In the United States successfully tested the Dream Chaser shuttle

The American Shuttle Dream Chaser made its first successful landing, reports RIA News message to Sierra Nevada Corporation.

Space shuttle landed at Edwards Air Force Base in California. The current descent was the second for the American apparatus. In the 2013, the landing gear failed during the planning test, the flight prototype was damaged.

“The compact shuttle was created on the basis of the American HL-20 orbital aircraft, which, in turn, was modeled on the Soviet BOR-4 unmanned rocket plane,” according to an article on NASA.

It is assumed that the "space taxi" will deliver to the near-earth orbit "cargo and crews of up to seven people."

The first flight to the ISS is scheduled for 2020 year.

Comments

[starogil]

Soon we will not need a cab, but here also prototypes, it turns out, haggled ....

[maxim947]

Cool thing, plus they still have the X-37B flying, and quite successfully.

[xetai9977]

Probably they made conclusions from the operation of the Shuttles, took into account shortcomings and again with the new technologies reanimated the project. Great and promising technique! Well done Americans! They are already engaged in space technologies by a number of companies and, on the whole, are quite successful. And as for those who are stamping out unfriendly comments here, envy silently. Do not blame space technology. In the end, it will serve the interests of all earthlings.

[maxim947]

In the end, it will serve the interests of all earthlings.
Well, with all the earthlings, you are bent. They are only interested in the interests of "exceptional" earthlings))

[IL-18]

I agree with the commentators, but wait until 2020, and then we'll see. With Space X, questions arise, but here everything is more complicated.

[venik]

Quote: IL-18

With Space X, questions arise, but here everything is more complicated.

=======
Here, just with Space-X there are no problems at all - this is a purely financial project with the goal of “shifting” part of the “space” expenses to PRIVATE investors (and not just American ones !!!). Everything is extremely simple: You announce a "project" promising colossal profits (and even a "monopoly position on the market" (for example, commercial launches), then an IPO ("Initial Public Offering" ie placement of issued shares of a new issue) on the largest "stock exchanges" (with mandatory advertising about "colossal future prospects"! ), thus attracting "additional funding" ... And quietly doing much more real "projects" (including and on the orders of the Pentagon), slowly "pushing" the "reusable" project into a "dusty corner" ......... Isn't that why Musk became Trump's “adviser” ???

[Kent0001]

Yes, of course, but if we can drive the headstock over the hill, then their engineers are not to blame. We had a "Lapot" it was, and now they have their "Lapot" and it flies. We are almost out of reach on almost all fronts (unfortunately), but once we were equal. By the way, this gizmo is just a gift for the military, but how do they drag it into orbit?

[Young_Communist]

Quote: Kent0001

We had a "Lapot" it was, and now they have their "Lapot" and it flies. We’re not even enough on almost all fronts (unfortunately), but once we were equal

When Putin came to power, Russia was positioned as Space superpower. For 15 years of lifting from her knees, she turned into Resource Super Power. I hope not to see how Putin announces our transformation into Hunting and Collective Super Power.

[Wedmak]

When Putin came to power, Russia positioned itself as a Space Superpower.

Do not lie ... He was elected in the 2000 year, just at the time that we were no longer a space power, developing the USSR’s remaining resource. Nor were we a military power. We generally observed the complete collapse of the country. "Thank you" to Boriska the drunk and the traitor Gorbachev.

For 15 years of rising from her knees, she has become a Resource superpower.

Lying again. You first looked at the list of high-tech goods exported now.

[prosto_rgb]

Quote: Wedmak

Gorbachev the traitor.

At which they launched the MIR station completed and launched the Buran
Continued to deploy GLONASS
In power was 5 years

Quote: Wedmak

"Thank you" Boriske-drunk and

at which the Angara began to do :)
and in power which was xnumx years
and at which oil was about $ 20 per barrel
http://www.waronline.org/fora/index.php?attachmen
ts / neft-jpg.19014 /

And let’s help Dasha, a traveler, find someone who has been in power since 2000 and everything prevents him from Yeltsin and Gorbachev in space exploration.

[Wedmak]

In power was 5 years

Yes, super at all, I'm just amazed how you pull the owl on the globe. The base unit of the WORLD was launched in 1986, then during 10 years the others raised it. But Gorbachev began to rule the USSR only in 1990, successfully merging domestic politics to please foreign ones. And his attempt to reform the USSR ended in the collapse of the country. So the WORLD was launched rather contrary to than thanks to this leader. And given the pace that GLONASS was unfolding, this was supposed to continue until the carrot's plot. Buran launched and immediately turned off. One flight. Is this also an achievement of Gorbachev?

and in power which was xnumx years

Come on? Hangar? It would have been nothing that parts of the Angara were tested in 2007, and before that, from 1994 of the year there were only variants of the new LV. And the Hangar 1.2 flew only in 2014. True, there were launches in South Korea with the first stage in 2009, 2009 and 2013, but still, somehow it does not coincide with the rule of Yeltsin.

was about 20 $ per barrel

Before the artificial collapse of oil prices in 2008, it was under 130 $. And she began to grow with 2002. Oops .. Where is Yeltsin?

You should at least before looking at the numbers look. It is useful. Gorbachev and Yeltsin do not interfere; they are responsible for the collapse of the entire Russian economy. For breaking ties between the countries of the former USSR. And the sale of the interests of our state for the vague promises of the United States. "Peace, friendship, chewing gum" did not work.

[Mikhail Zubkov]

Gorbachev became Secretary General of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1985. Why did you terminate his term - since 1990? He just did misfortunes in those 5 years - from 1985 to 1990. He launched “perestroika and glasnost”, “the fight against drunkenness and alcoholism” just in those years. You, apparently, are young and the “education” fell under you with Yeltsin, along with chewing gum. 25 years ago, in 1992, Gorbachev handed over power and the USSR flag to the Kremlin’s EBN, and Putin has been responsible for the Yeltsin Kremlin since 2000. But he is now rebuilding it, either backward or forward, for history for the travel industry, that is, for green money to the cashier of the operators. And another big, big question is whether these operators will be unfastened into our space - or they decide to give to their space. As Gorbachev, in essence and result, did. For the state, however, it is insulting and alarming!

[Wedmak]

Having received the general secretary in 1985, Horabchev just started to turn back, but after receiving the presidency in 1990 he made a control shot. From here I "skostil" terms. In fact, before the collapse of the USSR, everything, including in the space sphere, went according to plan, according to plan. I remember very well how people voted to preserve the USSR. But some decided otherwise. From that moment, things went awry.
Putin, having accepted power, struggled for several years with the country's fall into the abyss. It was possible to rectify the situation only by the 2010 year and then not completely. Only starting with 2015 did you see at least some growth, at least some positive progress. But then sanctions came, imposing strategic enterprises on all sides, preventing them from working normally. What space, when the economy puts a stick in the wheel? And yet, something is being done, developed and produced.

[prosto_rgb]

Quote: Wedmak

And Gorbachev began to rule the USSR only in 1990,

I have no more questions.

[x.andvlad]

Quote: xetai9977

Do not blame space technology.

You got out anyway: you should not blame the Americans, because they are "well done"
Yes, they are “good”, “good” when they sleep with their teeth against the wall.

[venik]

Quote: xetai9977

Probably they made conclusions from the operation of the Shuttles, took into account shortcomings and again with the new technologies reanimated the project.

===========
Yeah !!! One can immediately conclude from the “commentary”: the “ardent“ Americanophile, ”who does not bother himself with the“ study of the materiel ”!”
Personally, with a "fair share of skepticism" I belong to "reusable systems." The reason is this: ALL of these systems are FIRST glance only seem more economical than "one-time"! The reason is that after EVERY (!!) flight you have to make "COMPLETE DETECTION"systems !!! In other words - to disassemble what is called" to the screw "to carry out the" defect "of ALL components, assemblies, and structural elements, replace ALL that has become unsuitable or" doubtful ", then reassemble, test and only then -" by the second round "!!! The result -" shuttles "like" Columbia "had practically no NO"commercial" value !!! "Reputational" - certainly! “Scientific” and “Military” - YES !! A "commercial - sought to" 0 "!! That is why, and not because of accidents," the project and "covered" !!! (The cost of the cargo put into orbit was almost several times higher than the indicators of the same Delt, Arianov and Soyuz !!!!
Now about the "Dream Chaser" - judging by the photo - this is a greatly reduced version of the "shuttle" with limited (compared with the "Columbia" capabilities - "carrying capacity" + the lack of a marching engine, etc.). The downsizing is understandable - they will probably try to "squeeze" it under the fairing of promising Amer "superheavy" missiles (which will significantly reduce thermal loads (during take-off)), and a simpler design will simplify, reduce the cost and speed up the "defect!). Maybe it’s enough" economical "machine, comparable or even superior to" disposable "ships .... As I understand it, the" Federation "is designed based on the same criteria!
Well, about the "reusable steps" Ilona Mask, it's pure financial scam with the goal of transferring (partially) the "burden" of financing American space programs (including military) from the state budget - "onto the shoulders" of private investors (including and foreign !!!). I can "justify"!

[nmaxxen]

Quote: venik

Personally, with a "fair share of skepticism" I belong to "reusable systems." The reason is this: ALL of these systems - only at the FIRST glance, they seem more economical than “disposable” ones!

you are absolutely right. space "reusability" wretched scam.
But about:

Quote: venik

"Dream Chaser" - judging by the photo - this is a greatly reduced version of the "shuttle" with limited capabilities - "payload" + the lack of a marching engine, etc. .. ... It may turn out to be quite an "economical" machine, comparable or even superior to "disposable" "ships .... As I understand it," Federation "is designed based on the same criteria!

praised the ideological fathers "reusable bast shoe chasing a dream":
It will not work out an “economical machine”, let alone surpassing disposable spacecraft, and all the more ideal Union in layout, only in wet dreams.
KK Federation is also very unsuccessful in layout and concept, here we must rejoice about the delays in its implementation and hope that it will never be created.
Perhaps the power of compradors and prostitutes will change and we will have a second Korolev who will make Russia the undisputed leader in space exploration, which will drag along the development of our entire country.

[venik]

Quote: nmaxxen

praised the ideological fathers "reusable bast shoe chasing a dream":

========
That’s why he used the “cautious” expressions “maybe” and “comparable” ... Still, material science and instrument engineering are not “in place” ....
And as for the "Federation" - it’s such a primitive "barrel" that its "defect" can be quite simple and cheap .... Although ... Well, 2-3 times it can still be "driven" into space with the crew, and further .. - it is better to use as a "truck" - with each new flight - the risk of an accident will increase exponentially ......
In short, "count and count" is necessary here!

[nmaxxen]

“Federation” is an utter nonsense imposed by politicians who forced designers to conceptually copy American absurd barrels (artificially inflated so that in response to - why are they better than a union? Joyfully answer: 6-7 people fit - we are not wasting taxpayer money for nothing !!!).
That is, the same rake when the Kremlin elders were forced to copy the shuttle.
For flights to the moon and into orbit (although I believe that there is nothing to do in orbit - you need to fly directly to the moon and make a permanent base there), there are enough Unions (or a new ship repeating its concept at a new technical level)

[Victor Dubovitsky]

Quote: nmaxxen

“Federation” is an utter nonsense imposed by politicians who forced designers to conceptually copy American absurd barrels (artificially inflated so that in response to - why are they better than a union? Joyfully answer: 6-7 people fit - we are not wasting taxpayer money for nothing !!!).
That is, the same rake when the Kremlin elders were forced to copy the shuttle.
For flights to the moon and into orbit (although I believe that there is nothing to do in orbit - you need to fly directly to the moon and make a permanent base there), there are enough Unions (or a new ship repeating its concept at a new technical level)

Well, you scorcher! Go to Alpha Centauri why not fly? What a budget savings. You have not been to the orbit of the moon. Fly and then tell me.

[nmaxxen]

Quote: Victor Dubovitsky

Well, you scorcher! Go to Alpha Centauri why not fly? What a budget savings. You have not been to the orbit of the moon. Fly and then tell me.

Something did not understand your indignation ...
Do you think that spinning for years in orbit is more beneficial and much cheaper than the base on the moon.?
Or do you think that a base on the moon is impossible in our time, despite the 6 + 1/2 declared expeditions to the moon 50 years ago?
Or are you offended by the ever-memorable Kremlin elders and the Andropysh Trotskyites who manipulate them?
Or do you warm your hands on a drink, wretched and meaningless (since the "Union" is better, cheaper and more reliable), "federation".?

[Victor Dubovitsky]

Quote: nmaxxen

Quote: Victor Dubovitsky

Well, you scorcher! Go to Alpha Centauri why not fly? What a budget savings. You have not been to the orbit of the moon. Fly and then tell me.

Something did not understand your indignation ...
Do you think that spinning for years in orbit is more beneficial and much cheaper than the base on the moon.?
Or do you think that a base on the moon is impossible in our time, despite the 6 + 1/2 declared expeditions to the moon 50 years ago?
Or are you offended by the ever-memorable Kremlin elders and the Andropysh Trotskyites who manipulate them?
Or do you warm your hands on a drink, wretched and meaningless (since the "Union" is better, cheaper and more reliable), "federation".?

Then why strive to the moon, if you can’t understand that the difficulties arising from this exceed our capabilities. Raise a station carrying a hundred tons to such a distance. Here you can’t help with an attack on a cart. Who will deploy the hostel on the surface of the moon? Maybe we’ll shoot you there? Do not write nonsense, you are not a kindergartner. Or I'm wrong? Perhaps the Americans WERE on the moon. But why did it stop flying? Was everything ready?

[nmaxxen]

Quote: Victor Dubovitsky

Then why strive to the moon, if you can’t understand that the difficulties arising from this exceed our capabilities. Raise a station carrying a hundred tons to such a distance. Here you can’t help with an attack on a cart. Who will deploy the hostel on the surface of the moon? Maybe we’ll shoot you there? Do not write nonsense, you are not a kindergartner. Or I'm wrong? Perhaps the Americans WERE on the moon. But why did it stop flying? Was everything ready?

There were NO Americans on the moon.
this is clear to anyone who at least a little thoughtfully studied the "events" they claimed.
And precisely because of this lie, sabotage of space exploration began
space.
And those who do not see the consequences of this deliberate sabotage are fools.
Aggressive rash stupid write just you.
And you pour water on the mill of American scammers and their lackeys nasa propagandists who would hide the deception constantly, until absurd tantrums carry out the idea that in no case you need to fly to the moon and as a disguise (so as not to pass for obscurantists) delusional projections push everywhere flight to Mars, hoping for the formula "Hodge Ishak Emir"

[Mikhail Zubkov]

According to the algorithms of the Shuttle, Buran, Space-X and this "shoe" of NASA, which in principle repeats our "stormy" searches, one can and should argue, but without specific tasks for the equipment and its cost in the series and operation, the disputes have no main arguments. The Buran was created initially for military purposes - they were removed by Gorbachev, which immediately made the whole project unacceptably expensive - either they considered it that way, or the Americans proved it to Gorbachev. In short, they were not allowed to go to the series, but everything that was worked out was almost thrown out. For the state it is insulting and disturbing.

[Victor Dubovitsky]

Quote: xetai9977

Probably they made conclusions from the operation of the Shuttles, took into account shortcomings and again with the new technologies reanimated the project. Great and promising technique! Well done Americans! They are already engaged in space technologies by a number of companies and, on the whole, are quite successful. And as for those who are stamping out unfriendly comments here, envy silently. Do not blame space technology. In the end, it will serve the interests of all earthlings.

Well, in the interests of yours, your country, they certainly do not work. Moreover, of course, to the detriment.

[NEXUS]

Quote: maxim947

Cool thing, plus they still have the X-37B flying, and quite successfully.

And if they start doing them in series, then the mattresses will receive strategic bombers in the near space.
But for now, the horse did not lie in this direction, okromy Buran ...

[Young_Communist]

Quote: NEXUS

But for now, the horse did not lie in this direction, okromy Buran ...

Does Buran fly? Can I load a couple of bombs tomorrow and bomb the Pentagon?

[Vadim237]

There is no more Buran, the only flight instance in place with the Energia rocket - the roof of the hangar on Baikonur crushed the roof in 2002. The only direction that needs to be developed is single-stage aerospace aircraft.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Young_Communist

Does Buran fly? Can I load a couple of bombs tomorrow and bomb the Pentagon?

Dear, can you read thoughtfully? Where did I write that Buran flies? I wrote in black in Russian that ..

Quote: NEXUS

But for now, the horse did not lie in this direction, okromy Buran ...

Where in this sentence is there even a word that Buran is flying?

[venik]

Quote: NEXUS

And if they start doing them in series, then the mattresses will receive strategic bombers in the near space.

=========
And what, from the "non-returnable" devices, there is no way to "assemble" such a grouping does not work??? And WHAT ultimately cheaper?????

[NEXUS]

Quote: venik

And what, from the "non-returnable" devices, such a grouping "to collect" - does not work ??? AND WHAT is ultimately cheaper ?????

I’m talking about space strategic aviation, which will not be within the reach of our defense means. And what about disposable satellites?
Such a strategist bombed, sat down on the airfield, booted up and flew off again ... and to rivet disposable spacecraft (nifiga are not cheap), for one-time operations, will you have enough budget?

[Victor Dubovitsky]

Quote: NEXUS

Quote: maxim947

Cool thing, plus they still have the X-37B flying, and quite successfully.

And if they start doing them in series, then the mattresses will receive strategic bombers in the near space.
But for now, the horse did not lie in this direction, okromy Buran ...

You overestimate. As scouts, a good thing. But as carriers of weapons, of course not. Count yourself. The period of revolution around the Earth is about an hour and a half, depending on the height of the orbit. The inclination of the orbit, of course, will not allow us to inspect (fly) over our territory anywhere. Changing moods is a nightmare in fuel consumption. This canned food does not have such a reserve. If suddenly, it will be decided to attack something, then this can be done if not at THIS round, then at the next. And this is an hour and a half waiting. Start from the Earth and flight time of the strategist - 20 minutes - 40 minutes. Trying to use this piece of iron for missile defense- difficulties are added in determining the target, aiming and accurately hitting the target that has gained supersonic. Or even hypersound. After all, one must somehow extinguish the first cosmic velocity in order to enter and not burn out. Catch up and get in. Fantasy. Ground carriers can do their job FASTER than hanging in space and a little controlled piece of iron.
Further. Are you not afraid that the drone hanging there, armed with a nuclear clapper, can be redirected to the owner himself? Will you give a guarantee that this is not possible?

[Muvka]

There were already shuttles. They covered up. Well fly on this, they will kill about a dozen cosmonauts and again cover.

[Jedi]

Quote: Muvka

Well fly on this, they’ll kill about a dozen cosmonauts and cover again.

But this is not necessary - let their astronauts ruin.

[Muvka]

Quote: Jedi

Quote: Muvka

Well fly on this, they’ll kill about a dozen cosmonauts and cover again.

But this is not necessary - let their astronauts ruin.

Well, ours will not go there. They will fly on time-tested low-cost Unions.

[Jedi]

And they’ll do it right. And the Americans, you see, "zapadlo" in terms of space flights depend on the "main enemy of American democracy."

[Going]

Hi Maxim, everything is still very raw and it is too early to make forecasts, but nobody needs to be ruined.

[Jedi]

Victor, good day! I agree, it’s too early to share the skin of a dead bear. For some reason, it's a shame from this phrase:

The compact shuttle is based on the American HL-20 orbital plane, which, in turn, was modeled after the Soviet unmanned rocket plane BOR-4

[Going]

Oh, how much of this you can raise and regret that we are not, starting with the radio, etc ..

[Jedi]

As the character of N. Karachentsova in "White Roses" said: "Dad, don’t make me sad!"

[Going]

Yes, a good film, but yesterday I couldn’t watch it ... here we can fall behind very much too.

[Jedi]

I hope that now there is no such massive "drain" of technologies as under Mechen and EBN.

[Going]

Yes, then they sold everything that is possible, for a long time it will still be us.

[Wedmak]

Not everything is so bad ... It took a lot of time for the Americans to copy the BOR-4 of the 70's. And he only sat down with them. While ours was in orbit, and even maneuvered during the descent.

[Nasrat]

Before BOR-4 went into orbit and maneuvered during the descent, there were flights of BOR-2 and BOR-3, it is possible that the Americans are testing the same sequence ... ours, for example, do not experience this ... it might be better to observe, learn (always there is something), and not to gnash your teeth from the own greatness of the 70s - where is it now, then greatness?

[Wedmak]

where is it now, that greatness?

Nevertheless ... We have it было in the 70's. Then everything collapsed, the program was closed, and now apparently there is no money for these developments with an unknown result.

[Nasrat]

That's just the point - everything was and passed ... (here went mat) .. And if not us, then someone will definitely take our place. I feel that in the future we will not see our new victories in space (in the economy) ...

[Maz]

I read and think about the orbital armored train that has been standing in some sort of state security tunnel since the 70s. And the Americans Only began to build it.

[Nasrat]

Quote: Maz

..about an orbital armored train that has been standing in some sort of state security tunnel since the 70s.

Then I read for days that in the early 90s, in the northern fleet, hangars with canned Yak-41 (2 sides) were brewed. It seems like everything is in working condition .. I really don’t know whether to believe or fake (which is most likely) .. But it was nice to read .. the very thought of the working samples is pleasant

[venik]

Quote: Nasr

maybe it’s better to watch, learn (there is always something), and not gnash your teeth from the own greatness of the 70s - where is it now, then greatness?

==========
Or maybe it’s better to learn wisdom - analyze your own and others' mistakes and move YOUR own way ????

[Esoteric]

Quote: starogil

Soon we will not need a cab

We plowed ...
Attach the wheels to the sofa, shafts and harness the trotter ... Maybe you'll need ...

[starogil]

So far, you bit a bit. But-But, let's go ....

[Chertkov Oleg]

Humpbacked or ebn tried.

, was modeled after the Soviet unmanned rocket-plane BOR-4 ”,

[avt]

Quote: Oleg Chertkov

Humpbacked or ebn tried.

EBN. With him, they launched on Lightning, such as commercial pokatushki on a ballistic trajectory joint to do. Well, here is the result .... They already rolled out the carrier from the hangar, it was already double-fuselage on the site and ... also similar to the development of Lightning. If memory serves, then practically at the same time the USs of the garish fleet in Zhukovsky Tu-144 and checked a series of test flights according to YOUR program, so wait for something else .... hypersonic.

[Chertkov Oleg]

Great article about the history of Hogs
http://www.buran.ru/htm/bors.htm

[Kent0001]

Hare, not funny anymore. There is no EBN since 2000.

[venik]

Quote: Kent0001

Hare, not funny anymore. There is no EBN since 2000.

=========
He is not there! But the "case" of his "still lives" (albeit "barely") and the consequences are still "popping up" !!!

[Buffet]

Do you say trampolines? Well ... Where are you there?

[Nasrat]

Quote: SHVEDsky_stol

Where are you there?

The patriots, approaching the checkout counter in the store - abusively curse their poverty, and approaching the ballot box - they are not overjoyed by the current government.

[Mestny]

Oh, the strangers pulled themselves up.
But who needs this patriotism. What do you love here, why cheer? There are radiant places where everything is much better. Ayda destroy everything again.

[Sands Careers General]

Some kind of nonshuttle.
Let's see what they launch there, and then there are several managed flight programs, but in fact there is nothing.

[Mikhail m]

Quote: General of the Sand Quarries

Some kind of nonshuttle.

However, 7 people will pull. Well done engineers.

[Wedmak]

I don’t even know where they are going to place 7 people there. In this oversight. And it is curious how crew rescue schemes are implemented - all of a sudden, if that. Or like in the shuttles - "they have 100% reliable"?

[Mikhail m]

Length: 9 m, wingspan: 7 m, sealed volume: 16 m³. The term of active existence. up to 210 days.
In 16 cubes there is enough space for 7 people, I suppose. In the "Unions" the lander 3,5 cubic meters and a household compartment of 5 cubes for three.

[Wedmak]

tight volume: 16 m³

Sealed volume, this does not mean residential volume. What about appliances? What about the load? All this is also in a sealed volume.
Have you ever seen HOW these three lie in 3.5 cubes? And this despite the fact that there is an individual adjustment of lodges and spacesuits. And a bunch of equipment in front of the nose. And a load hangs overhead, free space only so that a toy announcing the onset of zero gravity is hung. But is the household compartment not used for cargo?

[Mikhail m]

When I was in Tura-Tame, I saw him. I never envied these guys.

[venik]

Quote: Wedmak

I don’t even know where they are going to place 7 people there.

========
And they’ll put it in a “stack”! Ah, what! "In cramped conditions, but not in insult" ...... Out of the "Constipation" "eared" was a matter of 9 (nine !!!) the snout fit! (Moreover - this is NOT a JOKE, NOT a WIN and NOT HEARING !!) I myself sat in the front seat, and on my knees - two more fit .... When they "unloaded" - the whole faculty ran to "gawk and neigh" !!! By the way, they themselves couldn’t “unload” - the laughter “pulled out” one at a time ..... But - bet - won!!! Oh and "kicked" .......
And here you are, my dear, about some kind of “shuttle” ... Yes, our students are “betting” (a box of vodka), they’ll climb in there with the whole “stream” !!

[Mikhail m]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNwjWvAODl8
14 people get into Constipation.

[Sands Careers General]

You can declare anything you want, that 48 people can be sent to Mars. Let's see when seven people fly, at least to the ISS, and then we'll see.
Dyna-Sor also did, as a result, the program was closed, throwing a ton of money into the wind.

[Wedmak]

Some kind of nonshuttle.

It’s a copy of the shuttle from the Spiral project. For a long time they did it ...

[Großer feldherr]

Shaw, again?
One failed shuttle program was not enough and wanted to cut even more budget dough ??

[Lycan]

Yeah!
To be able to raise the powdered the old as "breakthrough new"while mercilessly cutting the budget - this is necessary u m e!
PS: Cut - with a cut, but sensible scientists and inventors are cultivated in places in this "feed". This, so to speak, is a bunch of compost, where pumpkin can grow from a carelessly thrown seed.

[ghby]

Quote: Lycan

PS: Cut - with a cut, but sensible scientists and inventors are cultivated in places in this "feed". This, so to speak, is a bunch of compost, where pumpkin can grow from a carelessly thrown seed.

They haven’t grown anything for a long time, everything sensible is acquired ready-made from outside, including from the Russian Federation.

[Lycan]

Who knows - how they have it "in the depths". I would still continue to finance "interest circles" in their place - some Gates, Jobs, Hayflick, Creek with Watson may well appear ...

[Mik13]

Interestingly, this cheerful flock of screams about trampolines and the Mask, which energetically jumped in the comments about an exploding rocket engine among Americans, will follow this article! Or is this news for patriotic horse racing "Rogozin-style" - not format?

[Nasrat]

Of course it will run, moreover - they will predict the very appearance of such a shuttle !!!

[Mestny]

Well, as you can, it’s the radiant USA. They, as all fighters for the truth know, have everything only the best. Rather, a crowd will come running with a howl about how everything is once again bad with us.
These citizens, for whatever reason, are organizing mass tantrums, and here is such an occasion.

[Nasrat]

Calm down and envy silently!

[Mestny]

I repeat once again - no one encroaches on your beliefs that everything is fine with them and that everything is bad with us.
We simply state the fact - there are too many of you, the patriots of the USA, here. And this is not good.

[Nasrat]

An increase in the number of people dissatisfied with the situation in the country, states the fact - not everything is in order in the country !!!! Understand cause-effect relationships ..
If your life has improved (recently), then you are clearly not from the people and then it is clear that you are cynically supporting the current government ...

[Mestny]

Wrestler? I thought so.
I inform you specifically - my life has worsened (recently), and I'm from the people.
But.
Even if this very life worsens even more, I will still support my homeland and country than I can. All this exists regardless of the current government or the availability of an oiphone.
Do you understand this?

[Nasrat]

I state that you can love your homeland, while criticizing the authorities ... but you don’t know (if only at the time you earned hard-earned money ..) And what about the natural wealth of your homeland - they shared without you? Yes, there, at the top, they divided their entire homeland ... without you ... Wait for dividends ...
I don’t fight the regime, I despise it ...

[Mestny]

The very fact of your agreement with the definition of "regime" as applied to our country perfectly characterizes you.
It will not work just to love the motherland and "despise the regime." This hatred of yours implies a change of "regime" (for the good of the homeland, of course). As a result of the actions of such successors, or rather, the actions of their leaders and inspirers, there is no stone unturned from the homeland.
And people like you then in the ruins exclaim in surprise - "How so? We were for all the good against all the bad?"
This is not what I came up with, this is not the philistine fear of change. This is history.
There are simply no exceptions. In the best case, then on the wreckage of the homeland, whenever a new homeland appears, and even then, it is far from always. And those further ones, if they are born of course, will curse us for the fact that at one time we "all asked ... whether".

[Nasrat]

This is what you tell in the Yeltsin Center ... who, with fanfare, built and opened - the current regime covered by you !!! This is the very regime that imposes on us the heroes of Mannerheim, Kolchak (and others), Nicolas-2 ... while real heroes cannot afford a comfortable old age (the neighbor was buried for days - the WWII veteran was dying in poverty) ..

[Muvka]

What is unusual about this news? Shuttle 2.0. Recall how the first version ended? That's how they will fly on it, then we'll talk. A test every four years, with a performance of 50% does not mean anything. And it is better to be a cheerful herd than a herd of whiners who are constantly not happy with something, and who constantly complain about something.

[Thunderbolt]

Quote: Muvka

Recall how the first version ended?

2 accidents for 135 starts. Normal result.
Already that

The compact shuttle is based on the American orbital plane HL-20, which, in turn, was arranged modeled on the Soviet unmanned rocket plane BOR-4

speaks about the prospects of such a project. Agree that if we were now discussing another test flight of the BOR, then all the blackeners would jump and sing differently))).

[Muvka]

I'm talking about the cost.

[Akuzenka]

Amer cost on the drum, they print money, not earn.

[Setrac]

Quote: AKuzenka

Amer cost on the drum, they print money, not earn.

But they do not print iron, aluminum, titanium.

[Thunderbolt]

Quote: Muvka

I'm talking about the cost.

I think that it is not so critical for NASA if it pulls simultaneously 3 test programs for the delivery of cargo to the ISS.

[Wedmak]

what if we were now discussing another test flight of BOR

Rather, the flight schedule ... if it didn’t work out that way, and a decision would be made about the series. For almost 30 years, progress would have been significant.
Whether it is promising or not, time will still show, for until the Americans even launched it into orbit. Here it is worth recalling the X-37B, with unknown goals dangling in orbit for years. And why do two programs work: X-37B and this copy of BOR?

[Sergei75]

normally they will fly, first launch from launch vehicles, and then from aircraft platforms.

[Wedmak]

Why jump? They themselves admitted (NASA) that they copied the ship with BOR-4. Let me remind you that the BOR-4 was tested, flew into orbit, maneuvered upon entering the atmosphere in the 70's of the last century. And where is the progress?

[Thunderbolt]

It’s too early to talk about progress, but if their shuttle goes into series, then this will be the practical implementation of an orbital aircraft. Such “equipment” also has military prospects, by the way ...

[Großer feldherr]

Any artificial object in orbit has "military prospects", nothing new and surprising.

[Say]

Don’t worry so much, we are sincerely happy for your hail. We had no idea that your owners would always buy alliances.
All-human cooperation in space still did not work, and the Mkss are the same meaningless projects as the shuttles.
And trampolines, as you put it, will be useful to Russophobes for the following Maidan.

[79807420129]

Quote: Mik13

Interestingly, this cheerful flock of screams about trampolines and the Mask, which energetically jumped in the comments about an exploding rocket engine among Americans, will follow this article! Or is this news for patriotic horse racing "Rogozin-style" - not format?

Run over of course don't worry who will tell fortunes about trampolines, someone will admire on the contrary, the smart thing will be silent and will continue to watch, but the herd will begin to irony over one or the other. Ironize further.

[Mestny]

That is, irony in this case is prohibited?
Ok, what to do? Well, if everything is so bad, of course we have it, but is it so good for them?
I ask without irony.

[79807420129]

Quote: Mestny

I ask without irony.

A colleague, I’m also a fan of pironization, but I’m never members of the forum, it doesn’t matter who they believe in, prefer or adore, I will not name any animals as a herd. And so many people, so many opinions. Someone likes trampolines, some shuttles, some swing.

[Livonetc]

Quote: Großer Feldherr

Shaw, again?
One failed shuttle program was not enough and wanted to cut even more budget dough ??

The shuttle was a failure due to the high cost of the program.
Actually, like Buran.
If this shuttle is more economical than other launch methods, then the prospect will be

[family tree]

Quote: Livonetc

If this shuttle is more economical than other launch methods, then the prospect will be

It will not be more economical, purely because of reusable. SchA, for all firms, the trend is to make disposable, and so as not to repair, the horse price tag on the nodes, because sometimes figs change parts, inextricable connection

[Großer feldherr]

It cannot be more economical because of the concept itself.
The space shuttle was forced to throw an extra 70 tons into orbit with the same payload as the proton, which increased the cost of the load by about 6 times without any advantages.

[Pacifist]

There are no words. Almost complete copy of the shuttle for the work "Spiral". When will Roskosmos stop crap?!. Where is the "Federation"? Where is the "MAX"?
We have all these developments. Why the hell is nothing implemented? Humanly insulting, our ancestors put so much effort into the leadership of the country in space, and the bureaucrats all went through ... if.

[Wedmak]

and all bureaucrats are just ...

And they are going to implement a program of flights to Mars. I don’t even know, the idea is certainly a good and promising one, but only without a serial heavy rocket and its own orbital station it will all be catch-ups of American rovers.

[Akuzenka]

How do you not understand? The bureaucrats did not "piss off." This is a targeted policy to destroy our space program. Really for so many years before you did not get it? The facts of the sea, screams that we are the first - the sea, the result is negative. Even this is enough for this conclusion.

[Setrac]

Quote: Pacifist

When will Roskosmos stop crap?!.

And you go, teach them how to work, he’s awkward.

[demos1111]

If you look, everyone in Rosskosmos is doing it right, of course within the budget. How was it not to build an eastern, seeing all the ex-brothers?
They’ll finish the east with a hangar, finish the federation, and take on multiple launches.
The concept of boron is relevant only for military purposes.

[andrewkor]

From what carrier did they launch it? It’s still a long way to real flights to Space, I think. And the device is interesting. Due to its similarity with Bohr, I think that is not surprising; the devices used in such extreme conditions as flights to the Cosmos must meet very strict requirements, which in itself limits the options for their designs. There are a lot of examples of similarity of equipment from different countries if we discard direct industrial espionage.

[True]

How's the Rogozin trampoline? Clowns!

[Muvka]

As usual, only they deliver the crews to the ISS. And they are doing it successfully. To your regret.

[Esoteric]

I just have one small question: "Hard cosmic radiation does not affect the multiple repetition of the take-off-landing cycle?"

Space is radioactive. Shelter from radiation is simply impossible. Imagine that you are standing in the midst of a sandstorm, and a whirlpool of small pebbles that hurt your skin is constantly circling around you. This is what cosmic radiation looks like. And this radiation causes considerable harm. But the problem is that, unlike pebbles and pieces of earth, ionizing radiation does not bounce off human flesh. It passes through it like a cannonball pierces through a building. And this radiation causes considerable harm.

[Großer feldherr]

There is no cosmos, all these charlatans, under the guise of scientists, invented to fool people, in fact, the Earth is flat, and nobody can overcome the firmament of heaven, except God. [this is a joke, if that ...]
I’ll tell you a little secret, but in this world almost everything is radioactive.
We are constantly in the midst of radiation background, and norms, no "considerable harm" and even discomfort.
In many places, people from birth are forced to live with beyond the Earth, the radioactive background of which exceeds the cosmic ... they live poorly, but they live. And here is just iron.

[Warrior-80]

The earth’s magnetic field protects from the solar wind and radiation, from the side of the sun about 50 thousand km, from the opposite side, since there the pressure of the solar wind on the magnetosphere is less, the protective field is much larger, even goes beyond the moon

[Cat Marquis]

Hey! Where is this "trampoline" tovarisch? What is not witty about the "trampolines"?

[Mestny]

And what, 7 Americans have already landed on the ISS?
Is it time for us to start crying and crawling into the cemetery of history?

[Cat Marquis]

We haven’t "not landed," ... we have an RD-180 .... Or is it already not "like us" like "Spiral" and much more? That's what is written here, for example, about the "famous" RD-180 which is "our fse" for ....... (it is clear to whom): https://m-kalashnikov.livejournal.com/3290279.htm
l ".... It should be noted that this contract then came back to haunt the Russian military-industrial complex, because when Russia itself needed a" half "engine for the Rus-M and Angara missiles, it turned out that, under the terms of the contract, it could not produce the RD-180 for their own purposes, but must purchase it from the American company Pratt & Whitney.
Now all the key elements of the RD-180 are protected by US patents! Well, offhand, so as not to be unfounded: US Patent 6244041, US Patent 6226980, USPatent 6442931. Moreover, although the "base" of the engine is taken from the Soviet RD-170, all the subtle control mechanics and automation: pumps, valves, control circuits - this is all - American, real American developments owned by Lockheed and Martin.
And therefore, when Russia needed exactly such an engine as the RD-180 for the Rus-M missiles, it was necessary to start developing the full Russian analogue, the RD-180V, in which American patents and American developments would not be used. This problem could not be solved: by that time there were still specialists in engine production in Russia, but there were no specialists left to develop them.
As a result, to put on the Angara is not a “half”, but a “quarter” RD-191 engine. ... "
Well, "- The Americans were sold all the test results of a flying laboratory on the subject of" Cold. "And the last test (in 1998) was funded by the United States. In return, they got access to all the invaluable research materials. As a result, in 2001, miraculously , without any research potential, in the USA three experimental prototypes of the X-41 hypersonic apparatus were built at once. "...

[Mestny]

What does the RD-180 have to do with it? On the new shuttle, what - is it installed?
However, I am not talking about that.
For me personally, any invention, wherever it is made, is still a step forward for everyone. Someone will do it - the rest will at least be convinced that this can be done, because sometimes, in the implementation of large projects, a significant part is made up of doubts about its effectiveness, or the possibility of implementing it.
We will see. Bring to regular use - it means it turned out, and this can and should be done.
But, it may not work out - it may turn out to be expensive, or unreliable.
We will see. So far, here's a test flight in the atmosphere with landing.

[Cat Marquis]

What does the RD-180 have to do with it? .

Well, you're talking about the landing on the ISS ....

[Mestny]

No, I'm talking about the fact that the project is already in the stage of practical use, and not experimental flights in the atmosphere.

[Cat Marquis]

And I'm talking about the fact that they sold everything that is possible and now ....: "A car in the name of my wife, a cottage in my name ... You don’t have anything! You are a wimp! ("Watch out for the car")

[AlexanderVP]

Quote: Cat Marquis

Now all the key elements of the RD-180 are protected by patents, US owned! Well, offhand, so as not to be unfounded: US Patent 6244041, US Patent 6226980, US Patent 6442931. Moreover, although the “basic basis" of the engine was taken from the Soviet RD-170, all the subtle control mechanics and automation: pumps, valves, control circuits - these are all American, real American developments, owned by Lockheed and Martin.

We have three statements, two of which are false.
Firstly, the fact that a patent is registered in the USA does not mean that it belongs to the USA. IMHO, this is such an obvious thing that it does not need to be reminded that the patent belongs to the patent holder, and not to the country of registration of the patent. For the same invention, the author can obtain patents in all countries in order to secure copyright and legal protection. So that, this is lie number 1.
Secondly, it is sometimes necessary to check the sources, no matter how authoritative they seem to you or no matter how convenient they fit into your picture of the world. So, I specifically looked at all three of these patents. All three belong to Energomash, all three indicate Russian engineers as authors. Do not believe, see:
https://www.google.com/patents/US6442931
https://www.google.com/patents/US6244041
https://www.google.com/patents/US6226980
It is a lie number 2.

The only truth is that the RD-180 is legally owned by P&W. Yes, legally this is not a Russian engine.

[Cat Marquis]

Checked. I agree - the owner of the patents is “Russian” ОАО ...... ". BUT .." from the change of terms, the amount has not changed "-RD-180 is not ours legally.

[AlexanderVP]

Quote: Marquis Cat

Checked. I agree - the owner of the patents is “Russian” ОАО ...... ". BUT .." from the change of terms, the amount has not changed "-RD-180 is not ours legally.

The devil is hiding in the little things, huh? :)
As the saying goes: "Once lied, who will believe you?"

[Cat Marquis]

Well, yes ... Are you talking about the "May decrees" or the "promises" of EDRO? Judging by them, they believe, even as they believe .... although "slander" ...

[AlexanderVP]

Quote: Marquis Cat

Well, yes ... Are you talking about the "May decrees" or the "promises" of EDRO? Judging by them, they believe, even as they believe .... although "slander" ...

And I have not believed these "gentlemen" for a long time.

[Technologist]

Somehow ... at one time, she traded drawings ...

[san4es]

'Dream Chaser' - A Cool Dive

[Mestny]

Especially. that the technology for the production of materials, electronics, and much more has changed a lot since the 80s. That is, there is a chance in such a truncated version.

[Sergei75]

Well, at least someone uses the achievements of the USSR, because we do not need them.

[mlad]

If we trace the Russian space program, then we see complete underfunding. Because of this, nothing good was done except for the expensive hangars, and those crumbs that were allocated went nowhere, very surprised by this mess, and most importantly, offensively.

[Old26]

Quote: starogil

Soon we will not need a cab, but here also prototypes, it turns out, haggled ....

Not necessarily that traded. The Americans had a long-term program in the 60s. A number of samples were tested. In the Armament section of the Cosmos subsection, these articles can be read.

Quote: Muvka

There were already shuttles. They covered up. Well fly on this, they will kill about a dozen cosmonauts and again cover.

Iron excuse in the complete absence of similar developments, ready for operation with us. The staff of Orion, Dragon, Signus, Dream Chaser and one more, EMNIP CST-100 (which name - I do not remember), but what about us? The unrealized so far "Federation" postponed to 2023?

Quote: Muvka

Quote: Jedi

Quote: Muvka

Well fly on this, they’ll kill about a dozen cosmonauts and cover again.

But this is not necessary - let their astronauts ruin.

Well, ours will not go there. They will fly on time-tested low-cost Unions.

Yeah. On the proven "Union", And how many more will you fly on this design? There is one more option. Take even more inexpensive and 100% reliable in manned flights "Vostok". 6 manned flights - 6 100% guaranteed operation? Even the SPK itself spoke of the "Unions" as intermediate ships that were supposed to fly somewhere before the beginning of the 80s, and then should be replaced by new ones. And we all nod to them: inexpensive, reliable. Inexpensive - yes, reliable - yes. But outdated. Now there are completely different requirements for the ship, in particular in terms of carrying capacity (cargo) and the number of astronauts

Quote: Wedmak

Not everything is so bad ... It took a lot of time for the Americans to copy the BOR-4 of the 70's. And he only sat down with them. While ours was in orbit, and even maneuvered during the descent.

Work on this project began directly in 2010, although the EP was introduced in 2004. In the 90s, work was underway on the HL-20. But then the shuttles still flew and there was no need to speed up this program. Sierra Nevada Corporation simply reverted to tried and tested prototypes of the 90s

Quote: Wedmak

Why jump? They themselves admitted (NASA) that they copied the ship with BOR-4. Let me remind you that the BOR-4 was tested, flew into orbit, maneuvered upon entering the atmosphere in the 70's of the last century. And where is the progress?

Not copied, but arranged according to the BOR-4 model. And this, sorry, two big differences. Outwardly they are similar, but if you look at the details, the differences are also visible. In the same way, it can be said that the TU-144 is modeled on the Concord or vice versa. That the Buran in its first incarnation is modeled after the Shuttle, that the Chinese carrier CZ-2 is modeled after the Union. Patterned, not copied

Quote: andrewkor

From what carrier did they launch it? It’s still a long way to real flights to Space, I think. And the device is interesting. Due to its similarity with Bohr, I think that is not surprising; the devices used in such extreme conditions as flights to the Cosmos must meet very strict requirements, which in itself limits the options for their designs. There are a lot of examples of similarity of equipment from different countries if we discard direct industrial espionage.

Now there was an atmospheric test, like on our first BOR rocket planes. In the future, from carriers with a carrying capacity of 10 to 14 tons. What it will be - Atlas, Delta or what else - is not yet known exactly. Atlas is planned, but this is one of the options. Can lift and "Falcon" and other suitable media. As for the flight into space, 2020 was announced. Is it far or close after the second pilot flight?

Quote: Technologist

Somehow ... at one time, she traded drawings ...

Maybe she didn’t. The same purpose ships are usually very similar to each other.

[Setrac]

Quote: Old26

Yeah. On the proven "Union", And how many more will you fly on this design?

"Unions" - this is the limit of the development of cosmonautics on chemical fuel. To achieve more, engines are required on principles other than chemical combustion.

[voyaka uh]

Cosmonautics, relative to other areas of technology, is still “in diapers.”
Only 60 years of development. One "hour" of human history.
What you wrote about the Unions, as if at the dawn of the automotive industry they said:
"Ford-T - the limit of development of cars with a gasoline engine."

[Setrac]

Quote: voyaka uh

Cosmonautics, relative to other areas of technology, is still “in diapers”

Maybe astronautics and in diapers, and chemical rockets - to the limit.

Quote: voyaka uh

"Ford-T - the limit of development of cars with a gasoline engine."

What about the Ford Focus? But internal combustion engines and rocket engines are almost the same age.

[nmaxxen]

Quote: old26

Inexpensive - yes, reliable - yes. But outdated. Now there are completely different requirements for the ship, in particular in terms of carrying capacity (cargo) and the number of astronauts

In particular???
Do not make me laugh! This is the only thing you call from branch to branch as the "obsolescence" of the Unions.
Wanting to create (from propaganda reasons) among the readers, who are not very detailed in space technology, that there are many still some "completely different requirements for the ship."

Uncover this GREAT SECRET !!
What other "completely different requirements" that the American quartet of projected manned spacecraft meets and the spacecraft UNION does not?

As for the number of crews, it’s cheaper and more reliable to launch 6 people with a tested Union in 2 starts than with a new craft.

[AlexanderVP]

Uh, what is the joy of the "patriots" then? From BOR there is only a layout, all the main stuffing (engines, electronics, mechanics, software, etc.) is Amersky. At one time, Soviet engineers took the layout of Amer shuttles for Buran, which saved themselves a couple of years of development, purge and refinement of the airframe.

[DimerVladimer]

One of the features of the Spiral apparatus was folding wings, which were upright at start-up and pre-atmospheric flight, and before returning to Earth they assumed a horizontal position and the apparatus turned into an airplane with a deltoid wing.
Work began in 1967 at a special branch of MiG ■ in Dubna, Moscow Region. Epos experimental devices were built. These were 1/2 and 1/3 magnitude models and were intended: 105.11 - for subsonic atmospheric research, 105.12 - for supersonic research, 105.13 - for hypersonic research.

Technical characteristics of Bor-4 (aka Lapot):
The purpose of the spacecraft (Bor-4) is the study of heat-shielding coatings and the development of technology for the return of the spacecraft of the aircraft circuit to the Earth's surface. The scheme is aircraft, with a low location of the delta wing and a small vertical stabilizer.

length: 2,86 m
width: 2,28 m
weight: 1074 kg
dry weight: 795 kg
launch site: Kapustin Yar, launch complex 107
landing: with a parachute on the water

In the upper part of the Bor-4, after the splashdown, a conical bearing balloon with a blinking light was inflated. He increased the buoyancy of the device and brought out the search engine antennas. For many years, intelligence sources in the United States believed that the manned version of this device could weigh 15 tons, 4-5 times more in size and would be launched in the mid-1980s with the Zenit LV. But in the USSR, instead, the Space Shuttle program was completely repeated.
All flights of the Bor-4 vehicles were carried out under the official legend Investigation of the upper layers of the atmosphere and near space.



FLIGHTS BY THE BOR-4 PROGRAM

COSMOS-1374

Registration number: 13257 / 1982-054A
Launch date and time: June 3, 1982; 21:36 UTC
Date and time of landing: June 3, 1982; 23:19 UTC
Parameters of the orbit: 167 x 222 km x 88,1 min. x 50,6

This was the first flight of an orbital plane. The launch was made from the Kapustin Yar Cosmodrome. For technical support of the Cosmos-1374 flight, research ships Cosmonaut Viktor Patsaev and Cosmonaut Georgy Dobrovolsky, who under normal conditions provided communication with Salyut station, were involved. After completing one revolution, the spacecraft splashed down in the Indian Ocean. The spacecraft performed a maneuver of descent with a length of about 600 km. Water flooding was carried out by parachute 560 km south of the Cocos Islands. In the proposed area of ​​splashdown there were 7 ships of the Soviet Navy, which provided a meeting and evacuation of the apparatus. When carrying out work on the evacuation of the apparatus by Soviet ships, they were watched by the Australian Air Force reconnaissance aircraft Orion, whose crew photographed the spaceship and work with it. Studies of photographs showed that in the bow of the spacecraft there are small portholes, like on a manned vehicle, and the heat-protective coating of the nose coca, like on the American shuttle, consists of small pieces.


COSMOS-1445

Registration number: 13883/1983 017A
Launch date and time: March 15, 1983; 22:33 UTC
Date and time of landing: March 16, 1983; 00:25 UTC
Parameters of the orbit: 176 x 217 km x 88,3 min. x 50,7

The flight is similar to that completed a year earlier than the flight of Cosmos-1374. For technical support of the flight, research ships Cosmonaut Vladislav Volkov and Cosmonaut Pavel Belyaev were involved. The device was splashed in the Indian Ocean 556 km south of the Cocos Islands and was successfully picked up by Soviet ships on duty in the area. As in the previous flight, Australian reconnaissance aircraft obtained detailed images of the spacecraft and its evacuation operations.


COSMOS-1517

Registration number: 14585 / 1983-125A
Launch date and time: December 27, 1983; 10:04 UTC
Date and time of landing: December 27, 1983; 11:46 UTC
Parameters of the orbit: 180 x 221 km x 88,8 min. x 50,6

This flight was similar to the previous ones (Cosmos-1374 and Cosmos-1445). But unlike previous flights, in order to avoid surveillance by Western intelligence, the landing site has changed. Thus, it was possible to establish only the fact that the research ships transmitted messages about the issuance of a brake impulse over the North Atlantic. After that, the device made a splashdown in the Black Sea.

COSMOS-1614

Registration number: 15442/1984 126A
Launch date and time: December 19, 1984; 04:04 UTC
Date and time of landing: December 19, 1984; 05:26 UTC
Parameters of the orbit: 173 x 223 km x 88,5 min. x 50,7

The last space flight under the program (Bor-4), launched by the spacecraft (Cosmos-1374). Waterlogging as in (Cosmos-1517) was carried out in the Black Sea after one turn.

[nmaxxen]

Well, who is the "news" writes? And who is letting articles in this form come here.

The purpose of the "news" is to create for some readers for purely fraudulent propaganda purposes, that there is a powerful movement:
America’s spaceships plow the expanses of the universe !!! Union to rest !!!
Actually it was just a dump from a helicopter.
On November 2, 2017, a second planning and landing test was performed. The flight prototype was dropped from a helicopter to test planning and landing on the strip of Edwards Air Force Base.
Breakthrough??!! no matter how much .... We look at the test history.
On October 26, 2013, a flight prototype was dropped from a helicopter from a height of 3,8 kilometers to test planning and landing on the Edwards Air Force Base. However, when landing, the left landing gear did not come out, and the device was damaged.
That is, it took more than 4 years to fix the problem with the non-release of the chassis !!!
at this pace, on the occasion of the 200th anniversary of the abolition of slavery in the United States, this “type of reusable” miracle can be launched.

[nmaxxen]

To prevent the impressionable public from fainting, a part with landing on one rack is cut out.
Now imagine what happened to the light and flimsy "reusable" design from such a landing? The cost of one repair will not be much less than the production of a new one.
And for reasons of reliability for the crew, they could have generally declared unfit for restoration.
'Dream Chaser' Landing Gear Fails To Deploy On Test | Video

[Old26]

Quote: Setrac

Quote: Old26

Yeah. On the proven "Union", And how many more will you fly on this design?

"Unions" - this is the limit of the development of cosmonautics on chemical fuel. To achieve more, engines are required on principles other than chemical combustion.

I'm not even talking about carriers, comrades, but about ships. The development of the 60s was excellent in the 60-70s. By the mid-80s, it became clear that a replacement was needed. No wonder the very same "Dawn" was developed, not to mention reusable options. Now the ship is capable of lifting a maximum of 3 people and a couple of hundred kilograms of cargo - this is not what is needed. A new ship with a crew of 6-7 people is much more efficient than the triple Soyuz

Quote: nmaxxen

In particular???
Do not make me laugh! This is the only thing you call from branch to branch as the "obsolescence" of the Unions.
Wanting to create (from propaganda reasons) among the readers, who are not very detailed in space technology, that there are many still some "completely different requirements for the ship."

Uncover this GREAT SECRET !!
What other "completely different requirements" that the American quartet of projected manned spacecraft meets and the spacecraft UNION does not?

As for the number of crews, it’s cheaper and more reliable to launch 6 people with a tested Union in 2 starts than with a new craft.

In particular?
1. Low payload. Maximum crew of 3 people plus a couple of hundred kilograms of cargo. The concept of a flight of 2-3 people no longer meets current requirements. Such ships are the lot of countries making their first steps in space exploration. And even that, the same Chinese have already switched to a transporter with a loading capacity of about 6-7 tons, against 2,5 for us and them.
2. A hatch with such transverse dimensions no longer corresponds to the nature of the cargo.
I will not talk about the ergonomics of the cabin, about the convenience of being in a ship with a crew of 6-7 people.
Is it enough?

Is it cheaper and more reliable to launch with two ships? More reliable - yes, maybe. Cheaper - UNIVERSAL NO.
It will be required instead of one ship
1. At least two ships
2. At least two media
3. The amount of fuel for launch vehicles is also greater. In order to lift 6 people or 7 tons of cargo at a time (I take our numbers), 470 tons of fuel and one ship and one carrier will be needed
When using Unions you will need
• For manned flight
= 2 ships
= 2 carriers
= 2 x 270 tons of fuel, i.e. 540 tons of fuel

• For unmanned flight (cargo delivery)
= 3 ships
= 3 carriers
= 3 x 270 tons of fuel, i.e. 810 tons of fuel

And after that, say what to let on the "Unions" CHEAPER ??? Well, well

Quote: DimerVladimer

One of the features of the Spiral apparatus was folding wings, which were upright at start-up and pre-atmospheric flight, and before returning to Earth they assumed a horizontal position and the apparatus turned into an airplane with a deltoid wing.
Work began in 1967 at a special branch of MiG ■ in Dubna, Moscow Region. Epos experimental devices were built. These were 1/2 and 1/3 magnitude models and were intended: 105.11 - for subsonic atmospheric research, 105.12 - for supersonic research, 105.13 - for hypersonic research ..

Comrad. You are absolutely right in writing about folding wings. Only now they did not become horizontal. There was still some V (I don’t remember exactly, but it seems 12 degrees). And further. Models 105.12 and 105.13 were only planned. The program was closed at step 105.11. And there were really 4 BOR-4 orbital launches. Suborbital - there were rumors that there were also 2 or 3

[Victor Dubovitsky]

The author was modest about something and did not write that the test descent was carried out not from space, but from a height rather large — it was dropped from a helicopter. So to beat the timpani is somewhat early. Landing loads here were quite childish.

[Vadim237]

They still have everything ahead - two years of testing.

[Victor Dubovitsky]

Quote: Vadim237

They still have everything ahead - two years of testing.

For two years of EXPECTING success, so many joyful mankurts will make a career!