KerikBalm

Buran and faked photos

Recommended Posts

So, I've looked for photos of the Buran flying or even attached to the Energia...

and all I seem to find is this:

Buran.jpg

Which just.... doesn't look real to me... it looks like a plastic model to me...

I'm not saying the Buran flights were a hoaxes... but... am I the only one that thinks this doesn't look real?

Does anyone know of other pictures of the Buran actually flying?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wikipedia's license for the image includes the following:

Quote

This image is a faithful digitisation of a unique historic image, and the copyright for it is most likely held by the person who created the image or the agency employing the person. It is believed that the use of this image may qualify as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Fair use for more information.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, KerikBalm said:

So, I've looked for photos of the Buran flying or even attached to the Energia...

and all I seem to find is this:

Buran.jpg

Which just.... doesn't look real to me... it looks like a plastic model to me...

I'm not saying the Buran flights were a hoaxes... but... am I the only one that thinks this doesn't look real?

Does anyone know of other pictures of the Buran actually flying?

Those commies sure like plastic ;)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pls don't take offense anyone :mellow:.

Edited by Spaceception

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the provenence of that photo is unknown?

I wouldn't corry about copyright images, as there is no knownholder of the copyright, its a historic image (makes it likely to be public domain), and this is a non-commercial use that would likely also qualify as fair use.

If it flew in 1988, that image is 28 years old.

Copyright laws vary, but lets just use russia... I'd assume once its no longer protected there, and as the copyright isn't registered elsewhere, once its free in Russia, its public domain... when that photo was taken, USSR/Russia protected stuff 25 years after the author's death... (when copyright durations are changed, they typically only apply to new copyrights... unless you are disney).

So... is the person still alive? did they transfer their rights to anyone? when did they die?

...

I think its pretty safe to use this image for an internet discussion

Edited by KerikBalm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it looks weird, at least to me, because they didn't seem to use the same materials for the exterior as the shuttle, which is what our eyes are used to. The shuttle had a matte look due to being coated in fabric and ceramics, whereas this looks shiny like painted metal. Plus the exterior tank is painted as well, but the shuttle was orange foam, except for the first few flights. Probably just your brain playing tricks on your eye...or your eyes play tricks on your brain, or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They could only copy shuttle so closely, they did;t get the texture right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you have to remember is that the camera taking that picture has some pretty heavy filtering on it to keep it from being blinded by the rocket plume. The filtering has a way of making the image look fake.

delta-4-heavy-launch-1920.jpg?1377793668

 

Without those filters, you end up with something like this. . .

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore the copyright thing I posted. I misread it and thought it was a digital recreation of a photograph. Now I realize it means they just scanned the real photograph. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC the only launch of the Buran/ Energia was at night in poor weather. This was also during the cold war, when the Soviets were actively trying to hide the details of their activities.

 I'm not surprised that no high quality images exist.

Best,
-Slashy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reflections on the paint are due to the strong lights. You can see them in the video.

You can't fake an orbital launch. The launch and flight was picked up by American early warning and tracking systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'm not saying the Buran flights were a hoaxes"

I didn't say the flight was faked, I was just wondering if those photos were really authentic. As someone alreayd mentioned: "the only launch of the Buran/ Energia was at night in poor weather. This was also during the cold war, when the Soviets were actively trying to hide the details of their activities."

I wouldn't be surprised if there was some picture of a mock up that was being circulated around the interwebs as the real thing, or some propaganda piece that was prepared.

To me its the reflections and lack of "texture" on the craft, the strange sky color, that the flame seems to be in two layers. The differences in lighting between the foreground and background (yes, I know, real launch, artificial lighting) makes it look like an old bluescreen creation. I guess its more of a matter of the nighttime launch and exposure settings. The lighting/shadows of the structure on the background aren't consistent with the foreground... fine.. .the forground had lights pointing right at it... I would expect the major lightsource on the background at that moment to be from the flames of the rocket, but the shadows don't seem consistent with that.

I am specifically questioning that image, not the Buran flight itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Americans were not on the moon, look at the astronauts, they ... they look like puppets on a string...

Ah yes, a copy of the Buran shuttle only in aerodynamic terms, although it reduced the time for the Soviets, thanks to the Americans. in general, Buran "other payload" just cause breathing dust US space shuttle...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Buran.ru they say it had about the same payload capacity as the american payload shuttle (higher back to earth)

But I've recently read a very long article covering some study by american's about the Buran and they said it's payload capacities were far greater and due to them having to remake everything from scratch without any cost implications made it a better space plane.

 

Now I wonder which is true.er

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, lude said:

On Buran.ru they say it had about the same payload capacity as the american payload shuttle (higher back to earth)

But I've recently read a very long article covering some study by american's about the Buran and they said it's payload capacities were far greater and due to them having to remake everything from scratch without any cost implications made it a better space plane.

 

Now I wonder which is true.er

Both are true. In the US STS system, the shuttle was an intrinsic part of the launch vehicle for the entirety of the launch; but for Energiya-Buran, Buran only provided the final injection into orbit, similar to shutlle's OMS system. This meant Buran could be replaced entirely with a small upper stage and a 100+ ton payload.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.