Energia - Buran Space Transportation System

[Incarn]

Functionality test of the docking unit

 

[Incarn]

Fibonacci and I are continuing to experiment with using artificial intelligence to restore historical photographs.
I want to understand just how much AI can be used without losing the essential content—to find the point where the pros outweigh the cons.

Sometimes the results are quite good—here’s an example of my original photo and the AI-processed result:

The colors aren’t accurate everywhere (for example, in the last photo, the fabric on the nozzles of the Buran’s main engines should be red, and the car in the distance by the left wheel should be yellow with a red stripe on the side), but overall, the image is quite impressive.

And we’re continuing))

 

[Archibald]

It is an intelligent and respectful use of A.I so why not ?

 

[NMaude]

It is an intelligent and respectful use of A.I so why not ?

How AI should be used.

 

[Fibonacci]

The colors aren’t accurate everywhere (for example, in the last photo, the fabric on the nozzles of the Buran’s main engines should be red, and the car in the distance by the left wheel should be yellow with a red stripe on the side), but overall, the image is quite impressive.

And we’re continuing))

 

[Incarn]

The chassis is drawn incorrectly here—the wheels are below the line of the sand dunes and shouldn't be visible...

 

[Fibonacci]

The chassis is drawn incorrectly here—the wheels are below the line of the sand dunes and shouldn't be visible...

Ahhhh! Got it. The image is entering repair now...!

(....)

Done! Image repaired!

 

[Incarn]

Source:

https://www.facebook.com/vadim.lukashevich.7/posts/pfbid0339cNUurJi3JBZTCxme5amQ7uFTdLcQnqbLuRmXNRmEKikfxhBj6K8Hvrkv9F4Xp9l

View: https://www.facebook.com/vadim.lukashevich.7/posts/pfbid0339cNUurJi3JBZTCxme5amQ7uFTdLcQnqbLuRmXNRmEKikfxhBj6K8Hvrkv9F4Xp9l

Yesterday we missed an interesting anniversary—39 years ago, on May 15, 1987, the first launch of the new Soviet super-heavy-lift carrier rocket “Energia” took place from Baikonur, carrying the “Polyus” spacecraft—the name given to the demonstration model of the 17F19DM (“Skif-DM”), weighing 79.6 tons and equipped with a megawatt-class excimer laser, which was developed as part of the “Skif” program in accordance with the tactical and technical requirements of the USSR Ministry of Defense (Main Directorate of Space Equipment) No. K-00561.
To mislead the enemy, the words “Mir-2” were painted in large letters on the black surface of the “Skif-DM” so that they would be visible from space during the horizontal transport of the “Polyus” to the launch complex.

On that day, the rocket performed normally, delivering “Polyus” to a transfer trajectory at an altitude of 110 kilometers, where it was supposed to fire its own engine and, with two thrust pulses, enter its target orbit. But due to a malfunction in the orientation system, the engine fired, delivering the specified thrust in the wrong direction, and “Polyus,” having flown along a suborbital trajectory, fell into the Pacific Ocean.
There is much that is interesting and still mysterious about this story; if you’re interested, check out the relevant section on my website https://www.buran.ru/htm/cargo.htm or the memoirs of “Energia” chief designer Boris Gubanov https://www.buran.ru/htm/35-3.htm
But the most interesting and detailed account of the entire project, including the launch, can be found in Konstantin Lantratov’s article “The Star Wars That Never Was”—this manuscript sat in a safe under two locks for many years until I posted it on my website, https://www.buran.ru/other/skif-lan.pdf, at my own risk

But here’s what I’ll say—the true story of “Polus” (also known as “Skif”) has yet to be written. If you look at everything that has been published on this topic, it all boils down to the fact that the “Energia-Buran” system was created to launch a reusable orbital spacecraft into space, and since ‘Energia’ could fly without “Buran,” in the first test launch it flew with “Polus,” and subsequently, “Energia” was supposed to fly mainly with ‘Buran’ spacecraft and occasionally with “Skif” spacecraft.

In reality, it was exactly the opposite.
Yes, it all began with “Buran” as a response to the American Space Shuttle, but when it became clear after further study that the shuttle concept with two solid-fuel boosters and three main engines on the spacecraft was flawed (it was significantly inferior in payload capacity when launching from the latitude of Baikonur) and there was no point in repeating it—a decision was made to create a full-fledged launch vehicle with a side-mounted payload of up to 105 tons. This payload could have been either the reusable “Buran” or an independent payload with its own propulsion system. This is how the “Buran-T” variant emerged, which (note!) became the dominant one.
In fact, starting in 1983, the priority “Buran-T” was developed under the 11K26 program, while the 11F35 “Buran” winged spacecraft became secondary. For example, by the time of the first “Buran” launch in November 1988, plans for using the 11K26 system through the year 2000 called for four “Buran-T” launches for every “Buran” launch.
It was no coincidence that in May 1987, during a visit to Baikonur, Mikhail Gorbachev told the test engineers: “We are unlikely to find a use for the spacecraft, but the rocket will come in handy”—he was referring specifically to the “Buran-T.”
And the story of the “Buran-T,” which remained in the shadow of the Buran’s triumphant but solitary flight, has remained unknown...

I’m not telling you what everyone already knows, but rather what only I know. That’s why, along with the photo of “Energia” and “Polyus” at the launch complex from my website www.buran.ru, I’m publishing for the first time an excerpt from a document on “Buran-T” that sheds a great deal of light on the Soviet program to develop a reusable space transportation system.

Thus, the launch of “Energia” with “Polyus” 39 years ago was the first flight test of “Buran-T,” still without the cargo transport module (CTM).
I will add that according to the (still) classified Resolution of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated December 19, 1981, No. 1206-371, the first two launches of “Energia” in 1985–1986 were to have been with mock-ups of the orbital spacecraft (which are now sitting at Baikonur, owned by Kazakhstan), and only the third launch was supposed to be the first launch of the “Buran-T” in 1987, but the development, testing, and trials of the spacecraft took too long, and the first launch was of the “Energia” flight test model (6SL) with ‘Polyus’—the prototype of the “Buran-T.”
I should note that it launched within the timeframe set by Government Decree No. 1206-371.

 

[flateric]

Cheapo
https://portal-da.ru/objects/575313...romnoy-tehnike-odu-orbitalnogo-korablya-buran

 

[galopujacy_jez]

Cheapo

a perfect decoration for my squash-court-sized coffee table

 

[Incarn]

We are continuing our restoration of low-quality historical photographs. In this case, these are photos taken with a “Smena” film camera by Deputy Flight Director Sergei Grachev from an earthen trench near the runway. Here are the original images and the results—you’re the first to see them:

 

[Incarn]

We continue to refine and improve the “Bolid” docking module, ensuring full compatibility with all possible docking configurations:

 

[galopujacy_jez]

We continue to refine and improve the “Bolid” docking module, ensuring full compatibility with all possible docking configurations:

Would the Bolid design use the emergency separation motors from ships of the "Second Series"?

 

[galopujacy_jez]

Two lovely photos with orbiter 2K during the 16-30 May 1991 rollout to pad 110/37 from the archive of electrical engineer Elena Pronina.
P.S. added perspective and color corrected versions

 

[galopujacy_jez]

New version of my Zarya article on The Space Review, with lots of new information on the 7K-SM and Zarya itself. (Thank you Vadim!)

Zarya: the three lives of the propulsively landed Super-Soyuz

 

[Incarn]

Two lovely photos with orbiter 2K during the 16-30 May 1991 rollout to pad 110/37 from the archive of electrical engineer Elena Pronina.
P.S. added perspective and color corrected versions

Fibonacci magic using magical spells and complex magical prompts from the higher mind (AI):



))))))

 

[Fibonacci]

A bit of fanart!
Wallpaper: 2560x1440 pixel
Buran at Baikonur
AI image and original image

 

[Fibonacci]

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25PU & Buran.
November 15, 1988.
Original image and image processed with AI.
Source: @Incarn

 

[KRRRL]

We continue to refine and improve the “Bolid” docking module, ensuring full compatibility with all possible docking configurations:

Hi, since Skif and Buran programs were close, maybe you know something about "СКУС" solid motors on Skif spacecrafts? (The ones, that should cancel all oscillations after core stage separation).

From this article (https://www.buran.ru/other/skif-lan...qTQANxdm_iqdchEgpw_aem_80IFK1ZOpPllQbuiC1mcZw) I understood that there should be 2 blocks of 2 solid engines somewhere near the laser exhaust system.
So, on the photos they're 4 small blocks (fairings?) around Polyus a bit above "pants" exhaust system.
Could it be them? (Maybe by 2 blocks it means left and right pairs?)

If yes, how many nozzles inside does it have in each block and how are they arranged?
As I understood there should be 3 sets of engines, so if it's basically an orientation system with nozzles installed at angle relative to the "blocks" surface. So 4 nozzles for the first set (all three axis. Nozzles pointing forward/backward and to the sides), 2 nozzles for second correction (Roll, maybe with nozzles above the ones for the roll from first set) and 4 nozzles for the third set(For the Pitch and Yaw, looking forward/backward, next the the Pitch/yaw nozzles from the first set)?

Look at my pretty bad sketch. Red arrows is first set, green is second set and blue is third set

 

[Incarn]

Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25PU & Buran.
November 15, 1988.
Original image and image processed with AI.
Source: @Incarn

I’ve made a few adjustments to a photo from the archive of Sergei Grachev, the acting flight director at the orbital spacecraft’s landing complex, which was posted by Fibonacci—I tweaked the color balance a bit in Photoshop, removing the magenta tint:

And here are a couple of new photos—the original and the version processed using AI and Photoshop:

 

[galopujacy_jez]

@Incarn I was wondering if you have more information on the geometry of the airframe you can share, specifically the shape of the fuselage and wings and how they're blended. I know the basics (78/45 degree double delta, 10 degree trailing edge sweep, 12% thickness at 40% chord, fuselage with 25m radius on bottom surface, 14 degree cylindrical undercut, etc.) and the shape of the aft fuselage from the drawings from your website, but i'm struggling to find more information on the wings (profile, twist, leading edge radii etc.) and the forward part of the fuselage. (as in: actual numbers instead of simplified diagrams and distorted blueprints)

 

[World B4]

I don’t understand the point of 2 docking systems, with one in a place where an accident could jeopardize the heat shield. What sort of mission was in mind?

 

[galopujacy_jez]

I don’t understand the point of 2 docking systems, with one in a place where an accident could jeopardize the heat shield. What sort of mission was in mind?

two docking systems? perhaps you mean the two ONA high-gain narrow beam antennas, one of which deploys through the heat shield?

 

[Michel Van]

more Picture of one of Buran orbiter
https://buranarchive.space/index?/category/260-at_zhukovsky_14102021=

 

[Fencer]

Here's another story about Buran you might not know.
...Obviously, the cosmodrome was highly classified—directive documents (from government decrees to orders to military units) on "comprehensive measures to counteract engineering and technical personnel"—as "foreign technical intelligence" was called—were strictly observed. But the management wanted to keep at least something as a memento, and over time, personal cameras began appearing at Baikonur so their owners could secretly photograph themselves against the backdrop of the "product." As Sergei Grachev, a flight dispatcher on duty at Yubileyny Airfield (the Buran landing complex), later told me: "I see that people have started taking secret photographs." "So we decided to do something ourselves..." ...Deep earthen trenches had been dug along the runway in case the Buran missed the runway on landing—so that airfield personnel who had not been evacuated could take refuge in them. So Sergei Grachev and his colleague Boris Sedyshev decided to take refuge in them, spreading out along the runway and taking Smena film cameras with them. Then came the instructions: as soon as the Buran emerged from the low clouds, they were to lie face down on the ground at the bottom of the trench. After a pre-arranged pause, they were to carefully peer over the parapet and take a few photographs, as best they could, lying on their stomachs on the damp earth. Sergei Grachev was less fortunate—he was closer to the end of the runway, and the Buran quickly passed him at an altitude of several dozen meters. But Boris Sedyshev was approaching the end of Buran's flight and photographed the ship, still glowing with plasma, from close range. The ship majestically approached him, dropped its braking parachutes, and paused, as if posing. At that moment, Boris Sedyshev was closest to the ship, which had just returned from space... TASS photojournalists were further away, and the close-up shots appeared later, which is why Boris Sedyshev's photographs of Buran resemble Buzz Aldrin's first pictures from the Moon. You are seeing them for the first time.

https://www.facebook.com/vadim.lukashevich.7/posts/pfbid02MQJpnKcvcv19M8U1JX5QAUhXWfPwN3pWJQx2wPjxnHnVaRb3o1K8ei97a28U2EV7l

View: https://www.facebook.com/vadim.lukashevich.7/posts/pfbid02MQJpnKcvcv19M8U1JX5QAUhXWfPwN3pWJQx2wPjxnHnVaRb3o1K8ei97a28U2EV7l

 

[Incarn]

@Incarn I was wondering if you have more information on the geometry of the airframe you can share, specifically the shape of the fuselage and wings and how they're blended. I know the basics (78/45 degree double delta, 10 degree trailing edge sweep, 12% thickness at 40% chord, fuselage with 25m radius on bottom surface, 14 degree cylindrical undercut, etc.) and the shape of the aft fuselage from the drawings from your website, but i'm struggling to find more information on the wings (profile, twist, leading edge radii etc.) and the forward part of the fuselage. (as in: actual numbers instead of simplified diagrams and distorted blueprints)

I don't have the exact figures for the fillet radii and wing profile on hand—I'll have to look them up in the documents.
If I find them, I'll let you know.

 

[galopujacy_jez]

some progress. i made a decent approximation based on the information available to me

 

[KRRRL]

Hi, since Skif and Buran programs were close, maybe you know something about "СКУС" solid motors on Skif spacecrafts? (The ones, that should cancel all oscillations after core stage separation).

@Incarn do you have any info about it?
Sorry for being a bit impatient

 

[martinbayer]

Buran suffered from the same economical reusablity/expendability mix issues as the space shuttle, it lacked the same justification of clear missions, and it was just one of the last gasps of the dying Russian communist regime.

 

[Incarn]

@Incarn do you have any info about it?
Sorry for being a bit impatient

No, I don't have any specific information about those engines

 

[Incarn]

Buran suffered from the same economical reusablity/expendability mix issues as the space shuttle, it lacked the same justification of clear missions, and it was just one of the last gasps of the dying Russian communist regime.

The Shuttle was developed by NASA as a versatile and sole national launch vehicle in a market economy, while the “Buran” was developed as a strategic military spacecraft for conducting combat operations in space and from space against Earth, based on tactical and technical requirements set by the military (approved by the USSR Minister of Defense) within a planned economy, for specific military objectives. If you are unaware of Buran’s objectives, that does not mean they did not exist.

When it comes to economic feasibility and the objectives of the Space Shuttle and the “Buran,” they cannot be compared at all. It is pointless to compare a tank and a bus.

For example, can you name the number and yield of nuclear explosions that the Shuttle was supposed to withstand at the launch complex according to the regulatory documents governing its development? And how many and what kind of nuclear explosions in space was the Shuttle orbiter supposed to withstand without suffering irreversible failures of its onboard electronics?
For “Buran,” this (and much more) was specified in the 270 requirements of the USSR Ministry of Defense, No. K-00561

 

[Fibonacci]

Fresh out of the AI oven!
A stunning image of the Buran landing at Baikonur Cosmodrome. Truly a feast for the eyes and a real treat for all the Buran-lovers out there…!
Source: video capture

 

[KRRRL]

No, I don't have any specific information about those engines

Sad.
Thanks anyway

 

[Incarn]

some progress. i made a decent approximation based on the information available to me

Send me a private message and let me know what you want to do and why — I might be able to help you with your questions.

 

[Incarn]

Fresh out of the AI oven!
A stunning image of the Buran landing at Baikonur Cosmodrome. Truly a feast for the eyes and a real treat for all the Buran-lovers out there…!
Source: video capture

The lines on the main and brake parachutes are all tangled up...
I’m using red to show where the lines shouldn’t be.
Blue shows where they should be.
Note: On the lower main parachute, the lines shouldn’t be visible at all. On the upper one, they should all emerge from a single center (green dot).

But the angle is, of course, very dramatic!

 

[Fibonacci]

The lines on the main and brake parachutes are all tangled up...
I’m using red to show where the lines shouldn’t be.
Blue shows where they should be.
Note: On the lower main parachute, the lines shouldn’t be visible at all. On the upper one, they should all emerge from a single center (green dot).

Hi Vadim!!,
That’s entirely on me. When I publish these images, I should clearly state that they are purely for recreational and artistic purposes, not technical or historical ones.
I usually start with very low-quality originals that are heavily damaged or almost destroyed. Even with all its immense computing power, AI simply cannot recover 100% of the lost details. That information is gone forever.
That said, I still believe these AI-generated images offer a very good and compelling approximation of what reality must have looked like. They bring these historic moments back to life in a way that, while not perfect, can be quite emotional and inspiring for those of us who love the Buran story.

 

[galopujacy_jez]

That’s entirely on me. When I publish these images, I should clearly state that they are purely for recreational and artistic purposes, not technical or historical ones.

I think it might be worth considering to always put a watermark on those images indicating they're AI. They're already making the rounds on Reddit with people thinking they're real, next to posts with real photos that people think are AI or KSP...

 

[Incarn]

Hi Vadim!!,
That’s entirely on me. When I publish these images, I should clearly state that they are purely for recreational and artistic purposes, not technical or historical ones.
I usually start with very low-quality originals that are heavily damaged or almost destroyed. Even with all its immense computing power, AI simply cannot recover 100% of the lost details. That information is gone forever.
That said, I still believe these AI-generated images offer a very good and compelling approximation of what reality must have looked like. They bring these historic moments back to life in a way that, while not perfect, can be quite emotional and inspiring for those of us who love the Buran story.

Is it possible to edit this picture to fix the parachute lines?
It's such a beautiful angle...

 

[Fibonacci]

Is it possible to edit this picture to fix the parachute lines?
It's such a beautiful angle...

Yes Vadim, no problem at all!
I’ve also been trying these past few days to create a size comparison (“Humans vs Buran”), but I couldn’t find the exact diameter of the Buran’s main landing gear wheels. The AIs I asked say the diameter is somewhere between 1.10 m and 1.30 m. So I went with that range and made this (very approximate) comparison that I’m sharing below.
The Buran really is an enormous machine. Some people who managed to sneak into the MZK building at Baikonur said it’s almost impossible to put into words just how massive these vehicles are — especially when you’re standing right underneath one.

 

[Incarn]

Yes Vadim, no problem at all!
I’ve also been trying these past few days to create a size comparison (“Humans vs Buran”), but I couldn’t find the exact diameter of the Buran’s main landing gear wheels. The AIs I asked say the diameter is somewhere between 1.10 m and 1.30 m. So I went with that range and made this (very approximate) comparison that I’m sharing below.
The Buran really is an enormous machine. Some people who managed to sneak into the MZK building at Baikonur said it’s almost impossible to put into words just how massive these vehicles are — especially when you’re standing right underneath one.

Here you can see the scale of a person relative to the ship and its landing gear https://www.buran.ru/video/mpg/on_pk_noresize.mp4