It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Xubieee....why don't you tell the full story of the 'Russian reflectors'???
Hmmmmm?????
Retroreflectors were placed on the Moon by the astronauts of Apollo 11, 14 and 15 in 1969 and 1971. All Apollo reflectors are still functional. Two more, built in France, were carried on Soviet Lunokhod remotely controlled rovers in 1970 and 1973. Lunokhod 2’s reflector is still functional today. Lunokhod 1 also carried a reflector, but returns from it have not been detected since early in its mission . It should be noted that many references to the Soviet missions mistakenly state the opposite, that Lunokhod 2’s reflector cannot be used but Lunokhod 1’s can be. It is not known why Lunokhod 1 cannot be detected today. Possibilities may include a bad orien-tation (severe tilt on a crater slope?), excessive con-tamination by regolith (perhaps thrown up by wheels during efforts to free the rover from a steep crater slope on 13 April 1971, or other similar events), shad-owing by a partly closed ‘lid’ or other rover structure, or uncertainties in location causing erroneous target-ing.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Exuberant1
They can be placed using unmanned missions.
That is how the Russians got their reflectors on the moon.
Xubieee....why don't you tell the full story of the 'Russian reflectors'???
Hmmmmm?????
Originally posted by dragonridr
He doesnt want to because he knows they worked for less than 10 min and never worked again.
Originally posted by ArMaP
That looks more like an inverted Netherlands' flag or a sideways French flag than a Russian flag.
As always.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
Armap,
Now you are just nit-picking.
That was why I only talked about the flag.
...And ignoring the Buran shuttle in the second patch...
First flight
The only orbital launch of Buran occurred at 3:00 UTC on 15 November 1988 from Baikonur Cosmodrome Site 110/37. It was lifted into orbit unmanned by the specially designed Energia booster rocket. The life support system was partially installed and no software was installed to run the computer display screens.
The shuttle orbited the Earth twice in 206 minutes of flight. It performed an automated landing on the shuttle runway at Baikonur Cosmodrome where, despite a lateral wind speed of 61.2 kilometres (38.0 mi) /hour, it landed only 3 metres (9.8 ft) laterally and 10 metres (33 ft) longitudinally from the target.
Video and speculations
Part of the launch was televised but the actual lift-off was not shown. This led to some speculation that the mission may have been fabricated, and that the subsequent landing may not have been from orbit but from a shuttle-carrying aircraft, as with the Space Shuttle Enterprise. The launch video has since been released to the public, confirming that the shuttle did indeed lift off with the poor weather conditions described by the Soviet media at the time easily seen.
Projected flights
In 1989, it was projected that Buran would have an unmanned second flight in 1993, with a duration of 15–20 days. Due to the cancellation of the project, this never took place. Several scientists have been looking into trying to revive the Buran program, especially after the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. Currently, none of these plans have come to further fruition; however, there have recently been new interests in renewing the program temporarily while Russia struggles with the CSTS and Kliper design stages.
Destruction
On May 12, 2002, a hangar housing Buran in Kazakhstan collapsed, due to poor maintenance . The collapse killed eight workers and destroyed the orbiter as well as a mock-up of an Energia booster rocket.
The Soviet-era Buran space programme, mothballed 20 years ago, may be revived. With NASA about to retire its ageing fleet of space shuttles, there is a pressing need for viable space transport.
Two decades ago the Soviet space shuttle Buran blasted off on its first and only orbital flight. Just a few years later, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the programme was shelved.
After nearly a decade in a hangar, the only Buran that went into space was destroyed when a roof collapsed at Baikonur launch facility in 2002.
Although the Buran project ended prematurely, not all the ideas from it were left buried. Some of the technologies developed at the time are now used in everyday life. Fore example, several heat-resistant materials used to make deep-fryers are a direct result of the research done during Buran's development.
Buran technologies may make an unexpected return to the space industry as well.
Because NASA will soon retire its ageing space shuttle fleet, some American and Russian scientists are beginning to think of ways to revive the Buran programme.
It may be more economical than developing an entirely new spacecraft from scratch.
It's off-topic, but as that is something that puzzles many people I will tell you.
Originally posted by spikey
Why isn't your ATS registration date showing up under your name i wonder??
Originally posted by weedwhacker
The Buran???
Well....not a very reliable 'Contingency' system, hmmm?
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by weedwhacker
The Buran???
Well....not a very reliable 'Contingency' system, hmmm?
The only problem with your LOGIC is that you only consider one set of data... the data that best suits your theory
Buran destroyed? Who says? Parked maybe
Buran OK TVA
55°43'43.39"N 37°35'46.95"E
This one is dismantled... I hear they are selling pieces
Buran 2.01 "Baikal"
+55° 50' 28.95", +37° 27' 58.34"
Buran OK-ML-1
45°55'10.15"N 63°18'35.99"E
Buran OK-GLI
In pieces ready for shipping
+26° 11' 54.03", +50° 36' 8.74"
That is only the ones spotted on Google Earth... doesn't include the hidden ones or the LKS
[edit on 18-7-2009 by zorgon]
Originally posted by Silk
Its time for the followers of a French Students myth to lie back and accept reality
Originally posted by zorgon
So NASA says its a spacecraft and all the Apollo believers run and create a page that says "See" Its not a rock, its proof..." and now they tell me "Oh yeah but this... Yuppers its a SPACECRAFT"
But when Zorgon says "Its an artifact on Eros, and Zorgon's picture is much better resolution than NASA's, those same skeptics say "Its just a rock" even though we also landed a probe on Eros
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by zorgon
It's impossible to tell from either image what each is. Both could be rocks. The difference is that we know there are vehicles on the Moon. The difference is that we know exactly where they are. The difference is that the Eagle is exactly where it's supposed to be so we know it is not a rock.
It's impossible to tell from either image what each is. Both could be rocks.
Buran OK TVA
55°43'43.39"N 37°35'46.95"E
Originally posted by zorgon
In response to this resident expert Phage had this to say...
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by zorgon
It's impossible to tell from either image what each is. Both could be rocks. The difference is that we know there are vehicles on the Moon. The difference is that we know exactly where they are. The difference is that the Eagle is exactly where it's supposed to be so we know it is not a rock.
Originally posted by SLAYER69
I like Phage but "Expert"?