 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Shuttle / October 2004News: Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle (in 2009?)
Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle The Moscow News (Color picture of "Kliper" under construction in article) http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/09/16/kliper.shtml The Russian Federal Space Agency (FSA) is working on the project to launch a new space shuttle called Kliper. FSA deputy director Nikolai Moiseyev has told journalists that the Kliper project had been included in the federal space program for 2005-15. If the program is implemented successfully the first launch may take place in five years' time, the official told the Itar-Tass news agency. The metal hull of the craft has already been built. The 14,500-kilogram Kliper will be able to carry a six-member crew and a 700-kilogram payload. Itar-Tass also quoted Moiseyev as saying that Russian space experts are considering different options for booster rockets for launching the new space shuttle. One is Russian and the other Ukrainian-made, Moiseyev said. A modified Soyuz rocket, the new generation Angara booster rocket and the Ukrainian Zenit could be used for delivering Kliper into orbit, he said. Nikolai Zelenshchikov, first vice president of Moscow's space rocket corporation Energia, where Kliper has been designed, said "it is planned so far to launch the craft from the Plesetsk launch pad on the carrier rocket Onega, which is a modified Soyuz". Zelenshchikov did not rule out that Kliper could be launched in the future from other launch pads, including Kourou in French Guiana. The presidents of the Common Economic Space countries Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus on Wednesday passed a decision on setting up a space rocket corporation for joint use of the space complex Kliper-Zenit and ordered the governments of their countries to come up with concrete proposals by December 15. Russian spacecraft traditionally use landing capsules which descend on parachutes. The only Russian space shuttle project is known under the name Buran. One Buran shuttle made an unmanned spaceflight in November 1988. It circled Earth twice, landed automatically and since then has more or less sat in storage at the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Several other copies of the Russian shuttle were built as part of a test program and through the years have all become known by the name Buran. One of them is now used as an attraction in Moscow's Gorky Park. > Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/09/16/kliper.shtml Looks more like a mockup or an engineering model than flight hardware. Jeff  SignatureRemove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address. > > Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Looks more like a mockup or an engineering model than flight hardware. Looks more like the crew compartment; similar to the STS crew module (pressurised compartment inside the Orbiter 'shell'). SignatureAlan Erskine We can get people to the Moon in five years, not the fifteen GWB proposes. Give NASA a real challenge Alanterskine1@bigpond.com [snip] >Looks more like the crew compartment; similar to the STS crew module >(pressurised compartment inside the Orbiter 'shell'). Schematics : http://www.russianspaceweb.com/kliper.html SignatureKulvinder Singh Matharu Website : www.metalvortex.com Contact : www.metalvortex.com/form/form.htm "It ain't Coca Cola, it's rice" - The Clash > Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The Russian Federal Space Agency (FSA) is working on the project to > launch a new space shuttle called Kliper. I would be very interested to know if they are using aluminum or titanium for Kliper. 1.) What was the material decision criteria? (e.g., influences from Columbia accident, cost, ease of fabrication of material, availability of metal). 2.) Since titanium is more readily to Russia than the US, did this place a role in the decision? g. beat >> Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I would be very interested to know if they are using aluminum or titanium > for Kliper. > 1.) What was the material decision criteria? (e.g., influences from > Columbia accident, cost, ease of fabrication of material, availability of > metal). When you look at the aerodynamic heating environment that an orbital reentry takes place within, there's no structural reason to use Titanium over Aluminum. The heat leves on the outside of the ship are so high that both materiels will fail if the heat gets in. If you're able to build a Thermal Protection System that works for Titanium, It'll work for Aluminum, too. When you factor in the difficuly to build and maintain a Titanium structure, and the new failure modes you introduce by using Titanium, Aluminum looks like a more reasonable choice. (The SR-71 is able to use Ti over Al because it flies in an area (Mach 3-Mach 4) where it's too hot for Aluminum, and not yet too hot for Ti. If you want to go faster than the upper Mach3-Mach 4 range, Titanium won't cut it. That's why the X-15 was carged out of Iconel-X) > 2.) Since titanium is more readily to Russia than the US, did this place a > role in the decision? It would, but that's only hte cost of the raw ore. Refining it, smelting it, and machining it is still a gold-plated uhm - well, you get the idea. SignaturePete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster >>> Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle >>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > If you want to go faster than the upper Mach3-Mach 4 range, Titanium > won't cut it. That's why the X-15 was carged out of Iconel-X) When I read 1970 documents regarding decisions and compromises for the STS design, it appears that aluminum was selected due to: 1.) The difficulty in building & maintaining a titanium structure (from SR-71 and aircraft mfg. experience) versus deeper experience with aluminum for aerospace fabrication 2.) Supply and cost of titanium versus aluminum >> 2.) Since titanium is more readily to Russia than the US, did this place >> a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > smelting it, and machining it is still a gold-plated "uhm" - well, you > get the idea. It appears that previous aerospace fabrication experience is the primary selection criteria, with cost a close second. gb >>>> Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle >>>> [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > It appears that previous aerospace fabrication experience is the primary > selection criteria, with cost a close second. What it basically comes down to is that to handndle teh heat loads of an orbital reentry, you'd still ahve to use a serious Thermal Protection System to keep the heat away from the structure. (As in teh tiles & RCC - steel-burning hot on the outside, cool to the touch on theinside.) The strength/temperature character of Ti isn't so much better than Aluminum that it would make any difference They'll both soften & fail equally well. (or poorly). If you're going to need teh Super-Hyper TPS anyway, there's no need to complicate things by using Ti. Note that while the Russians have a lot of Ti in the ground, we've got more experience making stuff out of it. (Although one has to really wonder about the Blood level in the Alcohol System of whoever thought that making the hulls of the Alpha Class Attack Boats out ot Titanium was a Good Idea. "Let's see - we'll make teh hull out of something that falls apart when there's Hydrogen around, immerse it in seawater, and stick venting Lead/Acid Batteries aboard, and power it with a Nuclear Reactor that, if it gets cold, has its Primary Loop Coolant (Bismuth, IIRC) harden into solid bars in the pipes..." SignaturePete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster >When I read 1970 documents regarding decisions and compromises for the STS >design, it appears that aluminum was selected due to: > >1.) The difficulty in building & maintaining a titanium structure... >2.) Supply and cost of titanium versus aluminum The version I've seen is that difficulty and cost looked like a wash: titanium was more expensive and harder to work with, but it wouldn't require advancing the thermal-protection technology quite so far. On purely technical issues, it looked pretty even. The decisive issue was the USAF's fear that titanium orbiters would occupy so much of the US's limited titanium production capacity as to interfere with F-15 production. (The F-15 is primarily aluminum but does use significant amounts of titanium.) Signature"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | henry@spsystems.net >The version I've seen is that difficulty and cost looked like a wash: >titanium was more expensive and harder to work with, but it wouldn't [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >(The F-15 is primarily aluminum but does use significant amounts of >titanium.) Given who made it, I'm surprised it wasn't stainless steel honeycomb, like the B-70. ;-) Would the use of Titanium have led to the cadmium embrittlement problems in regards to tools used on the orbiter during maintenance, like happened on the A-12/SR-71? Pat >>purely technical issues, it looked pretty even. The decisive issue was >>the USAF's fear that titanium orbiters would occupy so much of the US's >>limited titanium production capacity as to interfere with F-15 production... > >Given who made it, I'm surprised it wasn't stainless steel honeycomb, >like the B-70. ;-) That would actually be more likely if somebody else had made it. NAA/Rockwell knew better, after all the grief they had on the B-70! >Would the use of Titanium have led to the cadmium embrittlement problems >in regards to tools used on the orbiter during maintenance, like >happened on the A-12/SR-71? Most likely, yes -- they'd have run into all the same problems as the Blackbirds, although they might have been able to get Kelly Johnson's boys to give them a few lectures on the basics. :-) (And to think that Johnson used titanium because one look at the complex manufacturing of the B-70's stainless-steel honeycomb scared him...) Signature"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer -- George Herbert | henry@spsystems.net >Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle >The Moscow News > >(Color picture of "Kliper" under construction in article) >http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/09/16/kliper.shtml A few(?) weeks back, that selfsame picture was being touted as a mockup of the crew compartment. D. SignatureTouch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL This is old news: http://www.astronautix.com/craft/kliper.htm Published in the Encyclopedia Astronautica on February 24, 2004 Matthew Ota Not another James Oberg, but I did stay at the Holiday Inn.... > Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle > [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > program and through the years have all become known by the name Buran. > One of them is now used as an attraction in Moscow's Gorky Park. > Russia Prepares Launch of New Space Shuttle > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/09/16/kliper.shtml Funny how much it looks like some of the LM and Boeing concepts for OSP. Sizing and layout are similar, too. -Kim- |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.