Military Review

Father of the Soviet "shuttle"

44
Father of the Soviet "shuttle"


For the space shuttle "Buran" Valentin Glushko created the most powerful in stories liquid jet engine
Valentin Petrovich Glushko - Odessa: he was born in the "Pearl of the Sea" in 1908 year. As a teenager, he read out Jules Verne's novels, although the idea of ​​traveling to the moon in the early 1920s even seemed to his keen peers to be nonsense: why dream of space when there are enough white spots on earth! Peers were inspired by the exploits of the brave pilots and harsh sailors, and the boy, following Verniy, discovered the works of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky: while sitting in the cold building of the Odessa public library, he made extracts in a notebook. There was only one work by the Kaluga Dreamer in the library; in order to read the others, Valentine sent the idol a letter asking him to send his other books. Tsiolkovsky responded, and correspondence began, which lasted seven years. In the 16 years, Glushko wrote his own “scientific” work - a work under the serious title “The Problem of Using Planets”, which nonetheless the publishers did not take: the author’s fantasies about mastering Mars and Venus seemed too naive. It is curious that in the book as the main justification for the need to develop astronautics, the depletion of the Earth’s resources appeared - an idea on which the plots of dozens of science fiction works (for example, the Hollywood film Interstellar) would be built: than humanity ultimately puts itself at risk of the collapse of both its civilization and its existence. The way out of the looming crisis is to replenish drying out reserves of energy and matter from the outside, from the depths of world space, from other bodies. It is quite natural now to place our neighboring planets in the same position as previously unknown to us continents. Colonizing new planets, organizing operational parts on them to supply the Earth, is becoming quite natural and understandable step of the expanding industry and the power of human intelligence. ”


Valentin Glushko. Photo: Valentin Cheredintsev / TASS

And nevertheless to publish, and regularly, Glushko began: his popular science articles about the creation of stations on the Moon and near-earth orbit appeared in newspapers and magazines. Then he managed to make his dream a little closer - to enter the Leningrad State University in the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics. Glushko remained faithful to the dream throughout his studies: his thesis work was the project of the interplanetary ship "Helioketoplan" with electric rocket engines.

While he was studying, a lot has changed in the country: the defeated universities again received funding, the government stopped seeing rocket science as a marginal and interesting area for enthusiasts only. After graduating from the University, Glushko was accepted into the staff of the Gas-Dynamic Laboratory (GDL), the first Soviet research and development laboratory. Here he began to work on the creation of the first domestic liquid-propellant rocket engine (LRE) ORM-1. During his time at the laboratory, Glushko designed several missiles of various series, and also tested ORM series engines on kerosene nitric acid.

A talented engineer was noticed at the People's Commissariat of Defense and in 1934 was transferred to Moscow, having appointed the head of the sector of the Rocket Research Institute. Here he finished work on his second book, “Missiles: Their Design and Application,” which, unlike his first brainchild, saw the light and was highly appreciated by his colleagues. However, the work that Glushko was engaged in at the Rocket Research Institute was primarily practical: for example, in 1936, under his leadership, official bench tests of the LRE-65 LPR up to 175 kg on liquid fuel for the RPN-318 rocket and 212 cruise missile designs by Sergey Korolev.

Prisoner scientist


Like most of the prominent scientists of his era, Glushko had a chance to work in a "sharashka": in March 1938, he was arrested. It took the Lubyanka investigators only two days to get a confession: “I am a member of an anti-Soviet organization in the defense industry, on whose instructions I was conducting sabotage subversive work. In addition, I was engaged in espionage work in favor of Germany. " True, once in the Butyrka prison, Glushko immediately disagreed with the unfounded accusations and began writing letters to state prosecutor Vyshinsky, and then Yezhov and Stalin himself, asking him to reconsider his case.

No one was going to answer: Glushko became a cog in the system of slave scientific work. With a special meeting at the NKVD, he was convicted for eight years, and until 1940, he worked as part of the design team of the 4 Special Section of the NKVD at the Tushino Aircraft Engine Plant. Here, the scientist led a group that was developing a project for an auxiliary unit with a liquid-jet engine for the C-100 twin-engine fighter. The use of rocket engines in the design of the aircraft significantly increased the speed of its rise. The same rocket launcher was planned to equip and bomber long-range "Steel-7", which would increase its speed when lifting by one third.


Valentin Glushko. Photo from the NKVD archive

The work of the Glushko group, carried out under conditions comparable to the working conditions of serfs at Petrovsky factories, was highly appreciated by the Air Force Technical Committee, and the scientist was even offered a choice: to continue development work, stay in Moscow, move to Leningrad or Kazan to be built aviation engine building plant. "Prisoner Glushko" chose Kazan, because there was more freedom for research. He was even given the right to choose employees. Of course, from among the same “sitters”: having compiled a list of former colleagues whom he was going to give work, Glushko was horrified to find that most of them had already been shot. However, even with a team recruited from those who survived, Glushko during the war managed to complete the development of auxiliary rocket engines for military aircraft. Incidentally, it was precisely at the request of Glushko that the Queen was transferred to Kazan in 1942.

The prison odyssey Glushko became the time when a liquid jet engine took its rightful place in Soviet rocket production. During the war years, Pe-2, Yak-3, Su-7 and La-7 aircraft were equipped with rocket launchers with LRE, thereby increasing their speed to 200 km / h. For his contribution to the development of the USSR military industry, Glushko was "awarded": on August 27 1944, he was released early by the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council. True, the scientist was rehabilitated only in 1956, after the death of Stalin and the Twentieth Congress. Glushko did not leave his comrades in misfortune: soon after he was released, he handed Stalin a list with the names of the 30 specialists, on whose early release he insisted. When, in 1945, Glushko headed the department of jet engines at the Kazan Aviation Institute, most of the engineers released at his request remained to work with him.

In the composition of the “magnificent six”


After the war, Glushko among the special commission went to Germany to study the German V-2 missiles. The successes of the Germans in the field of rocket technology, as is well known, spurred the development of space programs in the USSR and the USA. Upon the return of the designers from Germany, Glushko joined the "magnificent six" of the founding fathers of the Soviet rocket and space program. He was transferred to the aircraft factory number 456 in Khimki (later, in 1970, on the basis of this enterprise, the famous NPO Energia was created), converted to produce liquid rocket engines. And in September, 1948, the launch of the first rocket R-1, equipped with rocket engine. In 1953, Valentin Petrovich was elected a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences, and in 1957, the Higher Attestation Commission awarded him the degree of Doctor of Technical Sciences without defending a thesis.

As a member of the informal board of chief designers, Glushko took part in the preparation of all the major Soviet launches: his team developed and improved the engines for the Vostok and Soyuz manned spacecraft, Progress cargo ships. In 1960 – 1970 years he was the initiator of the most ambitious projects for the study and development of other planets. Many of them he hatched from his student days. So, even in the articles published in 1920, Valentin Petrovich talked about an observatory placed on a natural satellite of our planet: “An observatory built on the Moon, during the 354 hour of an hour that replaces the same lasting day, would give a lot of invaluable observations ... What enormous discoveries could give long-term observations and studies, spectral analysis, photometry, photography and other tools for studying the mysteries of the universe of a modern astronomer when conducting consistent studies of our companion. " In 1960, Glushko made (together with Korolev) one of the initiators of the construction of the station on the moon: in the design bureau of academician Barmin they even began to design models of the lunar settlement. Alas, most of the bold ideas proposed by Valentin Petrovich (among them, manned flights to Mars, Venus and the asteroid belt) were not carried out. Nevertheless, some of the ideas presented in his early opus “Problems of exploiting planets” found application in the Soviet cosmonautics: for example, it talked about “observation stations” constantly in orbit — this was the role played by the orbital complexes Salyut and "World", in the development of which Glushko took part. In total, under the leadership of an outstanding designer, more than fifty LREs were used, which were used in 17 models of combat and space rockets.

Shuttle Cosmonautics

In 1972, a program was developed in the United States to develop space "shuttle" that could perform multiple flights into space. The authors of the program were guided by the possibilities of launching with an unprecedented frequency. In the USSR, the problem of the domestic reusable space system was discussed in the same year: at a meeting of designers headed by Glushko, the main issues of building such a system were identified. The main problem, paradoxically, was that our space program could do perfectly well without “shuttles” - launching disposable missiles were more efficient and less costly. However, analytical studies conducted by the Institute of Applied Mathematics of the USSR Academy of Sciences and NPO Energia showed that after the launch of the Space Shuttle program, the United States will have the advantage in terms of delivering a preemptive nuclear strike on the territory of our country. This resolved the matter: in the year 1976, the strictly secret Energy-Buran program was approved. It is estimated that about a million people took part in its development, directly and indirectly. Note that the cost of creating a reusable launch system turned out to be much lower than the American development: 16 billion rubles versus $ 160 billion. For the new launch vehicle, the Glushko team built the most powerful LRE ever created (this honorable “title” engine holds and our days) - RD-170. Its capacity was about 20 million horsepower: this is enough to provide energy to a city with a population of up to a million inhabitants. As a result, the Buran not only did not yield to the shuttle, but surpassed them in a number of technical parameters.

15 November 1988 of the year when the weather was stormy, the first launch took place: having separated from the launch vehicle, the ship “Buran” went into a circular orbit and, having completed two full turns around the planet, landed in automatic mode on the Baikonur runway. Despite the complete success of the project, the first launch of Buran, alas, was the last one: the program fell victim to the destruction of the USSR, in 1992, it froze due to lack of funding. The legendary developer did not live to see the infamous collapse of an outstanding program: he died in 1989, at the age of 80. Five years later, the International Astronomical Union decided to perpetuate the memory of Valentine Glushko, calling his name a crater on the moon - where the Soviet base was supposed to be.
Author:
Originator:
http://rusplt.ru/sdelano-russkimi/otets-rossiyskogo-shattla-17935.html
44 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mik13
    Mik13 26 July 2015 06: 37
    +3
    Minus article. Because the author is trying to impose his version of the story under the guise of a biography.
    For example:
    Like most prominent scientists of his era, Glushko had the opportunity to work in a "sharashka": in March 1938, he was arrested

    If there is an article about Glushko, there is a fact in his biography. As for the "most prominent scientists" - this is already pulling an owl on a hedgehog. Such statements should be based on scientific work. We collect statistics on scientists, highlight the criterion of "visibility" - the number of scientific works, for example ... And determine which of them got into the "sharashka" - and the rationale with numbers. And only so. Otherwise, it is propaganda.

    The technique of imposing the main idea, which must be instilled in a kind of background, covered by a truthful main storyline, has been known for a long time and has been used just as long. And even considered banal and a little indecent. It is all the more surprising to meet such a "product" on such a resource as VO.
    1. atalef
      atalef 26 July 2015 11: 03
      -5
      On November 15, 1988, in stormy weather, the first launch took place: after separating from the launch vehicle, the Buran ship entered a circular orbit and, making two full turns around the planet, landed automatically on the runway of Baikonur. Despite the complete success of the project, the first launch of Buran.


      Well, I, as a participant in the launch of the Buran, I will say, the first time the Buran did not fly (8.11.88) - the cable mast did not go away and the gyroscopes did not spin
      The launch was postponed for a week.
      By the way, the Energy test (the only one) - when the weight model was used as a Buran, the same did not succeed, because the engines didn’t work and the model didn’t enter the specified orbit
      Quote: fa2998
      blizzard "was not inferior to the shuttles but also exceeded

      The shuttle flew (in my opinion about a hundred times) - Buran in general (in the standard, inhabited version) - not once.
      There is nothing to compare
      1. Vohman
        Vohman 26 July 2015 16: 30
        +3
        Shuttles flew from April 12, 1981 to July 21, 2011.
        Unfortunately, Buran, as you wrote, never with the astronauts.
        N and no matter how much was spent on the Shuttles, they were worth it and worked out, I think, the money spent on 1000%, and with regard to Buran, it turns out that both technology, resources, and money naturally went nowhere, alas.
        Here were the impressions and pride when the start of a snowstorm was shown on TV! I remember that. Only the program somehow lagged behind the American one by 10 years.
        And it would be very nice if the Buranas were flying! Whoever says that it is not profitable, it seems to me that they started to say so, because the program is simply not recoverable.
      2. vladimir_krm
        vladimir_krm 26 July 2015 18: 35
        +5
        Heh! And nobody aspired. Lozino-Lozinsky was ordered to "shob bulo like theirs." And no arguments that it was necessary and expensive had any effect on the officials. Therefore, in parallel with the obligation to "Buran" Gleb Evgenievich was engaged in "Spiral".

        Text: http://kramtp.info/news/18/full/id=24412;
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 26 July 2015 19: 56
          +1
          MiG-105s were engaged before Buran and any launch vehicle could launch it, not only the Spiral. He, of course, came under another contract as it posed a threat to amerovskih AUG.
          1. Akuzenka
            Akuzenka 26 July 2015 21: 16
            +2
            "Spiral" is not a launch vehicle, but a complex of an airplane, a tank and a space plane. Such things should be known.
            1. Scraptor
              Scraptor 27 July 2015 02: 51
              +1
              Not a tank but a disposable second stage. What difference do you know? laughing
              The space plane was called MiG-105.
            2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Scraptor
        Scraptor 26 July 2015 19: 52
        +1
        So the mast cable didn’t move away or the gyroscopes did not spin?

        Compare, yes - nothing. Amerikosy bought his control system after 20 years for his microscopic X-37. Half of the RD-170 and are now buying.
      4. Akuzenka
        Akuzenka 26 July 2015 21: 21
        +1
        You, a colleague to read, you managed everywhere. And the tanks were tested and the economy of the USSR was supported, now they reached space too ..... I respect. I have everything more modest. Work in the field for 20 years, a geophysicist, just a Ph.D.
      5. opus
        opus 27 July 2015 14: 21
        +1
        Quote: atalef
        , the first time the Buran did not fly (8.11.88) - the cable mast did not go away and the gyroscopes did not spin

        ?
        29 1988 October, the (And not 08.11.88, do you use the pre-revolutionary calendar for an hour?)).
        The launch preparation system issued the command "Automatic launch termination". ... The analysis showed that the launch failed due to the untimely removal of the board of the azimuthal guidance (aiming) system of the LV and, consequently, the delay with the removal of the farm on which it was located.
        (Gyroscopes have long been "spinning" normally)
        15 of November 1988 of the year is repeated, successful, even despite the wind at 20 m / s
        Quote: atalef
        it didn’t succeed, because the engines didn’t work and the layout didn’t reach the specified orbit

        SC Skif DM was separated from the launch vehicle at an altitude of 110 km. In the process of separationFrom the comments, the spacecraft withdrawal system from the LV.
        The turnaround was successful, but the orientation and stabilization program did not work, it was not possible to give an accelerating impulse, the stabilization and orientation engines of the DRL did not stop the rotation of the device after its regular turn by 180 degrees.

        uncontrolled rotation (moreover, the covers of the side blocks and the system of torqueless exhaust were separated, the antennas of the "Cube" system were opened, the covers of the infrared vertical sensors were shot off, the solar batteries were probably opened) - as a result of flooding, after the submission of a pulse from the booster station (on a rotating spacecraft)

        ---

        Quote: atalef
        There is nothing to compare

        of course.



        What reference point to take?
        Number of flights?
        Number of accidents,% of accidents?
        How many years has been exploited?
    2. vladimir_krm
      vladimir_krm 26 July 2015 18: 02
      +5
      And for some reason there are very few articles and memoirs about "sharashki". I saw only small memoirs of Kerber "Tupolevskaya Sharaga" (googled). But it is risky to judge from one source, especially since he calls himself there almost the right hand of Tupolev, but for some reason his last name is not found anywhere else. As far as I remember, there are other inconsistencies.

      Why such a friendly silence? The question is interesting. Why are our liberals just indignantly publicizing sharashka, but not publicizing eyewitness memoirs. Is there anything to hide? Why stubbornly confuse Beria and Yezhov, attributing to Beria all the sins of Yezhov? ..
      1. Scraptor
        Scraptor 26 July 2015 20: 05
        +1
        Because there were only 10-12% of prisoners in shorts. winked In the 1930s, before the Second World War, foreign and home-grown spies killed engineers and members of their families (just like in the 90s), so people went there to hide behind a fence with a thorn themselves, like in a monastery.
        Those who sat usually sat in criminal cases. Korolev for embezzlement, Tupolev for the sale of secret information to the Germans. The latter, with a creak, was not shot only because he needed the money to treat a relative. So they would have put it to the wall despite all its merits (there were no irreplaceable ones).

        Liberals are well aware of this and themselves (about the 90s), so they just have to remain silent or lie the other way around.
      2. Mik13
        Mik13 26 July 2015 20: 09
        +3
        Quote: vladimir_krm
        Why such a friendly silence? The question is interesting. Why are our liberals just indignantly publicizing sharashka, but not publicizing eyewitness memoirs. Is there anything to hide? Why stubbornly confuse Beria and Yezhov, attributing to Beria all the sins of Yezhov? ..


        Because.
        1. zubkoff46
          zubkoff46 26 July 2015 23: 01
          +1
          That's right, they planted themselves. Many personal issues, including career ones, were solved by denunciations. And the GPU-NKVD system worked flawlessly - how not to respond to "signals from below"? The country lived in a hostile environment, and what if we miss the enemy in the anonymous letter? So basically we put each other ourselves. Is that embarrassing to admit it.
          1. Scraptor
            Scraptor 27 July 2015 20: 32
            -2
            If the denunciation was justified, then of course they imprisoned (there was something for that), but if not, then they imprisoned mostly informers ... Because it was a "painful disease", and then there were dudroma only for "good psychos", sadists were even shot for abortion ... ...
      3. The comment was deleted.
  2. fa2998
    fa2998 26 July 2015 07: 04
    +2
    "Buran" was not inferior to the shuttles, but also superior "- well, no need to compare such different systems. The shuttle went into space CAM, on its own engines. At the same time, it was helped by boosters, and fuel in the outer tank. ALL COMPONENTS - shuttle, boosters, tank - "Buran" was designed for MULTIPLE use. "Buran" was put into space by "Energia". It is a carrier rocket for ONE-TIME use. And it is very large and expensive. hi
    1. region58
      region58 26 July 2015 07: 32
      +8
      Quote: fa2998
      The shuttle went into space on its own engines, with the help of accelerators and fuel in the outer tank.

      80% of the starting thrust was created by boosters, and the external fuel tank weighed 756 tons at the start, so to say that "SAM" took off would probably be a big exaggeration.
    2. blizart
      blizart 26 July 2015 07: 52
      +4
      "Buran" was launched into space by "Energia". This is a one-time use carrier rocket. Moreover, it is very large and expensive.
      "Energy" is partially reusable (side blocks up to 10 times), later it was planned to be fully reusable. Atlas is also large and very expensive and completely disposable.
      well, you don’t have to compare such different systems. The shuttle went out into space on its own engines.
      Different in reusability or what? Itself on its own engines, is it better than "Buran" "Energia"? The backlog on engines is huge, they still work in different configurations in different programs, including American ones.
      1. clidon
        clidon 26 July 2015 12: 17
        +2
        "Energy" is disposable. They wanted to use the blocks, but during the tests it was concluded that the landings were too hard and it was necessary to develop the topic of controlled booster blocks ("Baikal"). And it was already a matter of the future, like the "Volcanoes" and others.

        Different in reusability or what?

        At the start of the Shuttle, the tank and a pair of solid-fuel boosters were lost (which also wanted to save and also refused). At the start of "Buran" - 4 "liquid" boosters and a powerful launch vehicle. How many lost engines it is easy to calculate.
        1. atalef
          atalef 26 July 2015 12: 30
          -5
          Quote: clidon
          At the start of the Shuttle, a tank and a couple of solid fuel boosters were lost (who also wanted to save and also refused)

          Nothing like that, in the Shuttle, both the main tank and boosters are reusable
          The side accelerator MTKK Space Shuttle (English Solid Rocket Booster, SRB) is a solid propellant rocket accelerator, a pair of which provide 83% of the start thrust of the MTKK Space Shuttle. It is the largest and most powerful solid propellant rocket engine ever flying, the largest missile designed for reuse and also the most powerful rocket engine of all used, solid or liquid fuel.
          1. clidon
            clidon 26 July 2015 13: 54
            +2
            atalef
            Nothing like that, in the Shuttle, both the main tank and boosters are reusable

            The main tank burns down - they were going to save it only according to preliminary designs, but then they refused. The side boosters were supposed to be reusable and were actually splashed and sent for recovery. But in the end, they refused to recover - it turned out that the economic effect was zero, and they tried to minimize the risks after the Challenger.
            1. atalef
              atalef 26 July 2015 14: 02
              +2
              Quote: clidon
              The main tank burns down - they were going to save it only according to preliminary designs, but then they refused

              I agree, my mistake. only side boosters are returned
            2. atalef
              atalef 26 July 2015 14: 02
              +1
              Quote: clidon
              The main tank burns down - they were going to save it only according to preliminary designs, but then they refused

              I agree, my mistake. only side boosters are returned
            3. Scraptor
              Scraptor 27 July 2015 03: 01
              0
              SRBs weren’t disposable, otherwise why did they have to be made of steel sections parachuting and catching all the time?
              It's now they are going to wind up fiberglass for the SLS. As well as a one-time shoot RS-25 remaining from the Shuttle.
              1. opus
                opus 27 July 2015 14: 52
                0
                Quote: Scraptor
                It's now they are going to wind up fiberglass for the SLS.

                not going to.
                All the same sections and tape.

                5 segmented side boosters

                (Technologically it is not possible to make solid propellant rocket engines with 12,5 MN thrust, 580000kg starting mass
                Quote: Scraptor
                As a one-time shoot RS-25 remaining

                what's the point in "shooting"?
                RS-25 cannot be saved in this way.
                1 stage SLS-1 / EM-1 not salvage
                1. Scraptor
                  Scraptor 27 July 2015 21: 17
                  0
                  This is an old picture, (there and RS-25D / E 5 pcs.)

                  That they were not, and there was nothing to put in shuttles when again itchs.
                  1. opus
                    opus 27 July 2015 22: 03
                    0
                    Quote: Scraptor
                    This is an old picture, (there and RS-25D / E 5 pcs.)

                    ?

                    4 (!) x RS-25D / E

                    http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/664158main_sls_fs_master.pdf





                    repeat
                    Quote: opus
                    Technologically, it is impossible to make solid propellant rocket engines with 12,5 MN thrust and 580000kg starting mass

                    not sectional.






                    Quote: Scraptor
                    and there was nothing to put in shuttles when again itch.

                    1. The shuttle will be gone, 25x -15 pieces in stock, they are unlikely to be put on SLS. Expensive, since they are many one-time, the salvation of the 1 C block on SLS is not provided
                    2: Most likely back to F-1
                    http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/f1_sls.html

                    F-1B PowerPack
                    1. Scraptor
                      Scraptor 27 July 2015 23: 51
                      0
                      Previous Your picture was about Ares. It says 5 RS-25D / E, bottom right, in a frame. RS-25, not F-1
                      Then you yourself write below about 4 * RS-25D / E, and then even lower about F-1B. yes Is this a game like that?

                      And how do disposable ICBMs of such an elongation make them non-sectional? bully
                      sectioning for manufacturability with reusability is useful.
                      He didn’t get anywhere - a flag in their hands, a drum on his neck. laughing

                      Itch, itch ... And there will be nothing to put.
                      1. Well, besides the shuttle, there could be something else. While here http://topwar.ru/index.php?newsid=79232 BlackMockona writes that they are buzzing for SLS, and wow! NASA has been writing the same thing lately.
                      2. And, well, that is, they are still in "active search"? lol F-1 is not considered Human-Rated now wassat
          2. opus
            opus 27 July 2015 14: 27
            0
            Quote: atalef
            Nothing like that, in the Shuttle, both the main tank and boosters are reusable

            comrade ... do not make the audience laugh (about the main tank), you hardly believe that you
            Quote: atalef
            Well, I, as a participant in the launch of Buran



            the polyurethane foam layer turned dark orange due to exposure to solar radiation

            from the heights of 70-110 km not save the thin-walled structure, devoid of blowing pressure (and with the pressure then)



            The external fuel tank was the only non-returnable part in the design of the shuttle (two solid-fuel boosters returned by parachute, the shuttle itself (orbiter) landed like a glider) - it burned out in the atmosphere over the Indian or Pacific Ocean.

            One "but": when the Shuttle was designed there were plans to use external fuel tanks as space station module cases (dosing of hollow to 1 COP) ...
        2. Scraptor
          Scraptor 27 July 2015 02: 55
          0
          Well, they probably did not fall into the water ...
        3. opus
          opus 27 July 2015 14: 39
          0
          Quote: clidon
          Macaw of solid fuel boosters (which also wanted to save and also refused).

          No, check out how it was:






          The whole saga of fixing tapes for SRB sections
    3. Akuzenka
      Akuzenka 26 July 2015 21: 28
      0
      Teach materiel.
  3. blizart
    blizart 26 July 2015 07: 12
    +15
    Here is one more reason for the rejection of the power of the liberals.
    1985- I, a youth, see "Buran" on the back of "Mriya". The delight for your country is breathtaking!
    1988 - As a young man, I observe the automatic landing of "Buran" on a concrete strip. Awareness of the enormous complexity of resolved scientific and technical issues arises pride in our scientists and engineers.
    2002 - I am a mature and angry man, crying from impotent anger. My hero perished in the oblivion of MIC, and "Mriya" is now not mine at all. What have you done corrupt creatures!
    1. atalef
      atalef 26 July 2015 11: 06
      +1
      Quote: blizart
      1988 - As a young man, I observe the automatic landing of "Buran" on a concrete strip. The pride in our scientists and engineers rises from the awareness of the enormous complexity of the solved scientific and technical issues

      By the way, in the USSR there were 3 runways for Buran
      1. Baikonur
      2.Ulan-Ude
      3. Simferopol, so if anyone flew to Crimea - do not be surprised why there is a strip under 5 km.
      1. opus
        opus 27 July 2015 15: 31
        0
        Quote: atalef
        By the way, in the USSR there were 3 runways for Buran

        1. EASTERN SPARE AERODROME (KHOROL) 304 NORTH ODAP Khorol

        between settlements Khorol, Novodevitsa, Leninsky

        - latitude 44 degrees 27 '03,6' '
        - longitude 132 degrees 07 '27,9' '
        Height above sea level 95,23 m; the true landing course of the first direction is 153 degrees 27 '59,0' ', respectively of the second - 333 degrees 27' 59,0 ''.
        Strip length 3700 m, width 70 m, magnetic declination -9 degrees 39 '.

        2. WESTERN RESERVE AERODROME near Simfiropole "ZAS" facility
        - latitude 45 degrees 02 '42,26' '
        - longitude 33 degrees 58 '36,93' '

        Magnetic heading 90, magnetic declination 40 31 '
        runway length 3700 m, width 60 m.

        3. In Ulan-Ude and the Baltic states-was not. Like 5 km runway. These are fairy tales
        The use of the existing (standard) landing locators (PRL) of the aerodrome is impossible, the Vympel PRL is required

        The Western substitute was not fully prepared for the reception
  4. fa2998
    fa2998 26 July 2015 07: 47
    +1
    Quote: region58
    Quote: fa2998
    The shuttle went into space on its own engines, with the help of accelerators and fuel in the outer tank.

    80% of the starting thrust was created by boosters, and the external fuel tank weighed 756 tons at the start, so to say that "SAM" took off would probably be a big exaggeration.

    I agree with you. BUT ITS OWN ENGINES LAUNCHED ON THE EARTH. And the accelerators (which I mentioned earlier) were then caught from the Gulf of Mexico and towed to the pier. It can be said with a stretch that this system took off SAMA-it does not need a launch vehicle. hi
    1. region58
      region58 26 July 2015 09: 40
      +1
      Quote: fa2998
      We can say with a stretch that this system took off SAMA-it does not need a launch vehicle.

      You can say for everyone, just what does it fundamentally change? But the fact that the "Buran" could make a landing in a fully automatic mode is not too tough for everyone today. Eh ... how many good things have been ruined with this democracy, which happens only in fantasies ...
      PS There they also projected "Energia-2" completely reusable and "Volcano" - up to 200 tons into low orbit (this is something generally creepy).
      1. rosarioagro
        rosarioagro 26 July 2015 10: 54
        +1
        Quote: region58
        But the fact that the "Buran" could make a landing in a fully automatic mode is not for everyone in today's times.

        Already, the American space drone, after a year in space, made an automatic landing.
        1. Scraptor
          Scraptor 27 July 2015 08: 11
          0
          And in it there is automation from Buran. If Americans had any doubts, they couldn’t even make the orbital docking system themselves - all the time they docked manually, and for the Dragon they bought the Soviet one.
  5. fomkin
    fomkin 26 July 2015 08: 07
    0
    Sorry for the project. When I served in ZabVO, huge numbers of airfield plates suddenly began to be brought to us at the airport at 88. We all wondered about the goal. Subsequently, it turned out that a reserve strip was planned for Buran.
  6. egor1712
    egor1712 26 July 2015 10: 10
    +2
    Buran is the pinnacle of the technical development of the Soviet Union. With what admiration I watched the launch and return of the ship. Who could have guessed that the so-called "perestroika" would turn out to be a banal collapse of the state. How many promising military developments and civilians were destroyed. It's a shame that no one answered for this.
    1. Yars
      Yars 26 July 2015 10: 36
      +1
      By the way, the Buran can be attributed to the first space drone, he returned and sat on the airfield completely automatically.
      1. serohim
        serohim 26 July 2015 10: 45
        +1
        Yes, he flew without a crew.
        It is a pity that they acted with him mediocre. One roof in the hangar was crushed, another of his test counterpart in Australia was sold to break tourists. = (
    2. igor.borov775
      igor.borov775 26 July 2015 11: 39
      +3
      Hi!! A completely different person was the General Designer and Head of BURANA. Glushko suggested constructing a carrier for delivering cargo into orbit weighing one hundred and more tons. ENERGY was conceived to create a permanent station on the Moon. They should even bury him on the Moon. The military itself was fascinated by the amount of weight delivered to orbit. Therefore, the BURAN was demanded approximately for that weight. When they calculated everything, they tried to persuade the military to reduce Buran. The designers proved that there is no such cargo volume and will not be in the near future. Everything rested on US SPACE. Scientists knew this was a dead end. Scientists, as always, with designers and engineers did this project as expected. Who said that LIGHTNING is single-use, it was originally created as many times as a matter of all documents, this was discussed. It is not necessary to consider our scientists and designers as simple performers. Together with a large BURAN, they proactively created a small analog of BURAN. In all respects, it was several orders of magnitude cheaper and economical. It really was a masterpiece of our science and technology. There really were no competitors to it. The takeoff of the big BURANA put an end to the smallest most outstanding project. And another moment on the ground were the modules of the station did not have time to completely bring them to readiness, the deadlines were postponed and this was a problem. Buran was not needed to deliver a huge load. There were no such cargoes. but for the kid in bulk. You won’t return the past, you have to think about something completely different. But interesting fuss with these small shuttles is constantly being circulated but alas. The possibilities are not the same.
  7. X Y Z
    X Y Z 26 July 2015 12: 08
    +1
    The article is full of annoying mistakes that immediately catch your eye. It is clear that a man who did not work in the industry wrote it. When you collect material, you must be very scrupulous about the facts and not fail to show it to a specialist in order to avoid grins and condescending chuckles. Myself will be more expensive.
  8. Diviz
    Diviz 26 July 2015 12: 29
    +2
    Now all this commercial projects requires a bunch of dough. People like Glushko Alekseev Queen will no longer meet. We will see Siluanov Kudrin Chubais precisely these people now have power and money.
    1. MrK
      MrK 26 July 2015 15: 22
      +7
      Thanks DiViZ, I completely agree. But I will try to bring some clarity.

      Beria belongs to the invention of the era - "sharashka". Among the arrested there were many people who were very necessary to the country. Of course, these were not poets and writers who today scream the most and loudest than all, but scientists, engineers, designers, primarily working for defense. Repression in this environment is a special topic. Who and under what circumstances planted the developers of military equipment in the context of an impending war? The question is far from rhetorical. And there were no less "dissidents" in those days than at the end of the 80's. Moreover, the environment is incredibly squabbling, and the denunciation in it has always been a favorite means of settling accounts and career growth.

      Be that as it may, by accepting the people's commissariat of internal affairs, Beria was confronted with the fact that there were hundreds of arrested scientists and designers in his department, whose work the country simply needed to do.
      As it’s fashionable to say now - feel like a people's commissar!
      The matter lies before you. This person may be to blame, or may be innocent, but he is necessary. What to do? To write: “Free” means to show subordinates an example of lawlessness of the opposite property? Check things out? Yes, of course, but you have a cabinet in which 600 of thousands of cases. In fact, each of them needs to be re-investigated, but there are no other personnel. Repeated investigation will be conducted by those who planted. If we are talking about already convicted, we must also achieve the abolition of the sentence. Where to start? With scientists? With the military? And time is passing, people are sitting, war is getting closer.

      Beria orientated quickly. Already on 10 of January 1939 of the year he signed the order on the organization of the Special Technical Bureau. The research area is purely military: aircraft construction, shipbuilding, shells, armored steels. Whole groups were formed from specialists in these sectors in prisons.
      When the opportunity turned up, Beria tried to free these people.

      For example, the aircraft designer Tupolev 25 in May 1940 of the year announced a sentence - 15 years of camps, and in the summer he was released under an amnesty.
      Designer Petlyakov was amnestied on July 25 and in January 1941 was awarded the Stalin Prize. A large group of developers of military equipment was released in the summer of 1941, another one in 1943, the rest received freedom from the 1944 to the 1948 years.

      The work of the Glushko group, carried out under conditions comparable to the working conditions of serfs at Petrovsky factories, was highly appreciated by the Technical Committee of the Air Force - ed.

      If so, then why, after Beria’s death, they, the former employees of the “sharashka,” bitterly said, “they killed our Lavrenty Pavlovich.” But according to the logic of things, they had to DANCE FOR JOY, saying: the bastard died, finally he died.
      1. svp67
        svp67 26 July 2015 15: 27
        0
        Quote: mrark
        Beria orientated quickly. Already on January 10, 1939 he signed the order on the organization of the Special Technical Bureau

        Where did you read it?
        The Ostekhbyuro (abbr. From the Special Technical Bureau for Military Inventions of Special Purpose) under the Supreme Economic Council of the USSR was established by decree of the Council of Labor and Defense of July 18, 1921. And Tukhachevsky is behind this organization.
        1. MrK
          MrK 26 July 2015 17: 50
          +1
          svp67. I read this in the book, which is now at the hearing: [A. Kurlyandchik - “Damned SOVIET AUTHORITY” ... on Proza.ru]. As for Tukhachevsky or Beria, I’m talking about the Ostekhbyuro under the NKVD, and not under the Supreme Economic Council. And with two employees he was familiar with sharashka (he was friends with their children). I heard from them, already in my youth, stories about sharashka. And I have every reason to believe them. And not the liberals who ruined the country. respectfully
      2. Justme
        Justme 26 July 2015 18: 07
        0
        .. Moreover, the environment is incredibly quarrelsome ....
        - Good idea,
        but here it should be noted that we do not have a normal civilized mechanism of how to "settle" the conflict of technical views and personal engineering approaches.
        What had to be watched en masse since the beginning of the 80s is the ossification and inadequacy of the upper level of the technical management of enterprises.
  9. Old26
    Old26 26 July 2015 22: 28
    +2
    Quote: atalef
    By the way, the Energy test (the only one) - when the weight model was used as a Buran, the same did not succeed, because the engines didn’t work and the model didn’t enter the specified orbit

    Did you use a weight model as Buran? Actually, the first launch was with a dynamic layout of the Skif complex.

    Quote: Scraptor
    MiG-105s were engaged before Buran and any launch vehicle could launch it, not only the Spiral. He, of course, came under another contract as it posed a threat to amerovskih AUG.

    He did not get anywhere. It crashed in 1978 and was decommissioned. It was decided not to carry out further tests, tk. it was decided to stop at "Buran". Neither the supersonic version - MIG-105-12, nor the hypersonic MIG-105-13 were even built. The agreement was a year later and not a word was said about such products.

    Quote: Scraptor
    So the mast did not move away or the gyroscopes did not spin


    Well, at comrade atalefa the phrase sounds like this.

    Quote: atalef
    Well, as a participant in the launch of the Buran, I’ll say that the first time the Buran didn’t fly (8.11.88), the cable mast didn’t leave and the gyroscopes didn’t spin.


    Actually, the attempt was not on 8.11.1988/29.10.1988/XNUMX, but on XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX. The launch was rescheduled and occurred through 17 days. According 51 second before the start due to the fact that the normal abduction of the site with aiming devices (the so-called Block i) and a command was issued to cancel the start.

    Quote: fa2998
    "Buran" was not inferior to shuttles, but also superior "- well, no need to compare such different systems. The shuttle went into space CAM, on its own engines. At the same time, it was helped by accelerators, and fuel in the outer tank. ALL COMPONENTS - shuttle, accelerators, tank - were conceived for MULTIPLE use. "Buran" put into space "Energia". This is a launch vehicle for ONE-TIME use. Moreover, it is very large and expensive

    Actually, the Americans themselves did not consider the system reusable. They didn’t do reusable due to the fact that firstly it was expensive, secondly because they wouldn’t do it so quickly. Therefore, it was decided to do PARTLY REUSABLE. Orbital plane and TTU were reusable, tank - disposable

    Quote: mrark
    Beria belongs to the invention of the era - "sharashka".

    Actually, in the late 20s there was a sharashka OKB-29 EMNIP. So before Lavrenty Pavlovich they were
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 03: 33
      0
      Hit-hit ... Because the R-7 had to be launched in pairs, after which the first one looked for the AUG, and dropped the rubber bomb in her direction, the second while it was slowed down in the atmosphere, it guided it.
      And then she jumped-jumped-jumped between planes and the deck of an aircraft carrier and made both of them unusable. winked

      If gyroscopes (laser by the way) are not untwisted then why should the mast be retracted? And if the mast didn’t move away, then why spin gyroscopes? laughing

      Tovrisch is clearly confused in the testimonies and was somewhere on the night from 29.10/8.11 to 51/XNUMX, and here you count seconds accurate to the XNUMXst and surrender everything from A to Z ... laughing
      Then, just like that, aeroballistic missiles were banned, fueling rods on the Tu-22M3 were cut down, and much more ...
    2. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 06: 29
      0
      The MiG-105 special ammunition (unlike the early DF-21s) was not necessarily nuclear or stuffed inside in the form of a ODAB, a cassette lighter, a bucket of tungsten shot or a bunch of OA rods. The deck of an aircraft carrier could simply be shed by chemistry, after which for a long time the planes and crew would slide overboard, or stick to it, or (which is less humane for the enemy’s manpower) to tear off the chassis tires on quartz pumice to shreds.
      Until the flights stop for several hours or more (if it simply does not burn out and drowns), after an escort is knocked out without a "roof" of the air wing, any NK (especially an ekranoplan, a flying boat) or submarine will come up and take it in tow ...
      Therefore, even long before:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_USS_Forrestal_fire
      The United States always went into hysterics that "if at least something" (not necessarily a uranium-tungsten meteorite) falls on their precious AB, then it will be tantamount to an attack on the territory of SyShira by a nuclear ...
      In addition to all this, there is much more that can be wound around screws (including ship screws, let them talk about it too), cause short-circuits, flashes of same-sex love, or darkening of electronic-optical and radar systems (as well as just glazing of cabins) on duty wing aircraft on deck, and the team chewing gum. laughing
      The deck is open and not even very armored ...
      And then, if they don’t open the kingstones, they can wash it, paint it pink and sell it to the Chinese without the right to transfer it back.
  10. Old26
    Old26 26 July 2015 22: 48
    +2
    Quote: atalef
    By the way, in the USSR there were 3 landing strips for Buran 1. Baikonur 2. Ulan-Ude3. Simferopol, so if anyone flew to Crimea - do not be surprised why there is a strip under 5 km.

    Three. But Ulan-Ude has never been a reserve airfield landing Buran. In the east, Khorol was a reserve
  11. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 08: 07
    +2
    Quote: Scraptor
    Hit-hit ... Because the R-7 had to be launched in pairs, after which the first one looked for the AUG, and dropped the rubber bomb in her direction, the second while it was slowed down in the atmosphere, it guided it.

    Of the fact that this product could be done, you can certainly talk and talk a lot. The question is somewhat different. There is nothing in the OSV-2 agreement regarding the prohibition of this area of ​​work. Firstly, because there was nothing yet, secondly, because the Americans themselves at that time were developing similar systems and it was unreasonable to put a ban on themselves. The topic is generally very interesting and multifaceted.

    Indeed, in the course of the program, a number of subprojects were created to test the creation of the orbital aircraft and demonstrate its feasibility, in particular, the MiG-105.11 analogue aircraft, BOR-1 (unmanned orbital rocket-plane) suborbital vehicles, BOR-2, BOR-3, and spacecraft EPOS (experimental manned orbital aircraft) BOR-4 and BOR-6. In the EPOS subprogram, various military variants of this product were indeed planned.

    Work on the creation of the Spiral, including analogues of its orbital plane, interrupted in 1969, was resumed in 1974. In the years 1976-1978 was conducted 7 test flights MiG-105.11. Moreover, it was not a full-sized product, but on a scale of 1/2 - 1/3.
    But at the same time, we no longer considered (as originally) manned options, since the department in the CPC was disbanded in the 1973 EMNIP.

    Western magazines reflected this, but only as an option for creating our shuttle, They (west) did not expect that we would completely repeat the American Shuttle

    Quote: Scraptor
    If gyroscopes (laser by the way) are not untwisted then why should the mast be retracted? And if the mast didn’t move away, then why spin gyroscopes?

    If sclerosis does not change me it is well described on "Buran.ru". As far as I remember, instead of "moving away" in 3 or 4 seconds, this board (Block I) left for almost a minute. Accordingly, the mast was not retracted, which did not receive a command, well, etc.

    Quote: Scraptor
    Special ammunition MiG-105

    I repeat .. this special ammunition did not exist in nature. I wanted to have a project, but how much we had, that there is a project, but no product. In astronautics this is most convexly visible.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 08: 33
      0
      This was his main purpose. Brought up under the arms race in space (although unmanned ICBMs somehow fly through it). SALT is not a contract at all, this is "Talks", so they chatted and parted ... After which the USSR sawed everything and the USA saw nothing (the opposite was rare), or they simply removed the warheads and put them in the warehouse separately. Because Roosevelt's daughter married Khrushchev's granddaughter, or vice versa.
      The Americans with their DinaSoar lagged behind in this, this is not about the Shuttle.

      With the mast and hygroscopes could be either this or that, but not all at once.

      Yes, he existed - what is unique in the undivided MS IN? Upon exit from the plasma, it was controlled from the second MiG-105 like an ordinary KAB. The first at orbital speed went far ahead and was less noise immunity.

      Chelomeev diamonds, like this MiG-105, flew and no one knew about them, but there were passes in the "Salutes". And there were so many "Cosmos". It's just that everyone is told that these are projects, and the warhead could only be nuclear.
  12. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 08: 08
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    Then, just like that, aeroballistic missiles were banned,

    Exclusively only a certain range. More than 600 km. Less could be.
  13. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 08: 08
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    Then, just like that, aeroballistic missiles were banned,

    Exclusively only a certain range. More than 600 km. Less could be.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 08: 33
      0
      Well, where are they?
  14. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 10: 18
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    OSV is not a contract at all, this is "Talks", so we chatted and parted ...

    Well do not tell. Here with the START-1 treaty - I agree. Despite the fact that OSV-2 was not ratified, the parties basically complied with its provisions, although, of course, there were violations on both the Soviet side and the American side. Many restrictions had a deterrent effect. Part of the restrictions was beneficial for us, part for the Americans.

    Only one point could theoretically fit under what you say. it subparagraph C of paragraph 1 of Article 9. Which sounded

    c) means for putting into near-Earth orbit nuclear weapons or any other types of weapons of mass destruction, including partially orbital missiles


    Quote: Scraptor
    After that, the USSR sawed everything and the United States did nothing (the opposite was rare), or simply removed the warheads and put them in a warehouse separately.

    Rather, this was related to START-1. There, yes, the terms of the treaty, both START-1 and START-2, signed by Gorbachev and Yeltsin were UNFAVORABLE us

    Quote: Scraptor
    Yes, he existed - what is unique in the undivided MS IN? Upon exit from the plasma, it was controlled from the second MiG-105 like an ordinary KAB. The first at orbital speed went far ahead and was less noise immunity.

    Exclusively IN THEORY. MIG-105 existed in a single copy in the form of a subsonic product. 7 flights. All of them were carried out by dumping with TU-95. No supersonic and hypersonic variants of the MIG-105 existed. What was deduced in the framework of the BOR-4 program had a completely different task, working out atmospheric entry and landing (and exclusively on water)

    Quote: Scraptor
    Chelomeev diamonds, like this MiG-105, flew and no one knew about them, but there were passes in the "Salutes".

    Well, for the mass of people there was no difference, they did not even know which of the launched stations was Salut and which Almaz. Those who worked in this industry knew. They were even in different halls in the CPC. "Salute" in 142 (EMNIP) hall, where foreign delegations were taken, and "Almaz" EMNIP at 116 (I can be mistaken with the number, it's been 30 years already)

    Quote: Scraptor
    And there were so many "Cosmos".

    That's for sure. All went under the name "Cosmos". It doesn't matter what it is, a photo reconnaissance satellite, launches under the LVI program, unsuccessful launches of orbital stations, or a 16-ton Chelomeev "truck"
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 10: 38
      0
      Yes to them on a drum on articles ... it is a dowry question. laughing

      He flew in a full profile manned. There was an unmanned disintegration for research into how it would work to test his emergency capsule. Some kind of Cosmos there. And in the second case - rhinestone four.
      BOR-4 is Cosmos-1374

      ... or successful launches.
  15. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 10: 18
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    They just tell everyone that these are projects, and the warhead could only be nuclear.

    Basically, almost 99% of what is now being "Discovered" for the people were really projects. Sometimes very advanced, unique, but only projects

    Quote: Scraptor
    Well, where are they?

    Aeroballistic missiles? With a range of more than 600 km, they were not created due to the ban (there were only conceptual designs both with us and with them). Less than 600 km were exploited both by us and by them. We have an X-15 (300 km), they have a SREM (200 km). But the operation showed that with the growth of the air defense potential, the carrier became a fairly easy target
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 10: 30
      0
      Maybe Diamond hasn’t flown yet, inside the capsule of which you can now sit and look through binoculars? bully

      Quote: Old26
      were exploited

      Nothing of the kind. The most difficult target at all ... Well, where are they?
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 11: 43
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    Maybe Diamond hasn’t flown yet, inside the capsule of which you can now sit and look through binoculars?

    Dear Scraptor! Well, do not juggle, it does not paint you. Did I say somewhere that "Diamonds" did not fly? Read my posts carefully. I can add, if you like, that out of 5 buildings of 11F71 stations (the same manned Almazy), three were launched. Under the designations Salyut-2, Salyut-3 and Salyut-5 (OPS-1 - OPS-3, building numbers 101 to 103). Two did not start. Of the 6 buildings of unmanned Almazov (APS) with the index 11F668, 3 were launched. Moreover, one emergency, one called Cosmos-1870 and one Almaz-1. Three, incl. and Almaz-1V were not launched. So you shouldn't attribute to me what I didn't say. But the MIG-105 was not launched anywhere.

    Quote: Scraptor
    Nothing of the kind. The most difficult target at all ... Well, where are they?

    Distort again? Or already a phrase
    with increasing air defense potential carrier became a fairly easy target

    became synonymous with a rocket becoming an easy target ???

    I will quote a fragment of an article from the Voenmekhov resource

    With the improvement of air defense, the X-15 missiles no longer provided strike from a safe range. The missiles themselves were still very vulnerable, but this did not apply to the carrier aircraft.

    Complete “unloading” of the missile ammunition on board required a fair amount of time and seemed dangerous in the vicinity of the target. AWACS aircraft were discovered by bombers even at low altitudes from distances of up to 700 km, introducing interceptors into the battle from 550-600 km.

    As they approached further, the missile carriers found themselves at the effective-fire zone of the SAM system. At the same time, the launch of each X-15 required an 11-second cycle, and a simple calculation showed that in order to “shoot” all 10 missiles, it was necessary to remain on the battle course “without moving” and maintaining the direction to the target near the air defense zone (or even within it) for quite a long time.

    To "unload" the full ammunition of the Tu-160, which was supposed to carry 24 such missiles, it seemed and completely unrealistic in such an environment. At the same time, during normal operation of the SURO X-15 earned a reputation as a "fail-safe weapon", confidently holding the trajectory and hitting the target.


    Where are the aeroballistic rockets, you ask? SREMs are written off. After 2000-2005, this rocket never "lit up" in our country, although it seemed like they wanted to use it from many launch vehicles. As it is not in the reference book "Military Balance", although there is everything, including the X-32. Most likely, if not written off, then not in the combat composition. That is, its status is not determined.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 21: 11
      0
      Was the rocket sorry? But on the BOR - not? bully If it did not start, then do not ban it.

      Not a missile, but its ballistic warhead.

      That is, they are not simple.
  18. gregor6549
    gregor6549 27 July 2015 14: 08
    +1
    I would not call V. Glushko "the father of the Soviet Shuttle". Yes, he was a Gen. The designer of a number of rocket engines, but the engine is only one of Buran's subsystems.
    Gleb Evgenievich Lozino-Lozinsky was the leading developer of Buran, and Buran and all the ground infrastructure required for its flight were created by the efforts of dozens of research institutes and factories throughout the USSR. The head organization for the development of Buran was NPO Molniya (Moscow)
    For more information about who and how was "involved" in the "Buran" case, read here https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_(space_ship)
  19. Falcon5555
    Falcon5555 27 July 2015 15: 59
    +1
    Lozino-Lozinsky was a designer and "father" of Buran, plus a kind of many-sided party and state activists, various ministers and others who, contrary to common sense, contrary to the interests of the country, but in the interests of a complex struggle for money and influence and against unnecessary burden-work between different ministries and departments, and probably with the knowledge and approval of the decrepit party elite, decided to do "as they have." Otherwise Lozinsky would have completed the Spiral, which would probably fly now instead of the vintage Unions. And Glushko made engines for Energy, which was originally designed not for Buran at all, but for the Soviet lunar program, after it became clear that H1 was unsuccessful and would not fly. By the way, Glushko also had to participate in the decision to make Buran like theirs. I do not remember if it is known what he voted for. It may turn out that he also took part in making this ridiculous decision. And once again, by the way - absolutely "like them" as a result, it did not work out. The desire to find a use for Energy led to the creation of a reusable ship (as if copied by a carbon copy, but without a takeoff engine), launched by an expensive disposable rocket. And "they" lost only one fuel tank.
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 20: 08
      0
      Hmm laughing This large, load-bearing (rather than small and outboard) fuel tank was also "worth".
      The first steps of Energy returned with a resource of 10 launches despite the fact that they fell into the steppe and were not splashed into the Ocean. At the second stage, they planned to make a returnable engine compartment.
      The shuttle tank differs from the 2nd stage only in the absence of engines.
      Energy-Buran is much more reasonable than carrying engines in a shuttle, which are all the more not used to leave orbit (the braking impulse is issued by two protruding engine nacelles where toxic UDMH engines).
      1. You can withdraw not only Buran, but whatever you want, the weight of the thermal protection of the small engine compartment, while the mass of its structure, is ten times smaller than the whole shuttle - which, on the contrary, carried mostly itself only into orbit.
      2. when Buran launches cargo from orbit, the weight of these engines (and it is rather big) is added to the payload weight that can be landed.
      Buran himself will be better than the Shuttle, even the military says this with a smile. Not only because he knew how to automatically land, but also according to landing characteristics, lateral maneuver in a dive into the atmosphere and during landing, as well as in many other things ...
      The spiral is less practical, the Americans also showed off launching the D-21 from the back of the SR-71 in China, and then they simply hung it under the wing of the B-52
      It is even more efficient in terms of fuel than the weight and complexity of the design of the hypersonic first stage. So it goes.
      The shuttle’s TTU use thiokol, the products of this rubber’s combustion are toxic, which is why there were a lot of delayed launches in the weather so that the wind blew towards the sea, from land.
      There is nothing toxic in Energy in such quantities.

      Better learn to think for yourself, and not "live by" that the USSR was monkeying for someone! They monkeyed and stole many times more for him. Sometimes it was necessary to give (RP-1, for example) so that the Americans simply would not be killed, and they were generally taught to potty only on the ISS - before that they shit in the shuttle in plastic bags in the corners (as soon as you enter - to the right), and in Apollo and Gemeni in general at the neighbor sitting under the nose in the same row and fenced off with a canvas curtain crying

      Before the shuttle, the USSR had an MiG-105 which was also better than the X-20, and which flew.
  20. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 18: 28
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    He flew in a full profile manned. There was an unmanned disintegration for research into how it would work to test his emergency capsule. Some kind of Cosmos there. And in the second case - rhinestone four. BOR-4 is Cosmos-1374

    You can find out how you can fly in a full profile manned during a reset from the TU-95 ??? What does the phrase mean
    There was an unmanned disintegration for research into how it would work to test his emergency capsule.
    Is there some kind of Cosmos? Can I find out which ones? Bor-4 was generally a 1/3 scale option. And no manned. Bor-4 is not only Cosmos-1374, but also Cosmos-1445, Cosmos-1557, Cosmos-1614
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 22: 32
      0
      And how did BOR fly into the Indian Ocean, also a throw from the Tu-95?
      This means that the MiG-105 cockpit was the usual salvage ballistic capsule, so the fate of Colombia did not threaten him.
      Find out for a long time.
  21. Old26
    Old26 27 July 2015 20: 36
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    The first steps of Energy returned with a resource of 10 launches despite the fact that they fell into the steppe and were not splashed into the Ocean. At the second stage, they planned to make a returnable engine compartment.

    At first, they still went without a parachute system, and in the future, at 5 or 6 EMNIP launches, they were planned to be saved.

    Quote: Scraptor
    The shuttle tank differs from the 2nd stage only in the absence of engines.

    It all depends on the options. Option OS-120 almost repeated the shuttle scheme with a tank without engines (engines on the OS). Unlike American - 4 BB

    Quote: Scraptor
    Before the shuttle, the USSR had an MiG-105 which was also better than the X-20, and which flew.

    Nevertheless, I would greatly appreciate it if you answered the question when the MIG-1058 flew, and where ...
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 27 July 2015 22: 41
      0
      This system partially failed.

      Another option was flying ...

      Into the space. At the top of the R-7. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG-105 About the same time when with the Tu-95 (a couple of years later). Before the BORs were launched to test the "Buranovsk" materials.
  22. Old26
    Old26 28 July 2015 07: 59
    +1
    Nda. "Everything is confused in the Oblonskys' house"
    Like you, dear Scraptor. It is clear that when there are no arguments, conspiracy theology is also used, or simply a distortion, or an attempt to ridicule an opponent. Ways known and old as the world.
    Your phrase
    Quote: Scraptor
    And how did BOR fly into the Indian Ocean, also a throw from the Tu-95? This means that the MiG-105 cockpit was an ordinary salvage ballistic capsule, so Columbia’s fate did not threaten him. It took a long time to find out.

    In principle, there is nothing. Air concussion. You ask the question how the Bor flew into the Indian Ocean, as if I wrote that it was launched from the TU-95. Then they remembered the salvage cabin from the MIG-105, which had never been tested and could only save astronauts in the atmosphere.

    Then follows your link to the wiki
    Quote: Scraptor
    I flew another option ... Into space. At the top of the R-7. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG-105 About the same time when with the Tu-95 (a couple of years later). Before the BORs were launched to test the "Buranovsk" materials.

    Phrase
    The original plan was to launch the orbital aircraft with the R-7 rocket.

    became a synonym for you that some other option was flying. Orbiting R-7. A couple of years after the discharge from the TU-95, this was in 1980.
    It was not for nothing that I said at the beginning the famous phrase from Anna Karenina. You, too, are all confused. Different stages, different products.
    Briefly summarize information about these products, it sounds like this.

    FIRST STEP
    An attempt to create a manned version of the machine known as the MIG-105. The longest flight is about 30 km (with TU-95). Independent - 19 km (already at an altitude of 550 meters). Instead of 3 buildings, one was made. After the accident, the work was closed. Products MIG-105-12 and 105-13 have not been tested. The 13th was not created at all, and it was he who was planned for a suborbital flight. You can put an end to this on the item "105".

    SECOND PHASE
    Within the framework of the Buran program, tests have already begun on machines of the BOR type. The main difference is unmanned and small in size. The number of launches is known. There were 12 launches on suborbital trajectories, 4 on orbital trajectories (Bor-4)

    All other projects, such as EPOS (military, manned) were only projects. Although planned as THIRD STAGE.
    Not a single launch was there, and there was not a single launch of this kind of product on R-7 carriers. Not in 1980, nor in any other.
    Alas, this is exactly the case and no other way
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 28 July 2015 08: 37
      0
      In 1976-78 he flew. The pre-super-hyper-sonic options are no different, except for a substitute for slightly toxic coatings.
      Can you also describe in detail the stages of the Almaz manned biofeedback program? But only using only open sources of that time? bully
      The capsule behind the pilot had an ablative coating for some reason ...
      You came up with a spiral. So that there are fewer questions why not use the MiG-105? There is none and there’s nothing for him to fly. Well, something like this...
      Moreover, it is expensive and impractical to use it in urgent massive paired launches from large piece known strips. It is still possible to fly for planned reconnaissance, but not when the whole platoon of soldiers urgently needs to jump into the mine, climb inside these small airplanes and knock out 20AUG (or make a non-AUG out of them) all over the world in one "volley".
      Can you imagine flying on the "combat" A-12 as scheduled with the SR-71?
      D-21 in China, the US also launched the majority not from the back of the SR-71, but from under the wing of the B-52. Quickly expensive exotic bothered, especially after a couple of disasters when he clapped him on the back. There are no benefits (expenses alone). And, it’s one thing when something fails on a subsonic down, or on top (or even hypersound in the case of the MiG-105) it should safely and controllably move up ... and the 2nd stage booster with an engine or an external tank on the Spiral will be everything equally disposable.
    2. Scraptor
      Scraptor 28 July 2015 08: 59
      0
      On the R-7, initially on trials (you don't know how to read? Wikipedia, you know, is not lying), and so a large ICBM was quietly withdrawn from the mine, and the first stages of the launch vehicle or even they could completely be solid fuel. To shoot a couple of these "fiberglass cars of Chinese stale pyrotechnics" from the MiG-105 towards each AUG, you know it is even cheap ... laughing and with liquid oxygen and everything else, you don’t have to bother. Shuttle TTU somehow brought astronauts / astronauts into space.
      With Buran, every American aircraft carrier could have been covered with banana peels. And on it everyone would slide and fall overboard. laughing
  23. Old26
    Old26 28 July 2015 21: 32
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    In 1976-78 he flew. The pre-super-hyper-sonic options are no different, except for a substitute for slightly toxic coatings.

    If under the word flew you mean flights at a distance of 19-30 km - then yes, flew. At 30 km when launched from the TU-95 from a height of 5 km. When "taking off" from the airfield - the maximum range was 19 km, the altitude was about 550 meters, the speed was 450 km / h. All other "flights" had a duration of about 10-15 seconds, an altitude of about 12-15 meters, a range of 1-2 km, a speed of 350 km / h.

    They could not differ from each other (MIG-105 products) by coating, since apart from MIG-105-11 (aka product 101, aka number 1-01 or 7510511101) there was nothing else in readiness for LI. For MIG-105-12 the corps was created and that’s it. Before flight tests, this supersonic counterpart (product 102, or No. 2-01 / 7510511201) did not reach. And even more so it was not built No. 3-01 / 7510511301, aka product 103... Namely, it was planned for a suborbital flight, with "coating", as you say.

    In addition to a dozen flights of a subsonic analogue of other flights under the program SPIRAL not carried out. Projects of products, of course, were, but only in the drawings (paper). Under the BURAN program, completely different products that were not products were launched MIG-105.

    Quote: Scraptor
    Can you also describe in detail the stages of the Almaz manned biofeedback program? But only using only open sources of that time?

    Of course, what problems.
    At the initial stage, the ALMAZ complex was planned in several versions

    1. The initial version... Orbital station 11F711. It was supposed to consist of station 11F71 and military research ship 11F73 "Zvezda"

    2. An intermediate option. Orbital station 11F71. As part of the 11F75 orbital block, the 11F74 return vehicle, the 11F72 supply transport vehicle and the 11F76 information reset capsules

    3. The final version. Orbital station 11F71. the return vehicle 11F74, the supply vehicle 11F72, and the information reset capsules (CSI) 11F76. The designations of the orbital block were no longer mentioned, and the VA was part of the transport ship supply TKS 11F72.

    The following objects were created and launched.
    Product 11F71 (OPS orbital manned station)
    • OPS-1. Salute-2 (No. 101). Launched on 3.1.1973
    • OPS-2. Salute-3 (No. 102). Launched on 25.6.1974
    • OPS-3. Salute-5 (No. 103). Launched on 27.7.1976
    • OPS-4. (No. 104). Did not start
    • OPS-5. (No. 105). Did not start. At the station, it was planned to have 2 docking nodes for two TKS

    The following objects were created and launched.
    Product 11F668(AOS-automatic orbital station)
    • AOS-1. (No. 301) It did not start
    • AOS-2. (No. 302) It did not start
    • AOS-3. (No. 303). 11F668E. Radar "Sword-K". Launched 29.11.1986/XNUMX/XNUMX. Emergency start
    • AOS-4. (No. 304). 11F668. Radar "Sword-K". Launched on 25.7.1987. Called "Cosmos-1870"
    • AOS-5. (No. 305). 11F668. Radar "Sword-KU". Launched 31.3.1991. Called "Almaz-1"
    • AOS-6. (No. 306). 11F668. "Almaz-1V". Did not start

    This is with regard to flight copies. There is information that there are 2 more hulls that are planned to be used in flights around the Moon for commercial purposes. This is "Almaz-205" (No. 0205-02 and 0206-02)
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 29 July 2015 04: 41
      0
      Within the framework of the SPIRAL program, it may be (there is no accelerator). But the MIG-105 was there.

      The Soyuz was supposed to fly to the moon. What is there to plan then? Or is it also wrong?
  24. Old26
    Old26 28 July 2015 21: 33
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    The capsule behind the pilot had an ablative coating for some reason ...

    Capsule SHOULD BE. But since the product was never tested regularly, the capsule was not tested either.

    Quote: Scraptor
    You came up with a spiral. So that there are fewer questions why not use the MiG-105? There is none and there’s nothing for him to fly. Well, something like this...

    To me? Maybe you? Over 16 years of work in this industry, oh how much and why have seen enough of it, it’s just right to write a book ...

    Quote: Scraptor
    Moreover, it is expensive and impractical to use it in urgent mass paired launches from large piece known strips. It’s still possible to fly like this for planned reconnaissance, but not when the entire platoon of soldiers urgently needs to drop into the mine, climb inside these small planes and knock out 20AUG (or make non-AUG of them)

    Science fiction is good when in blueprints. Before that it was as far away as it was before Beijing ... in a kneeling state. Moreover, these "products" in mines are generally pure fantasy. Even plans for placement in certain locations were considered unrealistic from a technical point of view, since there were no overclocking aircraft. so placement plans in points CRIMEA, VOLGA, SIBERIA, AMUR were only plans far from implementation
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 29 July 2015 04: 32
      0
      The capsule was and is, it carries the structural element on it, and not an ejection seat with a shutter.

      Well, where can you look at this Spiral, at least in miniature? On the MiG-105, R-7 and Buran - you can. And all kinds of ICBMs. what

      It has been in metal for a long time ... In each Ohio SLBM, 1-2 mines are occupied by ICBMs (not Spirals), which have a spy satellite instead of the head units to fly around and make sure / aim.
      What are your accommodation plans? winked And what does it have to do with some kind of antastic "booster planes"? laughing
  25. The comment was deleted.
  26. Old26
    Old26 28 July 2015 21: 38
    +1
    Quote: Scraptor
    Can you imagine that the "combat" A-12 flew as scheduled from the SR-71? D-21 to China The US also launched the majority not from the back of the SR-71, but from under the wing of the B-52. I got tired of the expensive exotic quickly, especially after a couple of accidents when he slapped him on the back. There is no benefit (costs alone). And, it’s one thing when something falls down on subsonic sound, or above (or even on hypersonic in the case of the MiG-105), it should move up safely and in a controlled manner ... and a 2nd stage booster with an engine or an external tank on the Spiral will be all is equally disposable.

    The problems of the D-21 are the problems of the Americans and are not directly related to our conversation. About any supersonic and hypersound in relation to the MIG-105 is out of the question. This product was tested only in subsonic mode, after which the program was closed. Do not invent what was not.

    Quote: Scraptor
    At R-7, it’s initially in testing (you don’t know what to read? Wikipedia, you know, doesn’t lie)

    Of course. Wikipedia is the ultimate truth. But even there it does not mention the tests with the R-7. It says that it was originally PLANNED to use the P-7. So if you claim that it’s written on the wiki that you experienced, then one of you two lying. And I am afraid that this is not Wikipedia, since there is not such a thing written there. It’s you who have put an equal sign between intended и was tested

    Quote: Scraptor
    and so the calmly large ICBM was withdrawn from the mine, and the first stages of the launch vehicle or even they could be completely solid fuel.

    And what is this "big" ICBM, on which this product was removed from the mine? And even more so with solid fuel engines? Do you even know the performance characteristics of EPOS? If you know, compare with our most powerful rockets with solid propellant rocket engines ... and do not write nonsense

    Quote: Scraptor
    To shoot a couple of such "fiberglass cars of Chinese stale pyrotechnics" from the MiG-105 towards each AUG, you know it is even cheap ... and you don't need to mess around with liquid oxygen and everyone else. TTU Shuttle as it was taken out cosmonauts / astronauts into space. From "Buran" every American aircraft carrier could even be covered with a banana peel. And on it everyone would slide and fall overboard

    Well, then ordinary flood
    1. Scraptor
      Scraptor 29 July 2015 04: 20
      0
      Problems D-21 + SR-71 are common problems of such a scheme.
      all of this was first tested as a model (like the BOR-5) at entry speeds, otherwise the outlines of the "subsonic" MiG-105 (like Buran) could not be received.

      why two? mb you are lying because you "don't understand" too stubbornly
      What, all missiles (even liquid) are weaker than the R-7, which is also an ICBM (and the first)? lol
      you have a flood, and there were technical details.
  27. Scraptor
    Scraptor 29 July 2015 05: 27
    0
    Quote: Old26
    Of course, what problems.

    Thank. And what do you think that used to fly BOR-5 or BTS-002 (GLI)?
    And why should it be with the MiG-105 differently? wink

    In the USSR, a lot of things were somehow strangely closed (watch your hands, but not only in it, but less), at least the same B-350, La-350 "Tempest", although there was nothing else besides her at that time -cryogenic, that is, waiting for refueling with an oxidizer (risking a lot, if not all), as in the case of the R-7, over which the American Po-2 walked, who could not only photograph, but simply drop a pack of nails or even the usual heavy shot, not it was necessary to.