Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Energia Reveals New Russian Spacecraft

timothy posted more than 9 years ago | from the it's-only-a-model dept.

Space 356

colonist writes "Russian space officials unveiled a full-scale model of the Kliper spaceship. If funding is provided, Kliper will replace the Soyuz space capsule as Russia's human space vehicle. The spaceship, designed by RKK Energia, is twice the size of the Soyuz and will carry a crew of six. It has two main parts: a reusable re-entry craft with a lifting body design, and an orbital module. Like the Soyuz, it has a rocket to pull the spaceship away from the launch vehicle in an emergency. See this photo gallery, Encyclopedia Astronautica and RussianSpaceWeb.com."

cancel ×

356 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

My question is (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963837)

How come Michael Simms didn't kill himself as promised when Kerry lost the election? Will someone please put him out of his misery.

The US's Space Program (5, Insightful)

Icarus1919 (802533) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963849)

There is nothing more depressing to me than listening to how other industrial countries' space programs are flourishing while ours stagnates. It's as if America has lost its sense of humanity. It doesn't even really care about exploration anymore. Or apparently anything. All it wants to do is consume. Sigh....

Re:The US's Space Program (4, Insightful)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963875)

There is nothing more depressing to me than listening to how other industrial countries' space programs are flourishing while ours stagnates.

Especially considering that Russia has a mere fraction of the money available to us.

Re:The US's Space Program (5, Funny)

th1ckasabr1ck (752151) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963885)

It doesn't even really care about exploration anymore.

What do you mean? We're exploring Iraq.

Re:The US's Space Program (1)

double-oh three (688874) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963920)

I knew I shouldn't have given Bush that biography of Christopher Columbus.

Re:The US's Space Program (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963986)

Exploring or exploding Iraq?

Re:The US's Space Program (1, Funny)

diablobsb (444773) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964094)

you misspelled "exploiting"

Re:The US's Space Program (2, Insightful)

magarity (164372) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964238)

And you misspelled 'liberating'.

Re:The US's Space Program (1)

JoneK (833819) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964189)

;D hahaha ...

Re:The US's Space Program (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963893)

Yeah, but how come Michael Simms didn't kill himself, as promised, after Kerry lost the election?

By the way, the Euro-peons haven't even put a man into space, and Beagle was a disaster, so how exactly is our space program stagnating?

Re:The US's Space Program (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963938)

The same way it was stagnating a long time ago when Russia put Sputnik up, put the first dog in space, the first man in space, the first woman in space, shot down your U2, etc....
I guess it takes a while for you guys to wake up.

Re:The US's Space Program (-1, Flamebait)

Freexe (717562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963904)

There is nothing more depressing to me than finding out that 'the most powerful country' in the world voted Bush back in. It's as if America has lost its sense of humanity. He doesn't even really care about anyone else. Or anything really. All he wants to do is control. Sigh...

Re:The US's Space Program (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963942)

I'm happy about Bush's re-election. I love when Euro-peons and Canuckleheads get their panties in a bunch because they think they have some say in US elections. Remember, we're still top-dog on the planet. Euro-peons live like 3rd worlders compared to us. Look at their housing, cars, and income. Sweden has a per-capita GDP of 26,800 while the US has a per-capita GDP of 37,800. Socialism at it's finest losers.

Re:The US's Space Program (0, Offtopic)

Freexe (717562) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963991)

Well we have free healthcare for all ;)

Re:The US's Space Program (0, Offtopic)

The_Hun (693418) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964244)

because they think they have some say in US elections Yes, they have. The result of the US elections are felt all over the world, that's why almost everyone has an opinion about Ami politics. And many of the a ROTW-people (ROTW to you, because to me - here in Europe - you are the ROTW fellah) even have the power of affecting US politics - think of Russian "businessmen" paying for presidential campaigns or terrorists with well timed attacks.

Re:The US's Space Program (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963906)

It's as if America has lost its sense of humanity.

What has space exploration to do with humanity?

Re:The US's Space Program (0)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963982)

I wonder if you've noticed, but they did send human beings in space after Laika the dog and Albert the monkey...

Humanity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963910)

It's as if America has lost its sense of humanity.

Humanity? Personally, I hope the goal of space exploration is inhumanity. We can explore humanity all we want right here on earth.

Re:The US's Space Program (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963913)

Doing things ourselves is hard. We might fail. We'll attack other countries instead to keep people's minds off our own failures. And you can't say we're failing at that, it's unpatriotic.

Re:The US's Space Program (4, Informative)

voice of unreason (231784) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963941)

Um, this isn't "flourishing". Read the article. The ship in question hasn't been built yet, and the Russian government has not yet agreed to give the program the budget required. If Energia were to actually build this ship, then you would have a point. As it is, this is nothing more than a really good idea that will probably never be realized.

Re:The US's Space Program (5, Interesting)

WIAKywbfatw (307557) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964191)

Well, it's a bit hard to build something as complex as a spacecraft before you've designed it first, and that's the step that's just been taken with Kliper.

Your retort would be more valid if NASA was actually making similar progress: ie, designing possible STS replacements and giving its own manned programme some sort of direction. As it is, NASA seems to be (if you'll pardon the pun) in a terminally decaying orbit.

Whereas NASA's manned programme once had a clear vision and message - using the STS in conjunction with the ISS as a stepping stone to more orbitally-based research and then on to bigger and better things - now it's unclear where exactly NASA is heading.

Manned missions to the Moon? To Mars? Well, sure, those have been mentioned in "rallying the troops" kind of fashion after the Columbia disaster but where's the substance?

The reality of the situation is that the STS is grounded, and even when (if) it returns to flight status it's going to be a lame duck. And I don't even want to contemplate how disasterous another shuttle loss would be.

So, relatively speaking, given the inactivity of NASA, this Russian programme is flourishing. I don't know about you, but I'm glad that people with as much experience of manned spaceflight as the Russians haven't cashed out of this game just yet and are still willing, scientifically if not politically, to develop the technologies to further our exploration of space.

Re:The US's Space Program (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963961)

Hey maybe we can buy the next gen launch vehicle from these guys instead of spending fat flow building our own expensive stuff ... and concentrate on other things such as Mars mission or earth monitoring / space probes.

Re:The US's Space Program (5, Insightful)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964020)

Wow, are you just deliberately being anti-NASA or do you not know what's going on?

Has the shuttle program been all it was cracked up to be? Probably not. But it does give us signifigant capabilities that other "industrial countries' space programs" still don't have.

Know any other countries that could send not one, but two different robotic rovers to Mars and control them for over a year?

Hell, for that matter, just which other industrial countries are even doing anything in space right now? Ok, Russia--let's see if they find the funds to put these things in use. China--ok, China is using borrowed Russian tech to get where we were 40 years ago. True they do show more nationalistic pride in space endeavours, but then again so did we--40 years ago.

I'm not a NASA apologist--I for one think the future of space exploration will be best served by private hands...but we're not there yet. I don't see the point of bemoaning how far behind we are, when no one actually competes with us anymore (Russians simply don't have the cash anymore).

Re:The US's Space Program (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964194)

"Has the shuttle program been all it was cracked up to be? Probably not. "

Has been at least twice.

"But it does give us signifigant capabilities that other "industrial countries' space programs" still don't have."

Not sure the ability to kill up to 7 astronauts at a time is a significant capability.

Re:The US's Space Program (3, Insightful)

rob_squared (821479) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964206)

And in 5-10 years, when China gets to where we were, 30-35 years ago, they'll be tied with us today. Getting to the moon and the shuttle program have made us very complacent with manned space flight. China wants to actually DO something when they get to the moon, more than just plant a flag, collect some rocks, and shoot some pictures.

I love NASA, I really do, but they and the government as a whole need to set some long term plans, and a way to carry them out.

Re:The US's Space Program (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964028)

There is nothing more depressing to me than listening to how other industrial countries' space programs are flourishing while ours stagnates.

You know what? Don't be so pissed off -- I am Russian and can say exactly the same!

Re:The US's Space Program (0, Flamebait)

Snuffub (173401) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964052)

Now that's completely unfair, this administration is working hard every single day to curtail the rights of it's citizens. That alone takes a lot of energy. When you add on the absolutly necissary costs of making sure two guys named frank never exchange wedding vows and the dedicated effort to squash the scientific community its just no wonder we dont have time and energy to waste on trivial things like "exploring"

The US is doing a lot of space exploration... (5, Informative)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964099)

the key is that we are not doing manned exploration. Sending people up in to space isn't exploration.

We have probes to many of the planets, Mars in paticular, we are going to smack a asteroid soon, and there are plans to a new space observatory.

Considering the costs associated with space I think the US is doing just fine. Hell, I like to wonder, where is everyone else?

Besides this is just a mock up, it is no more valuable to space travel than a brochure from marketing... actually that is what it is, an attempt to stir up interest in what they do.

Re:The US's Space Program (2, Insightful)

krayfx (694332) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964250)

India, like Russia - builds rockets with shoestring budgets, as opposed to the average US ones - which cost way beyond.
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/india-02i.html [spacedaily.com]
the difference is that while developing countries/ or financially contsrained countries go through extensive optimisation. several factors too exist which spirals the costs upwards:
1) US usually wants to dominate any sector it chooses - this will cost plenty.
2) bleeding edge technology involves taking huge risks, plenty of writeoff on obselete technology, and investment.
3) people in developing countries work for longer hours for cheaper wages - (which is why you can find plenty of indians in nasa! they prefer nasa for a better pay and recognition - unlike a scientist in india who is not financially rewarded as like in the US)
4) people are expendable in the lesser countries - so all those double check facilities that might be deployed by nasa might not be on an equal level in the financially constrained countries - at least not to that insane level of perfection carried out by nasa ( i could be wrong here)
5) this is the most significant - US were ahead in the game - and at one time - nasa was showered with so much money - * just to beat the russians*. after that they continued recieving money. while the rest of the industry were on diet - nasa enjoyed gobs of money to toy around ( not all of it went waste, a large percentage as in research for kevlar was useful)

See this... (2, Funny)

double-oh three (688874) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963855)

'See this photo gallery'

He just had to tempt the fates, didn't he?

Re:See this... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963921)

Okay... "In Soviet Russia, photo galleries see you!" Is that what you were afraid of?

Re:See this... (1)

2old2rockNroll (572607) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964013)

'See this photo gallery'

Now that we have successfully slashdotted the Russian photo center, we can expect retaliation any minute.

Re:See this... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964117)

The Slashdotting starts in 5 minutes.

Moderated -1, overrated?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964209)

The Slashdotting starts in 5 minutes.

Ronny Reagan is spinning in his grave.

Re:See this... coral cache (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964270)

Russia is back in space? (2, Interesting)

Metteyya (790458) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963857)

With Russia going back to its space programmes, we're going to have more major players than during Cold War - that is, USA, Russia, China, maybe also EU.

Let's hope everyone - in contrary to recent US projects concerning space defense systems - remembers treaties about peace in space.

Don't forget India and private companies (4, Informative)

hpulley (587866) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964007)

India is also looking at lunar [cnn.com] and manned [spacedaily.com] programs and already has launched its own satellites [spacetoday.org] , etc. Private entries from the US [scaled.com] , Canada [canadianarrow.com] and the UK [starchaser.co.uk] (and other countries) can perhaps be considered separately from the goverment operations. There are now many players, some major (some declining, some expanding) and some minor (some expanding, some perhaps will never get off the ground). Exciting times ahead, I hope.

Re:Russia is back in space? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964037)

Russia hasn't ever stopped its space programs - the work continues, it just isn't always visible to the public.

ESA has been a major space player for decades, and is the dominant comercial space agency.

Space Race (3, Insightful)

RetroGeek (206522) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963858)

And the race is on.

Again...

Maybe this time it will have some staying power. Na, the US government critters cannot see past the next election :-(

Re:Space Race (1)

thepoch (698396) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964143)

The only time I'll look to the US for anything space related is on Star Trek. I have a gut feeling that China might be the first to colonize the moon or some other big thing. Then again it sounds like my view on real life is being mixed with Star Trek already.

The Space unRace (2, Insightful)

Mulletproof (513805) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964225)

"Na, the US government critters cannot see past the next election"

Um, how many presidencies has US manned space flight endured again??? Yeah, too bad they axed that one after JFK. And what race are you talking about? I think we'll sit here a moment and take a breather while everybody else catches up.

Earth to NASA. (3, Insightful)

joshv (13017) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963874)

This is the sort of thing NASA should have been working on decades ago. Instead we have the shuttle debacle, and a NASA that is still trying to pretend that the shuttle program is viable.

I Agree (2, Interesting)

Stone316 (629009) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964022)

Now that we have the space station NASA shouldn't be worried about having to have a shuttle as big as it is. Alot of the stuff they used to do (ie experiments) could be transfered to the space station.

It appears to me that the Russians are used to working on a budget and design stuff to get the job done effectively. They may not be able to do all the things that NASA would like to do but are they necessary? Is that little bit extra worth 10x the cost?

One nice thing about the shuttle was you could do space walks to repair satelites,etc... You wouldn't be able to do that with Russia's model (even tho you can detach for upto 15 days) but i'm sure instead of a cargo bay you can design one that can handle those types of requirements.

Anyways, its nice to see at least one Country looking forward and it looks like they hit the nail on the head.

Re:Earth to NASA. (2, Insightful)

Planesdragon (210349) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964076)

This is the sort of thing NASA should have been working on decades ago.

They were. Even after the shuttle was built, replacements have constantly been at the same design stage this Russian thing is at.

No. (2, Insightful)

rhadamanthus (200665) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964097)

What you have is a NASA forced to continue using the Shuttle since every other developing alternative gets cancelled and then restarted with differing politicians. E.g., OSP vs. Bush's CEV.

NASA is not guiltless in budget management, but you can only do so much.

Re:Earth to NASA. (5, Informative)

Keebler71 (520908) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964150)

This is the sort of thing NASA should have been working on decades ago

Where the hell have you been?.

CEV [wikipedia.org] , X-33 [wikipedia.org] , X-34 [wikipedia.org] , X-37 [wikipedia.org] , X-38 [wikipedia.org] , X-40 [wikipedia.org] , X-43 [wikipedia.org] .

Not to belittle this Russian effort which I think is terrific, but at this point, the Russian vehicle is no more than a concept and a full-scale mock-up.

NASA has been working on such projects for decades; whether or not they are funded is beyond their control...

Design vs. Function? (1, Interesting)

Bonker (243350) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963877)

The nose of the craft looks suspiciously like the front-half of the NASA Space Shuttles, down to the white/black colorscheme.

How much of that has to do with design and how much has to with the function of things like the reentry tiles and hull shielding?

Re:Design vs. Function? (1, Insightful)

Rhalin (791665) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963907)

I would suspect that the selection of color for things like the special paints and reentry tiles is fairly limited. It's not like there's a SpaceShuttle Depot where you can color coordinate all the panels on your reentry vehical ;)

Re:Design vs. Function? (1)

LiNKz (257629) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963964)

Not the first time Russia and the United States had similar projects appear well, rather similar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuttle_Buran

Re:Design vs. Function? (1)

replicate (670039) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963967)

White material reflects light and heat, the black tiles absorb it. This allows the ship to deal with the extremes of spaceflight and reentry. The aerodynamics of a reentry vehicle are even more limited than the choice of colours. Though I should note that IF they had other colours available to them, they likely wouldn't go for it, if only because we've become so accustomed to seeing the familiar black-on-white colour scheme of NASA's shuttle that it makes most sense to emulate it from a PR perspective: "look, it's totally obvious what this does!"

Re:Design vs. Function? (4, Informative)

cmowire (254489) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964024)

Well, it's actually pretty simple.

Things that get Really Fsking Hot are black because the only thing that will handle the heat is a carbon-carbon composite.

Things that get Not So Hot are white because it's either that or beige or black when it comes to high temperature ceramics.

There are other alternative coatings like metal, but given that the Russians have already flown a craft with shuttle-like tiles, it's probably the case that they'll stick with those.

Except, of course, that when the Russians coppied the idea of putting tiles on their shuttles, they made them a smidge sturdier.

Paint has undesirable properties, so you want to minimize it's use on the higher-temperature surfaces. If you look at the shuttle, except for small red maintenence markings, they pretty much stuck with that.

Re:Design vs. Function? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964204)

There is obvious design similarities, but really the underlying engineering decisions for this scheme is far more important than PR.

Let me explain.
White reflects heat. Black absorbs heat.
BUT black materials will also discard heat faster than white as well (you can try this at home with black/while mugs, water and a microwave).

This is why the underbelly and nose of the US Shuttle is black, and is partly why most high-speed (and stealth) aircraft are black (think SR-71). With the stealth aircraft in particular, you want to discard your heat from friction as efficiently, lest you show up as a lovely target for a heat-seeking missle.

Russia Vs. Slashdot (3, Funny)

TychoCelchuuu (835690) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963882)

The ultimate test of the Russian space program: can it stand up to an attempted Slashdotting?

energy for all (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963886)

The Soviet space shuttle was called "Energia", because it was the "mule" for shuttling between the Earth, and a planned Soviet solar energy satellite. Now that their oil mafia is running their show in Russia, their solar satellite strategy is about as likely as ours in the US.

Wasn't the Russian space shuttled called Buran? (1)

hpulley (587866) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964051)

As in this Buran [nasa.gov] ? Means 'snow storm' in Russian. "Ptichka" ("Little Bird" in Russian) was the name of the 2nd one built, which never flew. Energia did make the booster.

Re:energy for all (1)

shoemaker251 (816362) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964118)

Close. The lifting body for the Soviet version of the space shuttle was called Energiya [wikipedia.org] . The shuttle itself was called Buran [wikipedia.org] , which is Russian for "snowstorm".

Russian Oil Mafia? (1)

RandoX (828285) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964213)

See, they want to be like the US too.

Okaaaaay.... (3, Interesting)

Shillo (64681) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963891)

Is it just me, or does this thing really looks SOOOOO much like runabouts from Voyager (sans warp nacelles, but I guess it's a Minor Mater of Engineering... :) )?

--

Incremental progress? (4, Interesting)

dschuetz (10924) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963896)

[note: The newspaper photo on the MSNBC story looks like it's got a space shuttle mockup in the background. The "photo gallery" link has better images.]

Aside from the obvious color scheme borrowed from the US orbiters, this seems like it's really just incremental progress. Going from a 3-person Soyuz to a 6-person Klipper seems very much like one of the crew reentry vehicle concepts that have been floating around in the US for a while. One of those took an Apollo capsule, and extended it downwards a bit, to fit six people instead of three.

On the other hand, the "lifting body" design is interesting, if it'll work enough of the time (I'm gathering the parachute reentry option is for when the runways aren't available or weather doesn't cooporate).

On the gripping hand, I'm having Six Million Dollar Man flashbacks.

Re:Incremental progress? (4, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964091)

From what I understand, the color scheme is pretty much mandatory. The black side radiates heat, and the white side reflects it; it's a matter of temperature management.

Re:Incremental progress? (1)

Fr05t (69968) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964148)

RTFM and look at the other pictures. It's not a shuttle with wings - it just happens to have a similar nose on it is all.

Re:Incremental progress? (2)

david.given (6740) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964160)

this seems like it's really just incremental progress.

Of course. Incremental progress is what gave Russia the Soyuz, the cheapest, most reliable man-rated spacecraft in the world. Incremental progress is good if you want to put humans on board. (Won't the Klipper end up carrying the same number of people as the Shuttle?)

The place to start playing with radical new technologies is with unmanned vehicles. If one of those blows up, nobody cares but the accountants.

Re:Incremental progress? (1)

q-the-impaler (708563) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964166)

Not sure if I read it right, but it seems that they only use the lifting body to control the descent and narrow the landing area. I think they still use the parachutes, but the landing area is narrowed to 1 sq Km.
It mentioned that they are considering either specialized landing feet or a deployable air bag. The air bag would allow for water landings.

The lifting body is for reentry (1)

roystgnr (4015) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964167)

On the other hand, the "lifting body" design is interesting, if it'll work enough of the time (I'm gathering the parachute reentry option is for when the runways aren't available or weather doesn't cooporate).

The parachute reentry option is for a version that doesn't have wings. The body shape alone won't give enough lift to put you gently onto a runway at low speeds; it'll just give enough lift to let the craft spend more more time in higher, thinner atmosphere, so it can decelerate more slowly and shed heat more easily.

Re:Incremental progress? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964177)

[note: The newspaper photo on the MSNBC story looks like it's got a space shuttle mockup in the background. The "photo gallery" link has better images.]

That's probably a Soviet era Buran [wikipedia.org] , not a US shuttle, for those wondering.

A we back to tiles and long-re-entries? (3, Interesting)

reality-bytes (119275) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963908)



This looks rather like a step back towards thermal tiles which can be a problem in themselves when Soyuz uses one-big-heatsheild.

Also, the shape of the re-entry vehicle is rather like a Buran nose which suggest to me a somewhat longer re-entry than the Soyuz module which 'gets it over and done with'

I'm sure I've heard several times that the Shuttle/Buran re-entry technique is 'less-safe' compared with capsule re-entry due to the duration that the craft is actually being heated.

Re:A we back to tiles and long-re-entries? (1)

LiNKz (257629) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964044)

Perhaps to create a larger vehicle (to seat more passengers) would cause the weight and mass of it to be too large to use a big heatshield in the way they currently do it?

Re:A we back to tiles and long-re-entries? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964079)

armchair-engineer clown

To get NASA more funding... (3, Funny)

Skraut (545247) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963916)

Just pump sci-fi movies into the White House until our president is convinced that the aliens are Terrorists...

In other news (5, Funny)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963932)

Russian space officials unveiled a full-scale model of the Kliper spaceship

The KDE team [kde.org] announced they will sue the Russian government over the use of the "klipper" name, which, as everybody knows, is the name of the KDE clipboard. An outraged free software community is currently demonstrating and marching on Capitol Hill and the Kremlin to demand that justice be meeted out of the space agency. In a gesture of goodwill, the Russian space agency has decided to rename their spacecraft "firefoks". News at 11...

Re:In other news (1)

LMCBoy (185365) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963990)

But if they name it Firefox [imdb.com] , won't it be stolen by Clint Eastwood?

Re:In other news (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964127)

The 'original' Firefox was russian! At least in the movies, then Clint Eastwood stole it.

Kliper (2, Interesting)

LMCBoy (185365) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963935)

"Kliper", eh? I'm sure any resemblance to the McDonnell-Douglas Delta Clipper [wikipedia.org] is purely coincidental.

It's like deja-vu [nasa.gov] all over again!

Re:Kliper (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964029)

How about the Clipper chip [epic.org] ? Does it look like McDonnell's Delta Clipper?

How about "any old cone-shaped thingy looks like McDonnell's Delta Clipper", and "Clipper is a generic word"?

So yes, I suppose it's coincidental. Duh...

Re:Kliper (1)

NardofDoom (821951) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964158)

It's about as far from the Delta Clipper as possible while still looking the same. The DCX was a tail-sitter, SSTO VTOL rocket. This sits on top of a booster and lands with a parachute, oriented horizontally.

I miss the DCX. :-(

About damn time (2, Interesting)

kyouteki (835576) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963948)

The Soyuz has been used for how long? I mean, I'm sure there have been internal systems upgrades, but the design is just so old that I thought they'd never change it. Then again, if it ain't broke, why fix it?

RTA, Soyuz in use since 1966 (2, Informative)

hpulley (587866) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964107)

There have been some recent updates but essentially the design is almost 40-years old now.

In Korea... (-1)

silicon-pyro (217988) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963952)

In 2007 [spacetoday.net] , the Soyuz spacecraft will be for old people.

America in decline (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10963962)

Americans get what they vote for! Not too bright I see!

Why would this thing not roll over? (1, Interesting)

davidescott (778917) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963981)

Is there a simple physics explanation to this. Given that there are no visible control surfaces (although I suspect control surfaces are relatively useless at high speed) and the general shape is comparable to that of a brick (as opposed to the shuttle which is more of a brick with wings), why will this not roll over on reentry?

Re:Why would this thing not roll over? (3, Informative)

Vulch (221502) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964064)

Same reason as a badminton shuttlecock doesn't, and the Soyuz and Apollo capsules don't. Keep the centre of mass low and the aerodynamics will keep it the right way up.

Wow, take a look at those rockets (4, Informative)

aardwolf204 (630780) | more than 9 years ago | (#10963999)

FTA: The Kliper itself was a reduced-sized version of an earlier unique design envisioned for launch on the Angara or Zenit launch vehicles in the 1990's (see Energia Spaceplane 1990's). This was larger and had the re-entry vehicle mounted nose-down in the launch vehicle.

I got interested in the launch vehicles and found this site [astronautix.com] very informative, it has illustrations and information on various Russian launch vehicles. Its amazing how much smaller the Zenit is compared to some of the others, specifically the RLA-150 and Vulkan.

My heart still goes with the Saturn V though.

No In Soviet Russia jokes?! (2)

hsmith (818216) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964017)

wtf?

but i think this is great for them but we are breaking into the commerical space market with spaceshipOne. we will win, again.

i think commercial space industry will be the next big thing, thank god we are getting in on it first

Re:No In Soviet Russia jokes?! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964121)

People has grown up.

And only in Korea old people make jokes about Soviet Russia...

Stupid question, maybe one of you know (1)

aardwolf204 (630780) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964023)

Whats up with modern space craft having a black underside? Does this do anything for re-entry, or is it just to help us understand which side is "down".

Re:Stupid question, maybe one of you know (2, Informative)

NardofDoom (821951) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964180)

The black tiles are specially treated to resist higher temperatures than the white tiles, since they bear the highest thermal load on reentry.

Re:Stupid question, maybe one of you know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10964226)

because as every school child knows black is really good colour for reflecting heat ?!?!?

Moscow is Mocking NASA (1)

syntap (242090) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964032)

Geez, even the ship's colors exactly match the Shuttle. Not to meantion the nose is a blatant copy. Kind of like giving the finger to the US, as if to say "take that, we've managed to fly something recently."

Oh shit... (0)

SpermanHerman (763707) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964047)

Here come the "In Soviet Russia" jokes...

Okay European Space Agency! (2, Interesting)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964050)

Since I think there is considerable interest at the ESA for its own manned launch capability, how about ESA providing the funding for the completion of the Kliper project? A group like EADS could get the Russians to build Kliper spacecraft that could be launched from the new R-7 launchpad in Kourou in French Guiana at ESA's launch site.

Calling Lance Bass... (1)

inkdesign (7389) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964055)

They're gonna need some money to get this thing off the ground!

Isn't that.. (0)

Searinox (833879) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964103)

the 13-year-old russian spacecraft they recently found rusting in some desert? SNCR ;)

Ob. (0, Offtopic)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964119)

In Soviet Russia Spacecraft reveal New Energia?

Required In Soviet Russia Joke (bad) (1, Offtopic)

Warthog9 (100768) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964122)

In Soviet Russia, Energia reveals you!

Sorry this is bad all the way around.

In Korea, space exploration is for old people (-1)

Nine Tenths of The W (829559) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964135)

Is anyone else worried about the Russian combination of a space program and a desperate need for hard cash? I can quite easily see a situation where they become the launching whores of the world, and debris and waste from private companies in orbit ends up stopping space industrialisation before it's properly begun

color scheme (3, Funny)

kippy (416183) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964139)

Is it a system requirement that all new manned spacecraft have to look like killer whales?

I hear Canada has designed a new Spacecraft! (1)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964149)

Oh wait... we lost eh.

Well.. (1)

Presidential (805793) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964154)

I, for one, welcome our new Retired Soyuz Pilot masters..

Launch dreams and orbital wishes (1)

Mulletproof (513805) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964161)

"The Energia Rocket and Space Corporation, the organization that has built all of Russian's human space vehicles for the past half century,

Space vehicals like the Buran space shuttle! [spacedaily.com] No, wait... That was designed by NASA too...

In Soviet Russia (1)

Wordsmith (183749) | more than 9 years ago | (#10964207)

In Soviet Russa ... old people are Korean spacecrafts! or something.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>