 |
 | 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 2003Which of the Burans is this?
I was browsing some rollout pictures of Soyuz TMA-3, and I saw this: http://spaceflightnow.com/station/exp8/031016rollout/09.html Take a look at that picture. There is a Buran shuttle in the background. Does anyone know whether that is one of the real Burans, or some mock-up? Storing it outdoors would make it a likely candidate for some aerodynamic mock-up or something, but then again, I have always wondered what happened to Baikal and "Ptichka", the two nearly completed Burans. Could that be one of those? > I was browsing some rollout pictures of Soyuz TMA-3, and I saw this: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to Baikal and "Ptichka", the two nearly completed Burans. Could that be one > of those? It is probably OK-M (stored in open air). Also probably 1.01 or 1.02. (STS) It's OK-M. >> Storing it outdoors would make it a likely candidate for some aerodynamic >> mock-up or something, but then again, I have always wondered what happened [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >(STS) -- remove KILLSPAMMERS to reply! Guy's Space Shuttle Payload Bay page: http://www.netspace.net.au/~pargoo/ > I was browsing some rollout pictures of Soyuz TMA-3, and I saw this: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to Baikal and "Ptichka", the two nearly completed Burans. Could that be one > of those? I recognize it, it's one of the high fidelity mockups of Buran. the distinguishing feature is the lack of black tiles on the sides of the lower forward fuselage. -Mike > > I was browsing some rollout pictures of Soyuz TMA-3, and I saw this: > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > lower forward fuselage. > -Mike I was unaware that there was more than one Buran. > > > I was browsing some rollout pictures of Soyuz TMA-3, and I saw this: > > > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > I was unaware that there was more than one Buran. There were at least 7 Buran orbiter structural, mockup, and flight test article airframes built, and up to five spaceflight rated vehicles were to have been built. Only two were completed, of those two, only one flew, and then was retired. For more information check out the following URLs: "http://www.astronautix.com/craft/buran.htm" "http://pargoo.customer.netspace.net.au/buran.html" "http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya.htm" (this is the Buran website by the company that built the Buran orbiters) -Mike [...] > There were at least 7 Buran orbiter structural, mockup, and flight test > article airframes built, and up to five spaceflight rated vehicles were to [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > -Mike hmmmm....how much work would it have been to make one into the Columbia's replacement, compared to how much work Enterprise would be? (Only half a smiley) /dps > [...] >> There were at least 7 Buran orbiter structural, mockup, and flight [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > hmmmm....how much work would it have been to make one into the > Columbia's replacement, compared to how much work Enterprise would be? Buran would be a lot more work than Enterprise. No thrust structure in the aft compartment for the SSMEs, no ET umbilical doors, the ET attach points are in the wrong places and the load paths are wrong since the shuttle pushes the ET while Energia pushed Buran, no T-0 umbilicals, OMS/RCS use different propellants, different voltages in the power systems, lord knows what the flight software differences are, no uplink/downlink compatibility with Houston, and probably a dozen other things I can't think of right now. A team from KSC inspected Enterprise at Dulles a few years ago. They reported that Enterprise would need a lot of work, but there were no showstoppers. She would be a quite heavy orbiter, mind you.  SignatureJRF Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail, check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and think one step ahead of IBM. > > [...] > >> There were at least 7 Buran orbiter structural, mockup, and flight [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > what the flight software differences are, no uplink/downlink compatibility > with Houston, and probably a dozen other things I can't think of right now. Basically the killer is that what you are describing is the replacement of the ENTIRE Buran aft fuselage, and having to build, from scratch, an entire new aft fuselage plus OMS pods to replace it. Oh yes, and an entirely new Forward RCS module would have to be built as well since the Buran one not only uses different propellants, but also stores the FRSC prop in the aft fuselage tanks, and then pumps it into the FRSC when needed. > A team from KSC inspected Enterprise at Dulles a few years ago. They > reported that Enterprise would need a lot of work, but there were no > showstoppers. She would be a quite heavy orbiter, mind you. That was 1996. The more time goes by, the more work in repairing corrosion and metal fatigue in the airframe will probably be required. I don't know if back in 1999, when Enterprise's kapton wiring was inspected, if the airframe was looked extensively as well. What about when the landing gear bay door was removed for the CAIB testing earlier this year? -Mike > [...] > > There were at least 7 Buran orbiter structural, mockup, and flight test [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > (Only half a smiley) Even worse. See Jorge's commentary on what must be the minimum list for a Buran airframe conversion. -Mike "Mike Dicenso" <mdicenso@seds.lpl.arizona.edu> kirjoitti viestissä:Pine.GSO.4.51.0310201337420.6063@seds.lpl.arizona.edu... > I recognize it, it's one of the high fidelity mockups of Buran. the > distinguishing feature is the lack of black tiles on the sides of the > lower forward fuselage. Yes, the black tile are indeed missing, good point. A little off-topic, but now that we are talking about black tiles... Why do shuttles have black tiles? I mean, it's a common thing: the US space shuttle, Buran, some X-Prize concepts, some artistic renderitions of NASA future shuttles, even some concept study of the Chinese shuttle... they all have black tiles on the "belly". Why? Does the black color actually serve some purpose? I also noticed that Enterprise once had white tiles around the cockpit windows. Later, the shuttles have had black tiles around windows. Why? I once asked this on some forum, and someone answered something like "NASA does everything for some useful purpose", but I never got any answer what the purpose of those black window tiles might be. Does anybody know? Same thing with the engine pods. A few black tiles have appeared there. Why? If it's just a matter of replacing the old ones, why not use the same color? Take a look... Atlantis: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-112/lores/02pd1582.jp g Discovery: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-105/lores/s105e5018.j pg Endeavour: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-111/lores/ec02-0131-3 .jpg But in the older photos, those tiles are white... Columbia: http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/luceneweb/fullimage.jsp Challenger: http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/luceneweb/fullimage.jsp Discovery: http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/iams/images/pao/STS41D/10061572.jpg And so on and so on... It's not just different shuttle, for instance the "before and after" of Discovery shows that those have been changed at some time. So somebody has changed few tiles from white to black on identical locations on all orbiters. There *has* to be a reason, so what is it? I know that black is a good conductor of heat. Most people think that black traps heat, but it actually just conducts it the best. So it works well for rejecting the heat as well. Why certain tiles changed I'm not sure of the answer. > "Mike Dicenso" <mdicenso@seds.lpl.arizona.edu> kirjoitti > viestissä:Pine.GSO.4.51.0310201337420.6063@seds.lpl.arizona.edu... [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Take a look... > Atlantis: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-112/lores/02pd1582.jp > g > Discovery: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-105/lores/s105e5018.j > pg > Endeavour: http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/shuttle/sts-111/lores/ec02-0131-3 > .jpg > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > on all orbiters. > There *has* to be a reason, so what is it? > "Mike Dicenso" <mdicenso@seds.lpl.arizona.edu> kirjoitti > viestissä:Pine.GSO.4.51.0310201337420.6063@seds.lpl.arizona.edu... [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > on all orbiters. > There *has* to be a reason, so what is it? The black tiles are both higher-temperature (meaning they can withstand greater heat than can the white tiles) but the black coating also increases emissivity or radiative heat transfer away from the orbiter. Do a quick google search on emissivity and "black box radiation" and that ought to get you lots of basic heat transfer information relevant to the discussion. SignatureHerb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D. Reformed Aerospace Engineer "Heisenberg might have been here." ~ Anonymous "Sauli Nurmi" <saleguru@sunpoint.net> kirjoitti viestissä:bn4bpj$al0$1@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi... > But in the older photos, those tiles are white... > Columbia: > http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/luceneweb/fullimage.jsp > Challenger: > http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/luceneweb/fullimage.jsp Ooopps... sorry, those don't do much good, didn't notice that earlier. Anyways, the first one was from STS-5 picture number S82-39894, the second one from STS-7 picture number S83-35782. Of course, it really doesn't matter which picture and which mission we're looking at, it's the same thing in all photos. > "Mike Dicenso" <mdicenso@seds.lpl.arizona.edu> kirjoitti > viestissä:Pine.GSO.4.51.0310201337420.6063@seds.lpl.arizona.edu... > A little off-topic, but now that we are talking about black tiles... > Why do shuttles have black tiles? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "belly". Why? > Does the black color actually serve some purpose? The black tiles are denser than the white tiles and can cope with higher temperatures than the white tiles. The black tiles are for the higher temperature areas. I believe that actual experience showed that, compared to predictions, large areas are cooler than expected (e.g., no tiles required on wing upper surfaces), but a few areas - e.g., on the OMS pod - experience higher temperatures, and thus the white tiles were replaced with black ones. Jan > "Mike Dicenso" <mdicenso@seds.lpl.arizona.edu> kirjoitti > viestissä:Pine.GSO.4.51.0310201337420.6063@seds.lpl.arizona.edu... [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > does everything for some useful purpose", but I never got any answer what > the purpose of those black window tiles might be. Does anybody know? As Herb noted, the black coating on the HRSI tiles is there because it allows for greater conductivity and emission of heat. As to Enterprise, the tiles on OV-101 are NOT real, they are foam mock ups. The RCC on Enterprise, of which some were removed for the CAIB testing, are fiberglass mockups. The orignial OV-101 tile patterns are only approximations of what was then thought to be what the orbiter tile patterns would look like. Later after much testing, the pattern was changed as a better understanding of the heating and aerodynamic forces in certain areas was obtained, the use of certain kinds of tiles and thermal blankets was altered. On the later production OVs, from OV-103 onward, the tiles were replaced on the upper surfaces by the AFRSI blankets, which help to reduce maintaince and weight. The last rounds of OMDP/OMM prior to ISS assembly altered things just a bit more to save as much weight as possible by removing some of the AFRSI blankets in some of the less critcal leeside surface areas, and replacing them with the slightly lighter weight nomex felt blankets. Eventually later in it's life, Enterprise was painted (yes the foam tiles are just use regular old paint) to look somewhat like the later OVs. -Mike |
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.