LKS - The Chelomei alternative to Buran

[archipeppe68]

Here it is.

Ciao
Giuseppe

[Nathan]

Very interesting. I wonder what stopped progress on this? Mass growth in the design phase?

[corgius]

a wonderful work, as usual...

ciao

peppe

[archipeppe68]

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.

[archipeppe68]

a wonderful work, as usual...

ciao

peppe

Thanks for the appreciation Giuseppe... 

[Stan Black]

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

[archipeppe68]

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.

[Stan Black]

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.

[archipeppe68]

 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. 

[Stan Black]

 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.

[js117]

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

[Bob Shaw]

Was there not a story of the destruction of mockup hardware by an armed state goon squad?

Soviet aerospace was somewhat tribal, I think...

[Joris]

I would not dare fly humans on a proton rocket.

[archipeppe68]

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).

[Skylab]

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)

[simonbp]

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.

[B. Hendrickx]

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

[clongton]

Beautiful model.

[archipeppe68]

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

[Capt. David]

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