Comments on: Cool Shuttle pix

By: What is the Biggest Airplane in the World?

What is the Biggest Airplane in the World? — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:17:26 +0000

[…] the An-225, constructed in the Ukraine in 1988.It was designed as a cargo ship to carry the Russian Buran Space Shuttle. There were only 2 of its kind built and they are still available to carry oversize cargo and […]

By: kossak

kossak — Wed, 07 May 2008 06:26:59 +0000

The link in the original post is not working

Here is a working link with the cool pictures

http://www.popgive.com/2008/04/space-shuttle-processing-rarely-seen-by.html

By: stoner

stoner — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 06:31:45 +0000

“similar” pictures of buran and energija:

http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2007/11/rare-photos-of-russian-buran-space.html

By: Buzz Parsec

Buzz Parsec — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:56:06 +0000

LC and Spiv - From the pictures I’ve seen of Baikonur, it looks like the pads are built at the top of a cliff or flat-topped hill, so they didn’t have to do much if any excavation, just extend a pier-like structure horizontally (on pillars) a short distance off the edge of the cliff and put the launch pad at the end. Then level the top of the hill between the assembly building and the pad, and lay down railroad tracks between the two. Since they are way above sea level, at the top of a hill, and in a desert, they don’t have to worry about the water table. BTW, yesterday’s Soyuz launch used the same pad as Yuri Gagarin’s Vostok 1, which I think was the same pad used by Sputnik 1.

By: LC

LC — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 07:02:55 +0000

Poking through the pictures of Baikonur, it seems while the Russian pads are at ground level, but they cheat by digging out the ground under the platform forming the blast trench.

Also as mentioned Bailonur isnt in the middle of a swamp so the water table is a lot lower hence they can dig down with this method.

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/baikonur_r7_1.html

By: Spiv

Spiv — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:56:56 +0000

Two actual reasons not to put it lower down: First, the sound pressure coming off the shuttle is really something astounding. We have all sorts of cool vibration testing equipment here to try and simulate the abuse that pad and flight parts will undergo during a launch (and occasionally break stuff in glorious fashion in the attempt). Placing the pad lower gives less free-air for the pressure to disperse in, and would make that job much harder. We also need space for the water system to drain off, which also servers the purpose of vibration dampening. Second, it’s Florida, in the swamp, if you dig much more than about 5 feet down you hit water. This can be overcome, but with much expense.

I’m really not sure what the Russian approach is on this, if someone knows I’d love to hear it. Maybe more water or something to do with the russian landscape? Maybe just less expectation for everything to survive launch after launch?

By: DaveS

DaveS — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 01:17:08 +0000

Why is the platform raised, then? Couldn’t you do the same thing
more cheaply with excavation, leaving the pad at ground level? Am I
missing something?