h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Buran - The Russian Space Shuttle - A2532133
Author: Atlantic_Cable - U196159

Realised this was missing from the EG.

Comments and suggestions are, as always, very welcome.

Hi there!

Great subject for an entry , and exactly my field of interest!
While reading, I thought of serveral things:

"NASA's goal was the further exploration of space, cheaper satellite launches and carry out space science, [and] the Soviet's goal was to carry nuclear weapons to orbit"
In my opinion, that's too much of a black/white point of view. Of course there was a military background, but the Soviets planned also scientific missions, e.g. should Buran assist the launch of another space station.
I also doubt that the Americans had only non-military intentions. I think the Buran episode is just another chapter of the Space Race between America and the Soviet Union.

Perhaps you should mention the MiG 105-11 'Spiral' experimental manned orbital aircraft (Experimental'nyj Pilotiruemyj Orbital'nyj Samolet - EPOS) which flew in 1977/78 and helped in the development of the Soviet Space Shuttle.

"Buran never flew again."
That's incorrect. Well, sort of. It did fly again May 13th, 1989, on the back of Antonov An-225 'Mriya' which was designed specifically for this task and is the heaviest, most powerful and in most aspects also the biggest plane ever built. Both An-225 and Buran visited the Paris Airshow a few days later.

Perhaps the comparison of the NASA Shuttle and Buran should be a bit longer, and I think it would be fair to not only point out Buran's advantages, but also possible disadvantages. I know it's hard to do this, as I just finished a similar entry (regarding the history of Tu-144 and Concorde). I really do think that Soviet engineering was excellent, to all extents better than Western propaganda wanted us to believe. But facts are facts, so if there are disadvantages, name them.

Well, that's all I can think of at the moment, thank you for filling this gap in the Guide!

Hi AC,

Interesting article. I would agree with pragotron in that it is a very good entry for the guide, and you clearly have put a lot of work into the entry. I had heard about it a few times before, but I reckon it is still relatively unknown compared to its American cousins.

A few points to take or leave - I think you may be using a few too many footnotes - I'm wondering if you might be able to assimilate a few into the main text or drop them completely.

I wonder if you could rethink how the Flight and Analysis sections are structured. On the first check, they don't fit somehow. Mentioning that the flight was grounded should come at the end, I think.

You might also think about your use of paragraphs - they are very small, and I think you could lump some of them together into one paragraph to aid readability.

You don't have a closing paragraph. Maybe you could look into this?

Some typos -
Firstly designing --> Firstly, designing

significanly - significantly

"NASA's goal was the further exploration of space, cheaper satellite launches and carry out space science" --> It doesn't read well. You might consider rewriting.

I hope this helps and I look forward to seeing this go into the EG.

Woodpigeon

Interesting article. Could you find a link to a picture?

Thanks for the feedback. I've altered the entry, made the paragraphs tidier, rediced the footnotes and found some pictures.

Hi AC,

Good work. Its looking better.

Sorry to keep harping on about this, but the two sentences "Buran never flew in space again." and "The Buran flight was a huge sucess" are contradictory, as well as being incorrectly ordered chronologically. The Buran flight was a success *technically* and you should discuss this *before* you talk about the eventual fate of the Buran programme. It would read much better this way.

Typos -

sucess --> success
prmiary --> primary
scince --> science
noticable --> noticeable
maintennance --> maintenance
proficcient --> proficient
Airshow --> Air Show
Beoing --> Boeing
engies --> engines
maneouvers --> manoeuvres

Woodpigeon

I think Woodpigeon is right, the whole 'success/never flew again' thing needs an improvement. Perhaps you should move the paragraph starting with "Buran never flew in space again. Funding..." to the very end of the entry, together with a new subheader, something like "The End of The Buran Program".

I would also put the paragraphs starting with "Buran is 4600kg lighter..." and "Although it carries only ..." under "Comparison of Designs".

And one last remark: 'Energia' should be 'Energiya' according to the most common Cyrillic transcription systems.

Other than that, !

Thanks! I've altered the entry. I think it looks beter now.

Much better!

Some smaller quibbles - "The flight was unmanned, something that the NASA orbiter has never done". I'm not sure if this reads well. Just my opinion.

Also, maybe you can talk just a bit more about the reasons the Buran never flew again.

Otherwise it is coming on really well!

Woodpigeon

I've fixed that, and added abit about why it was cut, but the main reason is that after the initial success, interest from the Soviet government simply faded.

What a pity. Buran seemed to be better than STS.

Excellent, brilliant, well-written and informative Entry.

Thank you for that!

HELL

Its a winner AC I'd never heard of this before - space is not one of my interests - but I found this a good read.

"more sharper"?

My bad.

How's this going?

I'm happy with the way it is.

Do you know where Buran is today? I believe I saw a documentary about it some months ago, and I half remember that it's mothballed somewhere. That would be worth adding to the end of the entry if my memory is correct

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Congrats!

Well done and well deserved!



Woodpigeon