Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

Buy a Russian Space Shuttle 247

Posted by CmdrTaco from the way-cooler-than-a-pillow-fort dept.
zootsuite writes "Space.com is reporting that a Russian space shuttle is on the auction block today. Minimum asking price: $6 million." Nothing says white trash like having a multimilliondollar russian space shuttle rusting on your lawn! Better yet, someone could buy it COD ;)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Buy a Russian Space Shuttle More

Buy a Russian Space Shuttle

Comments Filter:

  • X-Prize (Score:2, Funny)

    by EnVisiCrypt ( 178985 )
    Hey! I can buy this to win the X-prize and still have $4 million left over when I win! Woohoo!

    • Re:X-Prize (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rorschach1 ( 174480 )
      Don't forget, you've got to buy the factory that makes the Energia boosters...

    • Only if you can get the thing up in the first place (doubtful), and then you have to figure out how to get it up AGAIN in two weeks. I'm guessing that the extra 4 million would go up in smoke (literally) trying to get that piece of Russian rust off the ground.

      But as a side note, the current method of Russian transportation is still probably better than ours, at least much more cost effective. (Just finished my History of the Russian Space Program [space.edu] class not long ago...)

  • So does it come with cosmonauts or are they skimping and just throwing in a pack of chimps?

  • Delivery fees (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:15AM (#3496881)
    Getting this thing from Russia to your backyard is going to cost at least another million.
    • You strap it on the back of a Jumbo for a couple hundred thou, or at the very least chop it's wings off and rent the US Airforce' cargo fleet for a few hours ...

      Personally, if I had the money for a rusty Buran, and I was crazy enough to actually *BUY* it, I'd also be crazy enough, and rich enough, to strap a few rockets on it and get it delivered that way.

      But yeah, I agree generally with the principle that COD into LEO might be nice way to pay for it, though.

      • Re:Delivery fees (Score:5, Interesting)

        by arivanov ( 12034 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:38AM (#3497069) Homepage
        er.... How to put it politely... er... get a clue...

        Buran is too heavy for any US cargo jet.

        Just to remind you US cargo jets suck rocks in the heavy bulk cargo business. For example the "problematic chinese incident" plane (you know which one) had to be carried to the US by a british company subcontracting to Antonov's construction bureau using an AN 124 Anthei. This was for a reason. The fuselage of the plane did not fit in any of the Galaxy series.

        The only thing that can lift a Buran intact is a AN 224 Mria which has recently been brought back from being mothballed. Subcontractable through the same UK company (forgot the name, based in Scotland). It will be more expensive then several thousands because it is a special purpose flight.

        A Jumbo cannot lift a Buran off. It is heavier then the US shuttles. Dunno exactly how much. But enough to exceed both take off weight and undercariage structural limits on Boeing 747.
        • Now if you are these guys [pbs.org], you just fix it up and fly it home.

        • Some related info (Score:2, Informative)

          by germinatoras ( 465782 )

          I was looking for some info to compare the Buran and US space shuttles, but couldn't find anything easily. We know it's possible [nasa.gov] to transport US shuttles but I'm not sure about the Buran.

          There may be some information [k26.com] available about the Buran's size and weight but I can't find it.

          Funny except from that page:

          Q. So the two countries with shuttle fleets are the U.S. and Kahzakstan?

          A. Pretty much.

        • er.... How to put it politely... er...

          Buran has a dry weight of 82 tons [russianspaceweb.com]. The Boeing 747 can handle cargo loads in excess of 110 tons [boeing.com], and can take this weight from Moscow to New York without refueling. You might have to disassemble the Buran to get it inside the 747's hold, but you are wrong to say it is too heavy for a US cargo jet.


          You could also handle this with an AN-124 (you wouldn't need a 224 or 225). The AN-124 is probably better suited for the project because it has an integrated cargo ramp and cargo handling equipment, so you would require less logistics support, and you might be able to get away with less disassembly. But if you had a cargo-trim 747 available, you could definitely get the job done.


          -Graham

          • Possibly I got my numbers wrong.

            Though I doubt it.

            I am fairly sure it was more then 100. Possibly it was not dry weight though.

            747 in its cargo incarnation is not adapted to carry large single loads. It can carry a lot, it is very well suited to carry containers, but not a single large load. So I doubt you will be able to do this with it.

            If you are right about the weight An124 is indeed possible but quite a bit of dissassembly will be required.
        • Buran can fly itself. There are removable engine packs that can be fitted on the tail. These were used for ferrying and the flight tests. There is a photo on the manufacturer's web site.

          You are right about the AN-124/224's though - those big buggers are massive, and I have only seen the smaller one from a distance.

        • Perhaps it could be carried by two European swallows who've tied it on a line... or it could be carried by a African swallow.

          --
          [McP]KAAOS

    • Re:Delivery fees (Score:5, Funny)

      by bob_jordan ( 39836 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @12:07PM (#3497268)
      If after paying for it, the Russians ask for a grid reference for your house, whatever you do, ask to confirm the exact method of delivery.

      Bob.

    • . . .

      Yup, an Antonov is what you want to ship your new toy :

      This page shows an Antonov ASTC [antonovaircargo.com] actually carrying piggy-back a CCCR / USSR Shuttle.

      Think your shuttle is big, then check the relative size of the An-225 Super Heavy Transport.

      Happy shopping!

  • an amusement park or a museum. This would be a great draw for anyone interested in getting people to come to their attraction.

    One of these "Space Camps" maybe.

    .

  • Too late (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:16AM (#3496888)
    The Specter organization has already stolen it to shuttle the new master race to the cloaked space station. I think the Brits are trying to recover it.

  • I saw the shuttle in Sydney a few months ago: rusting in a parking lot surrounded by chain link fence. I'd bet it's the one for sale.

  • Better yet, someone could buy it

    And do what with it? I really don't beleive that the US govnmt would let that go to the private sector in this country, and we don't need the technology. I suppose that is a good deal for a space shuttle, but I don't see the point.

    • More to the point, they got that tech from us...I seem to recall that they actually paid for the plans and went and constructed their own version based on those plans. Given that it is probably typical Russian space engineering, I think I'd rather buy a Kia.
    • The US government would have a damned hard time stopping someone from buying it. First of all, it's not a weapon. Secondly, the gov't has a harder time stopping rich people from doing whatever the hell they want. (They have no problems stomping all over the other 98% of the population)

      But as for what they'd do with it, they could EXPLORE! There is a lot of interest in a commercial space program in the US (and elsewhere), and this might be the impetus needed to get things moving. If you can't or don't dare fly it, then tear it down and use the technology in the private sector to build a new and innovative SSTO vehicle! Use your bloody imagination.

  • Second Space Tourist Won't be Given 'Ultimate Souv (Score:5, Interesting)

    by anthony_dipierro ( 543308 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:21AM (#3496925) Journal
    Mark Shuttleworth, the world's second space tourist, has said he will return to his native South Africa with his spacesuit, but without the ultimate in souvenirs - the Russian Soyuz capsule that brought him back to Earth. The 28-year-old Internet magnate, who paid $20 million for his 10-day adventure into space, told journalists in Moscow Tuesday, that the trip was worth the cost many times over. Mr. Shuttleworth said he expressed interest in buying the space capsule, which he nicknamed "Betty," but was not able to reach agreement with the Russian space agency. Sergei Gorbunov, a spokesman for the agency, said the capsule is federal property, adding the Soyuz is considered space technology and the legal procedures for exporting it would be long and complicated. Mr. Shuttleworth said he hoped to have a replica of the vehicle built, which he could take to South Africa and display to school children to interest them in space exploration. He also thanked his two crew mates, Russian commander Yuri Gidzenko and Italian pilot Roberto Vittori, for their help during his stay on the International Space Station and during the fiery descent to earth. The Soyuz capsule landed safely in Kazakhstan Sunday. Story from VOANews. Some information in this article provided by AFP.
  • Kick in another million and they'll throw in some decaying nuclear war-heads.

    • Re:weapon system (Score:5, Funny)

      by EastCoastSurfer ( 310758 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:30AM (#3496996)
      Kick in another million and they'll throw in some decaying nuclear war-heads.

      LOL, if they can find them. I can see it now:

      Russian Op> Hello, warhead distribution?

      Caller> Yea, I sent in my free warhead certificate months ago, and still haven't received it.

      Russian Op> Hmm, we shipped it out 2 months ago. Guess it got "lost" in the mail. That has been happening a lot lately. Anyways, let me get your address and we will send another one, plus a free one to make up for it.

      Caller> 911 Kabul Drive.

      Russin Op> Ok, we will get that right out to you. Don't forget to check our website at www.discountrussianwarheads.com
  • Does that include the stereo?
    I would really need to kick the tires a bit before I buy it.
  • I think I saw this on ebay [ebay.com]:

    L@@K - Russian Space Shuttle - No Reserve - [Buy It Now]
  • UserFriendly where Erwin buys Mir from Russia, charged and delivered to Stef...

    "Too late for refunds, the migs are on their way to shoot it down for you!"

    Hmm.

    Pi

  • Russia's Space Program. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by suwalski ( 176418 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:23AM (#3496942)
    In the last few years, Russia seems to be selling off/out much of it's space program. First (or maybe not first) their space shuttle program was cancelled and never flew (even though they had a better shuttle design than NASA), then MIR was decommisioned, then they started selling trips to space, and now they're selling the Buran. Perhaps this can be seen as a demise of their program, but it is offering more and more commercialization. Again, the Russians have beat the US to space by opening it up to the (rich) public.

    Does anyone have any idea how Buran got transported? Was it using a similar way as the NASA shuttle with the AA 747, or more likely to have been by sea?

    • Re:Russia's Space Program. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:37AM (#3497066)
      First (or maybe not first) their space shuttle program was cancelled and never flew (even though they had a better shuttle design than NASA),

      IIRC, they did do one successful unmanned orbital flight of the Buran. I think the fact that they managed to launch and land the thing on autopilot on the first try was a pretty impressive feat.

      The only stupid part was trying to replicate the ill-conceived US shuttle in the first place.

      • "The only stupid part was trying to replicate the ill-conceived US shuttle in the first place."

        I wouldn't expect a /.'er to know jack shit about the Buran. Although the "Orbiter" is similar in design, the Russian solid-LH/LO2 combo booster design was developed before NASA designed the shuttle! Have you even seen the Buran? It does not have any "liquid LH/LO2 engines" on the Orbiter because the engines are on the "tank" itself. I.e. It isn't just an "external fuel tank" like the US Shuttle!

        As such, NASA copied the Soviet design when it came to the solid-LH/LO2 booster design. In fact, I'll argue it was stupid for NASA to put the main liquid fuel engines on the Orbiter! Hence the return to an "Orbiter" without engines on the new, proposed designs from LockMart, Orbital-Northrop and Boeing. The US Shuttle is more complex than it needs to be IMHO.

        • You shouldn't assume what people know jack shit about. I am already aware most of your details about the Buran. You're focusing on technicalities of the propulsion system, which are not the most unique aspects of the shuttle. Here is an excerpt from astronautix [astronautix.com] (link broken this instant; here's the Google cache [216.239.39.100]) describing of the decision process the Buran designers went through regarding the orbiter itself:
          The final analysis of the problems indicated that the rational solution was an orbiter of the aircraft type. There was severe criticism of the decision to copy the space shuttle configuration. But earlier studies had considered numerous types of aircraft layouts, vertical takeoff designs, and ground- and sea- launched variants. The NPO Energia engineers could not find any configuration that was objectively better. This only validated the tremendous amount of work done in the US in refining the design. There was no point in picking a different inferior solution just because it was original.

          Therefore a straight aerodynamic copy of the US space shuttle, was selected as the orbiter configuration on 11 June 1976. MiG was selected as subcontractor to build the orbiter.

          This leaves little doubt about where the idea of a lumbering delta-winged orbiter vehicle strapped to the side of a huge gas tank originated.

        • Putting the engines on the big tank means throwing away more work whenever you jettison the big tank (every mission). Putting the engines on the part that comes back and lands at the end of the mission means not having to rebuild them from scratch for every launch, which was sort of the whole point of the shuttle - stop throwing the whole vehicle away each time you have a launch.
          • Yeah, and its cut the cost so much that they've saved money hand over fist.

            Oops gotta watch the sarcasm.

            The Russians can price an entire rocket for less than the cost of the external tank. Partly it's because their engineers are astonishingly cheap. The other part is because their hardware has been designed to actually be cheap to produce.

            Arguably NASA designs equipment to be more expensive. For example the SRBs are made in parts because otherwise they couldn't be made in certain districts...

        • I wouldn't expect a /.'er to know jack shit about the Buran.

          You're a slashdotter, and you seem to know what's going on (to some extent). You're not the smartest person on slashdot just because you know some details, so you won't get anywhere acting like you are. Seriously, thanks for the clarification, but lose the attitude.

          --Dan
        • Interestingly enough, it was possible to fit jet engines directly to Buran. Buran could take off and land under its own steam and this was used for ferrying as well as the manned landng tests. At least one of the photos of Buran shows these fitted.
    • Does anyone have any idea how Buran got transported?

      Russia transported it on the back of a huge cargo jet. I don't remember the jet's designation, right now, but it is bigger than the U.S. Air Force's C-5 cargo jet. I think it held/holds a world record for its size.
    • The Buran shuttle was indeed transported like the NASA shuttle, atop a massive An-225 Mriya carrier aircraft with 6 jet engines(!).
      There is some info here [friends-partners.org]

      Also, a couple interesting Buran info sites:
      http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya5.htm [buran.ru]
      http://k26.com/buran/Info/A_Quick_Look/a_quick_loo k.html [k26.com]

    • Russia has the right idea (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GuyMannDude ( 574364 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:46AM (#3497123) Journal

      Perhaps this can be seen as a demise of their program, but it is offering more and more commercialization.

      I don't agree that this trend represents any demise of their program. Rather the Russians are just doing whatever they can to get the funding they need. During the cold war, the space race was largely propaganda for both the US and USSR. The space agencies in both countries got the funding they wanted because politicians were eager to "show off" to the rest of the world. After the end of the cold war, politicians decided that science wasn't worth funding anymore. The Russian science program, eager to continue their work, simply looked for non-state-sponsered funding sources. They feel no shame in accepting an ad from Pizza Hut on the side of their rocket or selling defunct machinery. Most Russians probably think it's funny. In the meantime, the American space program still longs for the good ol' days when they were considered a source of national pride. For them, they simply cannot bear the thought of begging the public for money. They would rather get by with less but "maintain their pride". In the meantime, lots of important scientific work goes undone because of their refusal to swallow their pride and ask for money from the private sector.

      I think the Russians have the right idea. It's time for NASA to realize that the glory days are over and they have to find new funding sources to continue their work.

      GMD

    • Re:Russia's Space Program. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by badvictor ( 113234 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @12:22PM (#3497393)

      As many have pointed out the space shuttle program was cancelled because it was inferior to the currently existing methods of transportation. The whole "selling off" trend that you percieve is simply the equivalent of digging in your garage and seeing what old crap you can sell before it becomes totally worthless. MIR has outlived its original planned mission many times over -- it was time for it to go.

      I think the Russian space program is simply streamlining -- getting rid of the old, useless things, and finding new streams of revenue, i.e. space tourism. Hardly the demise.

    • "even though they had a better shuttle design than NASA"

      How do you figure? The Buran seems to be inherently more expensive to operate than the STS. With the STS, all engines (both the STS main engines and the SRBs) are recoverable and resuable, and all you have to do is refuel the SRBs and make a new external tank. With the Buran, you have to build a new Engeria booster for every launch, and the Buran had no engines of its own.

      "Does anyone have any idea how Buran got transported?"

      From this article [friends-partners.org], it looks like they mostly used the An-225.

    • Does anyone have any idea how Buran got transported?

      Yes :) There's a cargo jet called the AN-225 (Antonov 225) - supposedly there are only like 3 and their primary purpose is to fly to air shows. Also called mria - you can find hords of pictures of it on the net - including some with the orbiter on top.

      BTW - there's some good pictures and videos of buran taking off and landing here: http://www.buran.ru/htm/molniya5.htm [buran.ru]
  • 1 1988 [nasa.gov] Russian [k26.com] Space Shuttle, only 237,986 miles, fully loaded, power steering, power aerobrakes, 4 RD-0120 Rocket Engines [lycos.co.uk], plus 4 boosters using a single single four-chamber RD-170 Kerosene/Liquid Oxygen Rocket Engine.

    Priced to move at only $6 million! Buy yours now!
  • ... casemod! That'd fit perfectly!
  • Do you think they would accept payment in Blue Jeans?

  • I'd buy it but.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by GOD_ALMIGHTY ( 17678 ) <curt DOT johnson AT gmail DOT com> on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:26AM (#3496969) Homepage
    I don't think I have cinder blocks big enough to put it on. It was hard enough finding some for that Mercury capsule I caught in my crab trap.

  • of course he'll want one (Score:5, Funny)

    by Xaoswolf ( 524554 ) <Xaoswolf&gmail,com> on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:28AM (#3496983) Homepage Journal
    Tom Cruise has been suggested in particular

    So that when Xenu returns to Teegeeack, he'll be far from those pesky H-bombs...

  • Per the article:

    "And though there are certainly people in the Southern California area who might be able to afford their own spaceplane -- Tom Cruise has been suggested in particular -- auction organizers are not really expecting it to sell."

    Tom Cruise...why Tom Cruise?

    Perhaps this reporter took his piloting abilities demonstrated in Top Gun [geocities.com] a bit too seriously...

    Then again, perhaps Mr. Cruise was merely cited as being a feasible candidate due to the simple fact that his illustrious Hollywood career has afforded him the wealth and fame to receive all of the best things in life...including his gorgeous girlfriend Penelope Cruz [penelope-cruz.net]!

    While the old adage that 'money can't buy you happiness' may be true, this is proof that it may be able to assist in the purchase of an opportunity to be one of the first to join the "Ten-Mile High Club" with a beautiful actress - if that isn't happiness, I don't know what is!

    But then again, perhaps I am simply missing the point...

  • Fuel gantry and launch control sold separately (Score:5, Funny)

    by ch-chuck ( 9622 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:29AM (#3496992) Homepage
    Wow, first they steal the US shuttle design, and now they're trying to sell it back! Those guys are learning the ways of capitalism [microsoft.com] pretty quick!

    • Stolen? NOT! (Score:5, Informative)

      by Fenris2001 ( 210117 ) <fenris&nmt,edu> on Friday May 10, 2002 @12:09PM (#3497287)
      OK, for those of you who think this is just a rip-off of NASA's Shuttle: It's not [astronautix.com]

      Most importantly:
      The American shuttle design was studied intensively by Russian rocket scientists, but important aspects of it were rejected based on Soviet engineering analysis and technology.
      Space hardware is notoriously NOT modular - a design that works on American solid-fuel boosters doesn't work on Russian liquid-fuel boosters. Furthermore, and more importantly, all of the control systems on Buran were designed and built solely by the Soviets. This allowed Burtan to do something the US Shuttle can't - fly to space and back unmanned.
      • Apparently the U.S. Shuttle can do one thing Buran can't: keep flying. Buran was a very expensive mistake by the Russians. From what I've heard their own engineers fought mightily against the program, but the powers that be insisted on keeping up with the Joneses in Houston.

        If I remember correctly, they cancelled a follow-on to Mir to help fund Buran. Imagine where they'd be if they'd listened to their own people and done the reverse.

  • Okay, I know this sounds like a stretch, and definitely not the stuff you normally hear on slashdot, but please hear me out.

    I think this could be a perfect opportunity for Linux.

    Remember the Slashdot PT Cruiser? Sure, it was stupid to those of us "in the know", but it drew a lot of readers to slashdot who have since become contributing and supporting members of the community.

    What about a Linux Russian Space Shuttle, with Tux as captain! It could be paid for by Linux, and maintained by volunteers: Just Like Linux!

    This is exactly what we need to raise Linux's profile, since we have failed to get companies to provide Linux with any decent games or applications, and printing is largely broken.

    If we don't take this opportunity while we still can, then you know who will...and call me crazy, but I wouldn't feel safe flying to the moon on M$ Shuttle!

    ;)

  • Well... as a friend has pointed out to me -- this is a BARGAIN time for highly trained russian aerospace engineers; China is grabbing them by the bucketfull; and the US should too (we have currently no indication that the US is.

    now, before anyone gets all patriotic / egotistic and claim that the US have smarter engineers anyway -- the russians have came up with a ton of stuff that the US tries to copy; their research in (other areas than aerospace, b/c i am late for work and do not have the time to sit down and think about this) ground effect aircraft / super-cavitation under-water crafts, etc, completely blows the us counterpart out of the water; besides that - russia makes huge rockets (N1), they never flew successfully, but dam* they are big and a pleasure to stare at... =)

  • Hey Man, Imagine Cruising in This! (Score:5, Funny)

    by NeuroManson ( 214835 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:34AM (#3497034) Homepage
    Install a thumping sound system, some crushed velvet interior fabrics, a hydraulic lift system to make it jump, and of course the prerequisite chromed chain steering wheel, and you can be a gangsta in STYYYYLE!
  • Where's the e-bay link to place my bid!!
  • If Tom Cruise does buy it, like the article says, won't the Scientologists then have use of this?

    Maybe they can use it to find Xenu?!?

  • Tom Cruise? (Score:3, Funny)

    by MongooseCN ( 139203 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:45AM (#3497115) Homepage
    Why would Tom Cruise want a space shuttle? Maybe he's going to use it to fly all the other high level scientologists to the home plant of Xenu so that they can use their mind powers to save from being mind controled slaves.

    This is Maverick! Xenu at 12:00! Fox-1!
    • heh. way back when I was in civil air patrol. We went out to fallon naval air station (you know the logical navy base in the center of nevada) - this is where the top gun school is. I was talking with one of the pilots who flew tom cruise around in his tomcat (and f-18) and he said that tom puked all over the back seat. on every flight. so they all laughed at him and made him clean up his own puke... they made sure that tom acutally cleaned it up as a rite of passage. Said he was a total wimp when it came to actually flying....
  • I mean, look at how badly it copies their Space Shuttle? They'll probably find some DMCA violation and use it against anyone who has it shipped to the states.
  • I wrote about this [tripod.com] back in the late 80s, and got it published in this e-zine in 1994. (Unzip, and scan down to "Earth Bound Misfit, I")

    Only thing was that, in my story, the US Space Program went belly up due to Congressional cuts, the Soviet Union (and its Space Program) was alive and well, and the Endeavour was built and never flown.

    BTW, the dedication at the end -- that was to my now-ex. :P

  • Great! There goes the neighborhood... (Score:3, Funny)

    by hotgrits ( 183266 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @11:50AM (#3497146) Homepage
    Just when you get your 727 [airplanehome.com] up on blocks, some bozo next door wants to put in a shuttle.
  • Wow, with the money Mark Shuttleworth spent for a 5-day space flight he could've bought 3 of these instead!
  • Am I the only one that remembers the late-1998 ShuttleGNU / LinShuttle project/joke? I can find very few references to it [google.com] anymore, and the original page [inaxx.net] is long gone, unfortunately. The basic premise was that a Russian shuttle was up for auction, and a project was being started to write all of the software necessary to control it -- it would be the first open-source space mission. At least, that was the story. :)

    So, hey, who wants to start the GnuShuttle project on SourceForge? :)

    -Waldo Jaquith

  • Private space travel? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by theolein ( 316044 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @12:07PM (#3497271) Journal
    While the idea of some Hollywood start having one of these is ridiculous, the idea of selling one to a private enterprise company would be a huge boost for breaking the monopoly that governments hold on space travel. I'm sure that in the US it should not be too difficult for a space industries startup to gather $6 million from investors. The problem of course would be infrastructure (boosters, fuel, launchpads, tracking stations) but it would be a lot further down the road than current efforts are.

    The Buran actually flew and according to most reports is very reliable compared to the space shuttle (12 years of testing, can fly automatically).

    The ability for smaller firms to get into space would surely be paid back in terms of travel, industry etc.
    • The Buran actually flew and according to most reports is very reliable compared to the space shuttle (12 years of testing, can fly automatically).

      In fact experimentally, Buran is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT reliable!

      ;-)

      p.s. not sure where you got the 12 years of testing from... quite arguably it only has a few days of testing.

      • http://www.friends-partners.org/mwade/craft/buran. htm
        • At the end of the day, the only testing that really counts is whether it works when you use it for real.

          Any other metric is at best a proxy for the real thing. The space shuttle is currently slightly better than 99% reliable. Before Challenger the accident estimates were anywhere upto a million to one. Afterwards, sane people dropped it to between 50:1 and 200:1 or so.

          The Buran had a measured 100% reliability, but since it has only been flown once, the true reliability is unknown.

          p.s. great link; a truly great vehicle; I like it much more than the Shuttle design.

    • The Buran actually flew and according to most reports is very reliable compared to the space shuttle (12 years of testing, can fly
      automatically).


      Say what? Buran flew once, repeat, once. Based on that, how exactly are you making the leap to say that it's "very reliable compared to the space shuttle"? One flight tells you precisely nothing about how the hardware ages over time, what the likely failures will be, what the cost of ongoing maintenence is, and a whole lot more.


      Besides which, they're only selling the hardware here. If you want to do anything with it, you'd need to buy all the engineers from the program that made it, and all of their records, software, special equipment, and more. You think experimental space craft come with nice easy-to-read owners' manuals? It would be vastly, tremendously, hugely more expensive to get Buran back into flight condition than to start from scratch and build something capable of using existing US infrastructure.

  • Put a bigblock Cheby in't, hydrolifters, gold 17's, chain steering wheel

    this lowrider gonna beat ya MoFo ass !

  • What does God need with a starship?

  • Finally something for Bill to buy. (Score:4, Funny)

    by neo ( 4625 ) on Friday May 10, 2002 @12:36PM (#3497501)
    What should M$ do with all their extra "on hand" cash? They should buy a space shuttle! Imagine the profits to be had by knocking down other peoples satalites!! Screw the anti-trust trial, they can't touch you in space. Make whatever you want and just beam in down to retailers.

  • my garage is so gonna worship me when i pull up in this and say to the attendant "fill it up"
  • The next time Hollywood comes out with an asteroid-hitting-Earth type drama, they can blow up an actual shuttle for $6 million, thus reducing their special effects budget by half.
  • Out of curiosity I searched Ebay for Russian Space [ebay.com] junk and came up with 112 items including someone selling a piece of a Russian Satellite [ebay.com] for $12,000. Although currently no Space Shuttles are listed.
  • How much you wanna bet that the company in Russia that these guys are selling the shuttle for, is really a front for the Russian mob?

  • given that it has jet engines, can this shuttle do a horizontal take-off? I'm sure it wouldn't be able to fly very far (unless you modify the cargo bay to hold massive fuel tanks) - but what's to stop someone from converting this into a useful airplane with a few hundred thou?
  • There is no way this is a real shuttle.

    If it was an operational shuttle $6 mill would way too little to ask for it.

    During the testing of buran several early prototypes were made. Some were just an empty shell and were used to test the rigidity of the structure. The one thats a coffee house in leningrad is one of those.

    Others were actually used for flight testing, that is they could flyintheatmosphere,but still were not space capable. You can tell them apart because they have jet engines bolted on to them.

    So yeah the space shutlle in question is certainly one of those models.

Slashdot Top Deals

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"

Close