@@kentershackle1329 Yeah, sure, no, it didn't. Also, pilots fly better.
I will with you
@@RideAcrossTheRiver WHAT "it didn't"!!!???? Buran did not fly on his own and made second approach when landing? Of course it did! You know nothing and it is obvious that you are obsessed with American superiority. You are nothing more than a complete waste of time ...
When the space shuttle failed why didn't the United States buy the Russian space shuttle the Buran?
Буран не российский, а советский космический челнок
I've heard that the NASA actually considered using the Buran after the Columbia disaster. But the only Buran that ever flew to space was destroyed by this time. All the other orbiter that never got completed got their components used for other projects, scrapped or abandoned.
Buran can get to the moon, so its better. By a lot.
Shush
Roblox king The great why? buran is superior in a lot of ways
I'm the only person that commented because I understand what does feel that you didn't have comments I feel an empty inside... and nice video 👍🙂
To be Honest, Energia was way more complicated and Better than The space shuttle
Neat part is, it was less complicated, that´s the main reason why it was better
Buran has a lower percentage of returned parts. The number of engines on boosters speaks for this. The Chinese, when they copy Starship, will do the same.
Wich was actually an improvement
The shuttle was MORE expensive to repair, than just use an expendable rocket
The soviets made engines more powerfull and as efficient as the shuttle's, but far less complex and cheaper to build
The Shutle engines where also dead weigth in orbit
Буран -- наша гордость и боль. Ну могли же такое - великая страна была СССР!
Unless you disagreed with a dictatorship or were "lesser race" according to Stalin at which point you were tortured, gulaged and/or killed ... kinda sounds like another Nazi Germany with a Hitler in power when you think about it like that.
Buran was never used in a real mission so there is no comparison.
Он вообще то один раз летал на орбиту Земли в автоматическом режиме и вернулся оттуда на аэродром, сомневаюсь что ваш шаттл был способен на это, так что глупости не пишите, раз не в курсе всего...
Every space flight is a MISSION!
@@BadmaOchirov50 и толку, что он слетал? Мкс строили шатры, а не бураны.
@@yurakondratuk253 тут под этим видео некоторые писали что он вообще не летал, поэтому и написал что он всё таки разок слетал, а причём тут строительство МКС? Речь вообще не о нем.
@@BadmaOchirov50 у шатла был автопилот,на сколько я знаю. Так что приемущество автопилота очень спорное. Буран не стал рабочей лошадкой в космосе
BURAN .. THE BEST !!!
Cool graphics!... I am amazed the Soviets copied the Space Shuttle.. it was done with Soviet spies 👍
The design for the NASA space shuttle were made public, and the Soviets observed and improved from the Americans design.
@@jimmy950we5 Space Shuttle 2.0..👍🇳🇿
@@allgood6760 Indeed
The Energiya Super heavy rocket can take off over 100 tons into the space. Space Shuttle it is not a rocket at all. Energiya can fly without Buran. Surprise! Can the orange fuel tank fly without Space Shuttle? Definitely not. Yep, Soviet engineers was copy body and wings, like Formula One copy your family van :) four tires, steering system, drivers chair, pedals on the floor, engine. Obviously if you do not see deeply than F1 and van are same thing. And Buran was completely automatic space craft from 1988! Think about it. Soviet Union can do it. And now nobody have it and can`t make system automatic landing. Maybe soon. Maybe. Buran touch down in automatic mode without engine with hard crosswind making its own decision due to the changed weather for additional maneuver. When Columbia have disaster and Space Shuttle program have been closed (NASA?) think about resurrection Buran. But they don`t do that after counting money and effort. Well, Soviet Union build it, others can`t repair it. Ahhh! One more I just remember. The fuel for Energia was oxygen and hydrogen. Energiya is first from series super heavy rocket for Lunar expansion. I understand you, you are offended that this system was not created in your country and not your engineers. But right now, it's just a history. Relax.
The Buran was a heavily improved Space Shuttle. It fixed many of the Shuttle's fatal flaws and could even land automatically. The Energia rocket which the Buran would launch on could even fly without the Buran, allowing for much heavier payloads.
They also stole the shuttle
Никто ничего не крал, это собственная разработка СССР
Soviet technology is best
Totally UNUSEFUL!
Такую страну прое#бали
СССР USSR 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
США USA 👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎
nooooooo