Way to Russia Talk Lounge

sputnik · Lounge Lizard Joined: 02 Jan 2005 Posts: 141

A couple of hours before the space shuttle will (hopefully) land in the US. For the first time in a couple of years. Until now the servicing of the ISS has been done by Soyuz capsules, designed way back in 1965. Unlike the Space Shuttle these have a heat shield that vritually covers the whole spacecraft. This means they have a much larger safety margins when entering earth's atmosphere again.
They're less precise though as to the exact place where they will land, but who cares about a margin of 20 kms in the endless plains of Kazachstan..

The question is, where would we feel safer? In the sophisticated Shuttle, or in the sturdy Soyuz, with much less parts that can break down, but also much rougher landings..

Xela · VIP Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 781 Location: Shanghai

Shuttle.

Sorry, but I just don't like the idea of a rough landing from 40 million ft.

init6 · Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:12 am Post subject:

The Soyuz is a better spacecraft for it's job. It's a lot cheaper to launch the vehicle, it has had only ONE fatal re-entry accident (and that was a decompression, not a breakup of the craft). It might be older and "cruder," but so was Mir and look how long it lasted! Until just a week+ ago the Soyuz was the only spacecraft conducting manned launches in the world for nearly 2.5 years!

The Buran, for example, was newer, more sophisticated and could carry a larger payload than the American space shuttle. But it launched only once, and never manned. It's sad, but that's the way it is. And the good old Soyuz is still cookin'.

The space shuttle is outdated and is approaching unreliability. But on the other hand there was 17 years between fatal accidents! Not exactly unsafe in my book, especially given the job of the machine. But here's one for ya: what have we developed to replace it? Whoopsy...um...NOTHING. The "X-Plane" design was scrapped several years ago and there is nothing approaching production to replace the shuttle.

All the setbacks and delays with the recent shuttle launch are NOT because it was going to fall apart or explode on the launchpad. NASA is ridiculously gun shy right now and is taking every precaution to ensure both a safe launch and a safe return. But the landing is hardly smooth with the shuttle. It doesn't land under any power so it can't exactly "power out" of a bad landing. It's a giant glider!

The Soyuz is, at the moment, a better choice for the type of manned launches being conducted today. With the ISS operational the "mobile laboratory" that the shuttle was designed to be is simply unnecessary. It needs to be retired. But not because it's a bad or unstable spacecraft. It has served for more than 24 years, and served well.

More importantly the whole program has made the county a bearable, if not good, place to live throughout several decades, providing both my father and myself, along with scores of thousands of other residents, work through the years. Very Happy

Xela · VIP Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 781 Location: Shanghai

Consider this: the space shuttle is still operational, due to the fact the image of that famous, but obviously dated, craft represents the single most impressionable symbol of modern America.

Intourist · Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:37 pm Post subject:

No way in hell you're getting me on either of them. I really do hate heights. Combined with the aging aspects of both of them, you'd have better luck playing pick-up stick with your butt-cheeks than getting me into space.

e · VIP Joined: 23 Apr 2005 Posts: 654

I'd go with the Soyuz and Russian space program. Its been accident free for 30 years, its been holding up extremeley well and reliably despite Russia's problems, and any of us can go to space curtosey of the Федеральное космическое агентство provided if we have $20 to 100 million to spare.

Soyuz is going to be replaced soon by the Kliper anyway which they are developing co-jointly with the EU. It'll be interesting to see how that one pans out.

JadoreBaikonur · Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:18 pm Post subject:

Xela · VIP Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 781 Location: Shanghai

JadoreBaikonur · Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:25 pm Post subject:

DITTRICH · Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:58 pm Post subject:

"It is well known that the Buran was created from stolen Shuttle blueprints. Therefore I think the point is invalid that it was a superior craft. "

Weren't the Americans just trying to recover some of their R&D costs? Full marks to the Russians for getting the research on the cheap!

Russians also tend to be very inventive (IMHO) because for years they had to make do with very little. Witness, my father-in-law built a dacha from almost no proper materials (and it shows) has given rise to a family proverb...

Give Vasily a rubbish dump and he will build a moon rocket, but give him all the proper tools and equipment, and he will build rubbish.

Regards

Les

Xela · VIP Joined: 06 Jul 2005 Posts: 781 Location: Shanghai

JadoreBaikonur · Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2005 1:24 am Post subject:

Rick · Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:02 pm Post subject:

I attended a lecture today, by Dutch kosmonaut Andre Kuipers, who flew in the Soyuz in april 2004. On basis of what he said, I would definitely vote for the Soyuz.
Not only because of the safety systems. For instance it has a backup rocket that shoots the capsule off for a chute landing in case of an explosion of the rocket. It can be launched in virtually any weather type, very much in contrary to the shuttle. All the Soyuz needs, is the right position in relation to it's destination. They have a simple clock running in a bunker near the lauch platform. If it gives the right time, someone turns around a simple key and the rocket goes.

The main advantage according to him was that the craft has been in use for over 30 years and all the child's diseases are designed out of it. A big + is also that the rocket is built anew completely every time. No aging parts or systems.

Well.. just a few things. It was quite funny to hear about all the little traditions in base Baikonur, especially all those that relate back to the happenings around Gagarin's flight.