Author Topic: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran  (Read 37689 times)

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« on: 08/31/2012 09:13 am »
Here it is.

Ciao
Giuseppe
« Last Edit: 08/31/2012 09:41 am by archipeppe68 »

Offline Nathan

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
  • Sydney
  • Liked: 16
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #1 on: 08/31/2012 09:23 am »
Very interesting. I wonder what stopped progress on this? Mass growth in the design phase?
Given finite cash, if we want to go to Mars then we should go to Mars.

Offline corgius

  • Member
  • Posts: 14
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #2 on: 08/31/2012 09:26 am »
a wonderful work, as usual...

ciao

peppe

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #3 on: 08/31/2012 09:30 am »
Very interesting. I wonder what stopped progress on this? Mass growth in the design phase?

It wasn't a technical issue rather than a political one.

As stated into the fundamental book "Energiya-Buran: The Soviet Space Shuttle" by Bart Hendrickx and Bert Vis (page 431), both Politbjuro and the powerful General Ustinov were both against the LKS project (despite the fact that it was technically less challenging than the Buran and even less expensive).

This did not stopped Chelomei to pursue the LKS development expoliting all his experience (and also the hardware) developed for both Almaz and TKS spacecrafts. In any case the Politbjuro ordered to stop any further work on the LKS and santioned Chelomei for the money spent up to that moment (including the full scale mock up).

At least what really stopped Chelomei to go further with the LKS was his death happened in 1984.

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #4 on: 08/31/2012 09:31 am »
a wonderful work, as usual...

ciao

peppe

Thanks for the appreciation Giuseppe...  :)

Offline Stan Black

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3135
  • Liked: 377
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #5 on: 08/31/2012 09:32 am »
Giuseppe,

 Very well done. I am impressed.

 One thing that is interesting to see is the interstage between the 1st and 2nd stage of Proton. I have long believed that the engines were exposed, but what makes you think that a separate spacer is discarded? The Proton-K second stage is shown with a lattice and cylinder around the engines, whereas the original Proton featured just a cylinder; the lattice was only on the 1st stage? Why two events, would not the cylinder have remained attached to the 1st stage?

Stan

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #6 on: 08/31/2012 09:36 am »
Giuseppe,

 Very well done. I am impressed.

 One thing that is interesting to see is the interstage between the 1st and 2nd stage of Proton. I have long believed that the engines were exposed, but what makes you think that a separate spacer is discarded? The Proton-K second stage is shown with a lattice and cylinder around the engines, whereas the original Proton featured just a cylinder; the lattice was only on the 1st stage? Why two events, would not the cylinder have remained attached to the 1st stage?

Stan

You pointed out a sharp thing that puzzled me a lot.
I was unable to find out a single right reference about that, the intestage exists but it is not clear (at least to me obviously) if it remains attached to the first stage or it is discarded lately (like the interstage between S1C and SII of Saturn V).

I choose the second situation because it seems more logical, bur I'm willing to change or modify my drawings (as usual) if more detailed and referenced information came up later in this thread.

Offline Stan Black

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3135
  • Liked: 377
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #7 on: 08/31/2012 09:42 am »
Giuseppe,

 Very well done. I am impressed.

 One thing that is interesting to see is the interstage between the 1st and 2nd stage of Proton. I have long believed that the engines were exposed, but what makes you think that a separate spacer is discarded? The Proton-K second stage is shown with a lattice and cylinder around the engines, whereas the original Proton featured just a cylinder; the lattice was only on the 1st stage? Why two events, would not the cylinder have remained attached to the 1st stage?

Stan

You pointed out a sharp thing that puzzled me a lot.
I was unable to find out a single right reference about that, the intestage exists but it is not clear (at least to me obviously) if it remains attached to the first stage or it is discarded lately (like the interstage between S1C and SII of Saturn V).

I choose the second situation because it seems more logical, bur I'm willing to change or modify my drawings (as usual) if more detailed and referenced information came up later in this thread.

 Have a look at Proton; it has a solid single cylinder on the 2nd stage.

 The Chinese CZ rockets have a similiar separation system. Whilst the second stage is shown with the engines covered before integration, illustrations show all of the interstage left attached to the 1st stage.

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #8 on: 08/31/2012 09:43 am »
 Have a look at Proton; it has a solid single cylinder on the 2nd stage.

 The Chinese CZ rockets have a similiar separation system. Whilst the second stage is shown with the engines covered before integration, illustrations show all of the interstage left attached to the 1st stage.

Ok Stan, many thanks.  :)

Offline Stan Black

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3135
  • Liked: 377
  • Likes Given: 228
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #9 on: 08/31/2012 10:08 am »
 Have a look at Proton; it has a solid single cylinder on the 2nd stage.

 The Chinese CZ rockets have a similiar separation system. Whilst the second stage is shown with the engines covered before integration, illustrations show all of the interstage left attached to the 1st stage.

Ok Stan, many thanks.  :)

 There are a quite few detailed lists of timing events for Proton and they only show a single staging event.
http://coopi.khrunichev.ru
http://www.space-center.ru/ApriEvents.aspx

Then again I might wrong!

Anyway, once again good illustrations. Keep up the good work.

Offline js117

  • Member
  • Posts: 81
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #10 on: 08/31/2012 10:07 pm »
a wonderful work, as usual...

ciao

peppe

Thanks for the appreciation Giuseppe...  :)


nice work.
A similar design concept of  Dream Chaser.
But Deram Chaser first stage is ATLAS rocket.
Smaller version of the shuttle

Offline Bob Shaw

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1420
  • Liked: 725
  • Likes Given: 671
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #11 on: 08/31/2012 10:25 pm »
Was there not a story of the destruction of mockup hardware by an armed state goon squad?

Soviet aerospace was somewhat tribal, I think...

Offline Joris

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
  • Liked: 24
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #12 on: 08/31/2012 10:41 pm »
I would not dare fly humans on a proton rocket.
JIMO would have been the first proper spaceship.

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #13 on: 09/01/2012 06:19 pm »
I would not dare fly humans on a proton rocket.

Not more dangerous than fly on Titan II or III rocket.
Chelomei intended by since the Proton rocket to be man rated for a various range of manned spacecraft, as follows:

LK-1 (Lunar Flyby mission a loser competitor of the Soyuz 7K-L1)

Almaz OPS (the original one with the TKS-VA on top with a crew of three, very closer to USAF MOL)

TKS (It flown several times unmanned but it was intended as the third generation of Soviet Manned Spacecraft).

I herd some rumor about the distruction of the LKS mockup in early 90's but I don't know if the history of speznaz involment is true or not (personally I don't believe in it, probably the mock-up was destroyed as result of an accident exactly like the original Buran VKK 01).

Offline Skylab

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 477
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 55
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #14 on: 09/04/2012 12:29 pm »
I herd some rumor about the distruction of the LKS mockup in early 90's but I don't know if the history of speznaz involment is true or not (personally I don't believe in it, probably the mock-up was destroyed as result of an accident exactly like the original Buran VKK 01).
The Energiya-Buran book by Hendrickx and Vis also mentions this, but doesn't give sources. "It was demolished in what has been described as an act of sabotage in 1991". (p. 433)

Offline simonbp

  • Science Guy
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7138
  • Liked: 314
  • Likes Given: 183
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #15 on: 09/04/2012 02:39 pm »
Very interesting. I wonder what stopped progress on this? Mass growth in the design phase?

It wasn't a technical issue rather than a political one.

I imagine that beyond the simple design bureau rivalry the larger political issue was the size. The entire reason the Politburo supported Buran was that they wanted a shuttle as big and as capable as the American one. While LKS made a certain amount of technical sense (I personally would not ride a Proton), it would have been embarrassingly small next to an American Shuttle.
« Last Edit: 09/04/2012 02:40 pm by simonbp »

Offline B. Hendrickx

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1373
  • Liked: 1868
  • Likes Given: 65
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #16 on: 09/04/2012 09:44 pm »
I herd some rumor about the distruction of the LKS mockup in early 90's but I don't know if the history of speznaz involment is true or not (personally I don't believe in it, probably the mock-up was destroyed as result of an accident exactly like the original Buran VKK 01).
The Energiya-Buran book by Hendrickx and Vis also mentions this, but doesn't give sources. "It was demolished in what has been described as an act of sabotage in 1991". (p. 433)

The source for that was a series of articles on Chelomei projects published in "Vozdushnyy Transport" in 1996  (see p. 458 reference 2). I'm not sure how credible the story is.

Unless I missed something, not much new information on LKS has been published since the book came out. One of the most significant publications on LKS in recent years was an article in the July 2010 issue of  "Populyarnaya Mekhanika"

http://www.popmech.ru/article/7277-malyish-v-teni-burana/

This says the mock-up was "disassembled" at the request of the Ministry of General Machine Building.

The article also says documents on LKS have now been declassified, except for the sections dealing with the military applications of the vehicle.

Some of the new material was probably disclosed in a paper given by G. Yefremov and others at the latest "Academic Readings on Cosmonautics" in January 2012. However, only the abstracts of that paper are available online :

http://www.ihst.ru/~akm/36t1.htm

It is stressed in the abstracts that much of the information provided on LKS in the media is wrong and that one of the purposes of the paper is to rectify that situation "on the basis of reliable documents". Unfortunately, none of the new information is given in the abstracts.

BTW, there's a nice picture of a Proton/LKS scale model in this issue of NPO Mashinostroyeniya's in-house magazine "Tribuna" :

http://www.npomash.ru/press/ru/tribuna020710.htm?l=0&prn=y




Offline clongton

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12038
  • Connecticut
    • Direct Launcher
  • Liked: 7298
  • Likes Given: 3733
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #17 on: 09/05/2012 01:46 am »
Beautiful model.
Chuck - DIRECT co-founder
I started my career on the Saturn-V F-1A engine

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #18 on: 09/05/2012 07:24 am »

Some of the new material was probably disclosed in a paper given by G. Yefremov and others at the latest "Academic Readings on Cosmonautics" in January 2012. However, only the abstracts of that paper are available online :

http://www.ihst.ru/~akm/36t1.htm

It is stressed in the abstracts that much of the information provided on LKS in the media is wrong and that one of the purposes of the paper is to rectify that situation "on the basis of reliable documents". Unfortunately, none of the new information is given in the abstracts.

Many thanks Bart for the update.

BTW It is a pleasure for me to have one of the Buran book co-author in my thread....  :)

As usual, I'm willing to modify my presentation/drawings as soon as new and best referenced news will rise about such project.

Ciao
Giuseppe

Offline Capt. David

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #19 on: 09/08/2012 05:47 pm »

BTW, there's a nice picture of a Proton/LKS scale model in this issue of NPO Mashinostroyeniya's in-house magazine "Tribuna" :

http://www.npomash.ru/press/ru/tribuna020710.htm?l=0&prn=y


There is only one problem with these illustrations, and it is just a small problem. These drawings seem to be based on the NPO Mash scale model of the LKS/Proton. This model shows an incorrect orientation of the LKS.

To be accurate the Proton should be rotated 30 degrees with respect to the Proton. If the LKS was placed as seen on the model, it would not allow for proper transportation to the Launch Tower.

Other than this small orientation problem - This is a fantastic piece of work! Well done!!!

Best Regards,

David L. Rickman
549 Caribou Road
Asheville, NC  28803
USA

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #20 on: 09/10/2012 07:27 am »
Other than this small orientation problem - This is a fantastic piece of work! Well done!!!

I was not aware about such orientation problem, many thanks for the tip David!!!!

Offline Helodriver

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Liked: 5959
  • Likes Given: 698
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #21 on: 09/10/2012 07:47 am »
I wonder how robust the wingfold mechanism was supposed to be? In he event of an off nominal separation or a launch abort, the wings would have to extend quickly and would be exposed to large aero forces. Perhaps it had ejection seats?

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #22 on: 09/10/2012 07:51 am »
I wonder how robust the wingfold mechanism was supposed to be? In he event of an off nominal separation or a launch abort, the wings would have to extend quickly and would be exposed to large aero forces. Perhaps it had ejection seats?

There was any escape system for the whole spacecraft, the wings were deployed once the LKS was in orbit.

The crew of 2 cosmonauts had ejection seats (likely the same Zvezda K-36D of Buran and also the same Strizh pressurized suits), for the first part of the launch profile as also for the landing part of the re-entry (just like the Gemini for example).

In case of more than 2 cosmonauts, obviously, any escape system was foreseen for the extra crew members.

Offline Soaring Habu

  • Member
  • Posts: 62
  • Flying At 80,000 Feet
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #23 on: 09/10/2012 08:36 am »
Very interesting vehicle; don't think I've ever heard of it before!

Wouldn't the mechanism for folding the wings add too much extra weight and detract from the amount of payload that could be carried, or was LKS only intended to carry fairly light payloads?

Also, wouldn't the joints in the wings pose extra difficulties with regards to the TPS?
SR-71 Blackbird - Pure Speed!

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #24 on: 09/10/2012 08:45 am »
Very interesting vehicle; don't think I've ever heard of it before!

Wouldn't the mechanism for folding the wings add too much extra weight and detract from the amount of payload that could be carried, or was LKS only intended to carry fairly light payloads?

Also, wouldn't the joints in the wings pose extra difficulties with regards to the TPS?

Good questions.

First of all, even if the LKS was intended as small scale version of the Buran/STS Orbiter it has a smaller cargo bay in proportion. In this sense the payload volume/weight was still important but not as much as its bigger "brothers".

Regarding the folding wings question, Russians has seriously investigated such issue for nearly three decades, starting by the original Spiral 50/50 concept (which drove the MiG 105-11 realization). Russians engineers studied not only the folding wings mechanism (in terms of joint strenght and mechanichal interaction) but also the effectiveness of TPS in this critical configuration issue as for the heatshield porthole introduced into the TKS-VA (also known as "Merkur") design.

The folding wing was successfully proved with the small scale Bor-4 demonstrator. It was launched several times during early-mid 80's.
The Bor-4 utilized the wing folded during the re-entry phase in ordert to minimize the drag in this phase, once that the Spiral/bor-4 reached the dense air the wings were lowered down in order to achieve a runaway landing (or a slow speed splashdown in the case of Bor-4).

Regarding LKS the wings were folded during launch in order to reduce the drag in this phase and not during re-entry were the wings were fully deployed. So in this sense the LKS was less demanding for its TPS rather than the Spiral/Bor-4 concept.

Interstingly, the Spiral/Bor-4 was the baseline for the HL-20/Dream Chaser development with the only difference that American never considered seriuosly to apply the folding wings concept.

Offline Capt. David

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #25 on: 09/30/2012 06:48 pm »
Giuseppe, this really is excellent work! It is with great respect that I admire your abilities.

There remains volumes of notes concerning the LKS, but until then this will be the standard reference.

I think Chelomei would be proud!

Respectfully,

David L. Rickman
549 Caribou Road
Asheville, NC  28803
USA

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #26 on: 10/01/2012 07:47 am »
Giuseppe, this really is excellent work! It is with great respect that I admire your abilities.

There remains volumes of notes concerning the LKS, but until then this will be the standard reference.

I think Chelomei would be proud!

Respectfully,

David L. Rickman
549 Caribou Road
Asheville, NC  28803
USA

Many thanks David, I'm really pleased about your appreciation of my work.

Anyway, as usual, I'm willing to modify or update my presentation in order to respect the latest update status of information about the topic.

Thanks again.

Giuseppe De Chiara

Offline Loru

  • Member
  • Posts: 2
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #27 on: 07/07/2013 08:37 pm »
Hi

Since I cannot find this information elsewhere I'll ask here.

What materials and how TKS/LKS heatshield was made of. I'm developing near-future craft for Orbiter Space Sim and I'd like to come up with nice reusable heatshield for it, not involwing thousands of silicon tiles.

mark3-gear-up.3DS (click to view in 3D)
« Last Edit: 07/07/2013 08:38 pm by Loru »

Offline Helodriver

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Liked: 5959
  • Likes Given: 698
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #28 on: 07/31/2013 08:49 am »
Something like this would be interesting for military applications lofted by a Falcon 9R Heavy off of SLC4E at Vandenberg. Large enough to be optionally manned, incorporating long dwell time technologies proven by the X-37, and the whole stack completely reusable. Launch it from the Cape or Brownsville and you have an ISS crew taxi or an orbital tourism vehicle. This could have been a product of the Orbital Space Plane shuttle successor study had the "plane" part not degraded into "small capsule" by cost and mission confusion. Are there any Chelomei associates around who want to work at Space-X?
  ;)

Offline SalemHanna

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 111
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #29 on: 07/31/2013 07:17 pm »
Here it is.

Ciao
Giuseppe

I remember reading about this as a kid. Western science books called it Kosmolyet...I was starting to wonder if it was a figment of the writers' imaginations, and that Buran was the only real spaceplane considered in the 80s.

Mind you, the dream of a small Russian spaceplane isn't entirely dead; the MAKS concept still has its supporters and may one day become reality.

There was talk in 1991 of what was then HOTOL abandoning its single stage ambitions and launching from the top of an Antonov as a joint British-Russian project. Of course, it's evolved full circle over the years and will eventually see reality as Skylon  :)
Apollo, Soyuz, Shuttle...SKYLON.

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #30 on: 10/20/2019 11:59 am »
Here there are my updated (and also improved) artworks about the LKS project, based upon new and more accurate Russian references,


Offline JAFO

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1024
    • My hobby
  • Liked: 844
  • Likes Given: 950
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #31 on: 10/20/2019 12:32 pm »


The folding wing was successfully proved with the small scale Bor-4 demonstrator. It was launched several times during early-mid 80's.
The Bor-4 utilized the wing folded during the re-entry phase in ordert to minimize the drag in this phase, once that the Spiral/bor-4 reached the dense air the wings were lowered down in order to achieve a runaway landing (or a slow speed splashdown in the case of Bor-4).

Regarding LKS the wings were folded during launch in order to reduce the drag in this phase and not during re-entry were the wings were fully deployed. So in this sense the LKS was less demanding for its TPS rather than the Spiral/Bor-4 concept.

Interstingly, the Spiral/Bor-4 was the baseline for the HL-20/Dream Chaser development with the only difference that American never considered seriuosly to apply the folding wings concept.



Iím sorry, Iím a bit confused, it seems they would have had to deploy the wings once in orbit in order to access the cargo compartment?




Beautiful work!
Anyone can do the job when things are going right. In this business we play for keeps.
ó Ernest K. Gann

Offline archipeppe68

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 224
  • Italy
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #32 on: 10/20/2019 07:56 pm »
Exactly the wings were unfolded immediately achieved orbit, Just before opening the cargo bay doors.

I'm glad that you have appreciated my artworks, many thanks.

Offline WallE

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #33 on: 10/21/2019 08:18 pm »
Not more dangerous than fly on Titan II or III rocket. Chelomei intended by since the Proton rocket to be man rated for a various range of manned spacecraft, as follows:

Most Proton failures were in 1967-72, by the 80s its reliability record was fine (certainly no worse than the R-7's and one of those very nearly got a crew killed). Also a manned launch would have an LES and as far as I can figure out, most failed Proton launches had plenty of time after the first indication of trouble for the LES to be activated. I have also not heard anything about Protons having pogo issues like what dogged Titan II in the early days.
« Last Edit: 10/21/2019 08:27 pm by WallE »

Offline Vahe231991

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1689
  • 11 Canyon Terrace
  • Liked: 462
  • Likes Given: 199
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #34 on: 09/16/2023 01:36 am »
I just found this image of a model of an early LKS configuration at the Secret Projects forum.


Offline Dmitry_V_home

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • City of Toglliatti, Samara region, Russia
  • Liked: 666
  • Likes Given: 132
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #35 on: 09/28/2023 04:29 pm »
LKS and Proton

Offline Dmitry_V_home

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 513
  • City of Toglliatti, Samara region, Russia
  • Liked: 666
  • Likes Given: 132
Re: LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran
« Reply #36 on: 09/28/2023 04:30 pm »
LKS

Tags: lks chelomei 
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0