History of the US space shuttle. Shuttles

I was inspired to write this article by numerous discussions in forums and even articles in serious magazines, in which I came across the following position:

“The United States is actively developing missile defense (5th generation fighters, combat robots, etc.). Guard! They’re not fools, they know how to count money and won’t do nonsense???”

Fools are not fools, but they have always had a lot of fraud, stupidity and “drinking the dough” - you just have to take a closer look at the US megaprojects.

They are constantly trying to create a miracle weapon or such a miracle technology that will put all enemies/competitors to shame for a long time and make them tremble at the unimaginable technological power of America. They make impressive presentations, pour out amazing data, raise huge wave in the media.

Everything always ends in a trivial way - with a successful swindle of taxpayers represented by Congress, a huge money grab and a disastrous result.

For example, here is the history of the program Space Shuttle - one of the typical American chimera chases.

Here, at all stages, from problem statement to operation, NASA management made a series of gross mistakes/frauds, which ultimately led to the creation of a fantastically ineffective Shuttle, the early closure of the program and buried the development of the national orbital station.

How it all started:

In the late 60s, even before the moon landing, the United States decided to cut back (and then close) the Apollo program. Production capacity began to decline rapidly, and hundreds of thousands of workers and employees were subject to dismissal. The enormous costs of the Vietnam War and the space/military race with the USSR had undermined the US budget and one of the worst economic downturns in its history was looming.

NASA funding was cut more and more every year and the future of American manned space exploration was in jeopardy. There were growing voices of criticism in Congress who said NASA was pointlessly wasting taxpayer money at a time when critical resources were being underfunded. social articles in the country's budget. On the other hand, the entire free world watched with bated breath every gesture of the beacons of democracy and waited for the spectacular cosmic defeat of the totalitarian Russian barbarians

At the same time, it was clear that the USSR was not going to give up competition in space and that even a successful landing on the Moon could not be a reason to rest on its laurels.

There was an urgent need to decide what to do next. For this purpose, under the auspices of the Presidential Administration, a special working group scientists who began developing further plans for the development of American space technology..

Then it was already obvious that the USSR followed the path of developing the technology of orbital stations (OS), while participation in the lunar race was actively denied by Soviet officialdom.

Thus, in 1968, Soyuz-4 and Soyuz-5 were docked in orbit and a transition through open space was made from one ship to another. During the transition, the cosmonauts practiced actions to perform installation work in space, and the entire project was advertised as “the world’s first experimental orbital station.” The entire world press was filled with admiring responses. Some people rated the Soyuz docking even higher than the Apollo 8 flyby of the Moon.

Such a great response inspired the leadership of the USSR, and in 1969 a flight of three Soyuz aircraft was launched at once. Two had to dock, and the third would fly around, making a spectacular report. That is, the game was clearly intended to be played for the public. But the plan did not work out, the automation failed and it was not possible to dock. Nevertheless, valuable experience was gained in mutual maneuvering in orbit, a unique experiment on welding/brazing in a vacuum was conducted, and the interaction of ground services with ships in orbit was worked out. So the group flight was declared generally successful, and after the cosmonauts landed, at a rally, Brezhnev officially declared that “orbital stations are the main route in astronautics.”

What could America oppose? In fact, the project to create its own OS began in the United States long before these events, but it hardly moved, since all possible resources were aimed at ensuring a speedy landing on the Moon. Immediately after A11 finally visited the Moon, the question of building an OS arose at NASA in full force.

Then NASA decided to build an OS from the existing developments as quickly as possible Skylab (in duplicate), canceled two of the last lunar landings, freeing up Saturn 5 rockets to launch these stations into orbit. In what haste they built Skylab and what nonsense it turned out to be is a separate story.

At the very least, they temporarily covered the “hole” in this competition. But in any case, the Skylab program was obviously a dead end, since the launch vehicles necessary for its development had long been discontinued, and it was necessary to fly on the leftovers.

What did they offer?

Then the “Space Activities Planning Group” proposed in coming years(after the Skylab flight) create a huge orbital station, with a crew of dozens of people and a reusable space shuttle for it, carrying cargo and people to the station and back. The main emphasis was on the fact that the planned shuttle would be so cheap to operate and reliable that human space flights would become almost as routine and safe as civil airliner flights.

(that’s when the Russians will put their kerosene disposable rockets to rest)

NASA's original project for building the shuttle was quite rational:

They proposed making a space transportation system consisting of two winged fully reusable stages: “Booster” (“Accelerator”) and “Orbiter”.

It looked like this: one large “plane” carries another, smaller one on its back. Payload was limited to 11 tons (this is important!). The main purpose of the shuttle was to serve the future orbital station. It is a large OS that could create a sufficiently large cargo flow into orbit and, most importantly, from it.

The size of the Booster was supposed to be comparable to the size of a Boeing 747 (about 80 meters long), and the size of the Orbiter was like a Boeing 707 (about 40 meters). Both stages were supposed to be equipped with the most the best engines-oxygen-hydrogen. After takeoff, the Booster, having accelerated the Orbiter, would separate halfway and return/plane itself to base.

The cost of launching such a shuttle would be about 10 million dollars (in prices of those years), subject to fairly frequent flights, 40-60 times a year. (for comparison, the cost of launching the lunar Saturn 5 was then $200 million)

Naturally, the idea of ​​​​creating such a cheap and easy-to-use orbital transport was liked by the Congress/Administration. Let the economy be at its limit, the blacks are destroying the cities, but we’ll push ourselves once again, do a super thing, but then it’s like crazy!

All this is wonderful, but for the creation of the super shuttle alone, NASA wanted a minimum of 9 billion dollars, and the government agreed to allocate only 5, and even then only on the condition of active participation in financing the military. And for a large station they refused to give money at all, reasonably considering that it had already been allocated billions for the program of 2 Skylab stations (which had yet to fly) - quite enough at that time.

But NASA took the bait and eventually gave birth to this option:

Firstly, such a long lateral maneuver required powerful wings, which increased the weight of the shuttle. In addition, the Orbiter shuttle now lacked internal fuel tanks to carry 30 tons of cargo into orbit. We had to attach a huge external tank to it. Naturally, this tank had to be made disposable (it is very difficult to lower such a thin-walled, fragile structure from orbit intact). In addition, the problem arose of creating powerful hydrogen engines capable of lifting this entire colossus. NASA realistically assessed the possibilities in this regard and lowered the requirements for maximum thrust for the main engines, attaching two huge solid propellant boosters (SFC) on the sides to help them. It turned out that the hydrogen “Booster” completely disappeared from the configuration, degenerating into oversized door rockets from the “Katyusha”.

Thus, the Shuttle project in its modern form was finally formed. With the “help” of the military and under the guise of reducing the cost and speeding up development, the Nasovites mutilated the original project beyond recognition. However, it was successfully approved in 1972 and accepted for implementation.

Looking ahead, let's say that even on this misery they still spent far from 5 billion, as they promised. The development of the Shuttle by 1980 cost them 10 billion (in 1977 prices) or about 7 billion in 1971 prices. Note that the idea of ​​​​creating a station has been postponed for an indefinite period and therefore is under new project The shuttle came up with new tasks.

Namely, the purpose of the Shuttle was replanned along the way for the supposedly ultra-cheap launch of commercial and military satellites - everything in a row, from light to super-heavy, as well as the return of satellites from orbit.

There really was a bad problem here. At that time, they simply didn’t make enough satellites to justify the frequent launches of a huge rocket. But our brave scientists were not at a loss! They hired a private contractor, the Mathematics company, which very far-sightedly predicted simply enormous needs for launches in the near future. Hundreds! Thousands of launches! (who would doubt it)

In principle, already at this stage, at the stage of the project approved in 1972, it was clear that the Shuttle would never become a cheap means of launching into orbit, even if everything went like clockwork. Miracles don’t happen - you can’t pull a load three times heavier into orbit, spending the same 10-15 million dollars calculated for original a much lighter and more advanced system. Not to mention that all cost calculations were given for fully reusable a device that the Shuttle could no longer achieve by definition.

And the idea itself is to launch a 100-ton shuttle with people into orbit each time, only to deliver it into space in best case scenario a dozen or two tons of payload - strongly smacks of absurdity.

However, surprisingly, all the numbers and promises that were the original ones for the original project were automatically declared for the castrated version!

Although the loss of almost all the advantages of relatively disposable missiles was obvious. For example, the cost of rescuing from the ocean, restoring, transporting and assembling solid fuel boosters alone turned out to be not much less than the cost of manufacturing new ones.

By the way, the Thiokol Chemical company won a competition for the development of solid fuel accelerators, underestimating the actual cost of transportation costs by three times. Next small example from tons of waste and drank from the budget that accompanied the development Space Shuttle.

The promised safety also turned out to be a complete mess: solid fuel boosters cannot be stopped after ignition and they cannot be shot either, while the crew is deprived of any means of escape at launch. But who cares? NASA was so keen on mastering the budget that without hesitation it announced to Congress that the TTU had achieved 100% reliability. That is, their accident can never happen in principle.

How they looked into the water...

What happened in the end

But trouble came - open the gates, everything turned out to be even more fun when it came to actual development and operation.

Let me remind you:

According to the developers' plans, the Shuttle was to become a reusable, ultra-reliable and safe transport system, with a record low cost of putting cargo and people into orbit. The frequency of flights was supposed to be increased to 50 per year.

But it was smooth on paper...

The plate below clearly shows how “successful” the Shuttle turned out to be

All prices are quoted in 1971 dollars:

Thus, what happened was exactly the opposite

Not reusable

Insufficiently reliable and extremely dangerous in the event of an accident

With a record high cost of reaching orbit.

Not reusable - because after the Shuttle flight the external tank is lost, many critical elements of the system become unusable or require expensive restoration. Namely:

Restoring solid propellant boosters costs almost half the cost of manufacturing new ones, plus transportation, plus maintaining the infrastructure to catch them in the ocean.

After every landing major renovation marching engines pass, worse than that- their service life turned out to be so low that they had to manufacture an additional 50 propulsion engines for 5 shuttles!

The chassis is completely replaceable;

The heat-protective coating of the airframe requires a long recovery after each flight. (question - what is truly reusable in the system then? Space Shuttle ? only the shuttle body remains)

It turned out that before each launch, the “reusable” Orbiter needs a long, expensive restoration that lasts for months. Plus the launches themselves are constantly and for a long time postponed due to numerous problems. Sometimes you even have to remove components from one shuttle in order to launch another as quickly as possible. All this deprives MTKS of the ability to launch frequently (something that could somehow reduce the cost of operation).

Further, as already mentioned, during its development, NASA assured Congress that the reliability of the TTU can be conditionally considered 1. Therefore, no rescue systems were provided at the launch and they saved a lot on this. For which the Challenger crew paid.

The disaster itself occurred through the fault of NASA management, which, on the one hand, tried to increase the frequency of launches to the maximum at any cost (in order to reduce costs and put on a good face in a bad game), and on the other hand, ignored the operational requirements for technical specifications, which did not allow launches at sub-zero temperatures. temperatures. And that ill-fated launch had already been postponed many times and further waiting disrupted the entire flight schedule. Therefore, they did not care about the temperature conditions, they gave the go-ahead for the launch and the frozen intersection gasket in the TTU, having lost its elasticity, burned out, the escaped torch burned through the external tank and .... Bang!

After the Challenger disaster, the structure had to be strengthened and made heavier, which is why the required carrying capacity was never achieved. As a result, the Shuttle puts into orbit a payload only slightly larger than our Proton.

In addition, this disaster, in addition to a two-year delay in flights, ultimately led to the disruption of the very long-awaited Freedom OS program, on the development of which, by the way, 10 billion dollars were ultimately spent! Due to the reduced actual carrying capacity, the Freedom developers were unable to fit the station modules into the cargo compartment.

As for the Columbia disaster, the problems with damage to the TZP at launch were known from the very beginning, but they were ignored in the same way. Although the danger was obvious! And it still persists, since this problem has not yet received a fundamental solution.

As a result, today the Shuttles have not flown even 30% of the planned flights and the program will be closed by 2010, otherwise the probability of another disaster is unacceptably high!

Program history "Space Shuttle" began in the late 1960s, at the height of the triumph of the American national space program. On June 20, 1969, two Americans, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin, landed on the moon. By winning the “moon” race, America brilliantly proved its superiority and thereby decided its main task in space exploration, proclaimed by the President John Kennedy in his famous speech on May 25, 1962: “I believe that our people can set themselves the goal of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth before the end of this decade.”

Thus, on July 24, 1969, when the crew of Apollo 11 returned to Earth, the American program had lost its goal, which immediately affected the revision of further plans and the reduction of appropriations for the Apollo program. And although flights to the Moon continued, America was faced with the question: what should man do next in space?

The fact that such a question would arise was obvious long before July 1969. And the first evolutionary attempt to answer was natural and reasonable: NASA proposed, using the unique technology developed for the Apollo program, to expand the scope of work in space: to conduct a long expedition to the Moon, build a base on its surface, create manned space stations for regular observation of the Earth, organize factories in space, and finally begin manned exploration and exploration of Mars, asteroids and distant planets...

Even initial stage This program required maintaining spending on civil space at a level of at least $6 billion per year. But America, the richest country in the world, could not afford this: President L. Johnson needed money for the announced social programs and for the war in Vietnam. Therefore, on August 1, 1968, a year before the moon landing, a fundamental decision was made: to limit the production of Saturn launch vehicles to the first order - 12 copies of Saturn-1B and 15 Saturn-5 products. This meant that lunar technology would no longer be used - and all proposals further development The Apollo program ultimately left only the experimental orbital station Skylab. We needed new goals and new technical means for people's access to space, and on October 30, 1968, two main NASA centers (the Manned Spacecraft Center - MSC - in Houston and the Marshall Space Center - MSFC - in Huntsville) approached American space firms with a proposal to explore the possibility of creating a reusable space system .

Before this, all launch vehicles were disposable - when launching a payload into orbit, they spent themselves without a trace. Spacecraft were also disposable, with the rarest exception in the field of manned spacecraft - the Mercury with serial numbers 2, 8 and 14 and the second Gemini flew twice. Now the task was formulated: to create a reusable system, when both the launch vehicle and the spacecraft return after the flight and are used repeatedly, and thereby reduce the cost of space transport operations by 10 times, which was very important in conditions of budget deficit.

In February 1969, studies were ordered from four companies in order to identify the most prepared one for concluding a contract. In July 1970, two companies already received orders for more detailed work. In parallel, research was carried out in the MSC technical directorate under the leadership of Maxime Faget.

The carrier and the ship were intended to be winged and manned. They were supposed to launch vertically, like a conventional launch vehicle. The carrier aircraft operated as the first stage of the system and, after separation of the ship, landed at the airfield. The ship, using onboard fuel, was launched into orbit, carried out the task, left orbit and also landed “like an airplane.” The name “Space Shuttle” was assigned to the system.

In September, the Space Task Force under the leadership of Vice President S. Agnew, formed to formulate new goals in space, proposed two options: a “maximum” expedition to Mars, a manned station in lunar orbit, and a heavy Earth station for 50 people, serviced by ships reusable. "At a minimum" - only the space station and the space shuttle. But President Nixon rejected all options, because even the cheapest one required $5 billion a year.
NASA faced a difficult choice: it was necessary to either begin a new major development that would preserve personnel and accumulated experience, or announce the termination of the manned program. It was decided to insist on creating a shuttle, but not to present it as a transport ship for assembly and maintenance space station(keeping this in reserve, however), but as a system capable of generating profit and recouping investments by launching satellites into orbit on a commercial basis. An economic assessment carried out in 1970 showed that if a number of conditions were met (at least 30 shuttle flights per year, low operating costs and complete abandonment of disposable media), payback was in principle achievable.

Note this very important point in understanding the history of the shuttle. At the stage of conceptual studies of the appearance of the new transport system, a change in the fundamental approach to design occurred: instead of creating a device for specific purposes within the allocated funds, the developers began to save at any cost, by “pulling by the ears” economic calculations and future operating conditions existing project shuttle, preserving the created production capacities and jobs. In other words, the shuttle was not designed for tasks, but tasks and business case were adjusted to his project in order to save the industry and the American manned space program. This approach was “pushed” in Congress by the “space” lobby, consisting of senators who came from “aerospace” states - primarily Florida and California.

It was precisely this approach that confused Soviet experts, who did not understand the true motives in making the decision to develop the shuttle. After all, verification calculations of the declared economic efficiency of the shuttle, carried out in the USSR, showed that the costs of its creation and operation would never be recouped (and so it happened!), and the expected Earth-orbit-Earth cargo flow was not supported by real or designed payloads. Not knowing about future plans to create a large space station, our experts formed the opinion that the Americans were preparing for something - after all, a device was being created whose capabilities significantly anticipated all foreseeable goals in the use of space... “Fuel on the fire” of mistrust and fears and the participation of the US Department of Defense in determining the future appearance of the shuttle added to the uncertainty. But it couldn’t be otherwise, because the rejection of disposable launch vehicles meant that the shuttles should also launch all promising devices of the US Department of Defense, CIA and National Security Agency. The military's demands boiled down to the following:

• Firstly, the shuttle was supposed to be able to launch into orbit the KH-II optical-electronic reconnaissance satellite (the military prototype of the Hubble Space Telescope), which was developed in the first half of the 1970s, providing terrain resolution of no worse than 0.3 m when shooting from orbit ; and a family of cryogenic interorbital tugs. The geometric and weight dimensions of the secret satellite and tugs determined the dimensions of the cargo compartment - a length of at least 18 m and a width (diameter) of at least 4.5 meters. The ability of the shuttle to deliver cargo weighing up to 29,500 kg into orbit and return up to 14,500 kg from space to Earth was determined similarly. All conceivable civilian payloads fit within the specified parameters without problems. However, Soviet experts, who closely followed the “commencement” of the shuttle project and did not know about the new American spy satellite, could explain the selected dimensions of the useful compartment and the shuttle’s carrying capacity only by the desire of the “American military” to be able to inspect and, if necessary, remove (more precisely, capture) from orbit, Soviet manned stations of the "DOS" series (long-term orbital stations) developed by TsKBEM and military OPS (manned orbital stations) "Almaz" developed by OKB-52 V. Chelomey. By the way, the OPS was installed “just in case” automatic gun Nudelman-Richter designs.
• secondly, the military demanded that the designed amount of lateral maneuver during the descent of the orbital vehicle in the atmosphere be increased from the original 600 km to 2000-2500 km for ease of landing on a limited number of military airfields. To launch into circumpolar orbits (with an inclination of 56º...104º), the Air Force decided to build its own technical, launch and landing complexes at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

The military's payload requirements predetermined the size of the orbital vehicle and the launch mass of the system as a whole. Increased lateral maneuver required significant lift at hypersonic speeds - this is how the ship got a double-swept wing and powerful thermal protection.
In 1971, it became finally clear that NASA would not receive the $9-10 billion needed to create a completely reusable system. This is the second major turning point in the history of the shuttle. Before this, designers still had two alternatives - to spend a lot of money on development and build a reusable space system with a low cost of each launch (and operation in general), or try to save money at the design stage and transfer costs into the future by creating a system that is expensive to operate. for the high cost of a one-time launch. High cost launch in this case was determined by the presence of disposable elements in the ISS. To save the project, the designers took the second path, abandoning the “expensive” design of a reusable system in favor of a “cheap” semi-reusable one, thereby putting a final end to all plans for the future payback of the system.

In March 1972, on the basis of the Houston project MSC-040C, the appearance of the shuttle that we know today was approved: solid-fuel launch boosters, a disposable tank of fuel components and an orbital ship with three main engines, deprived of air-breathing engines for landing. The development of such a system, where everything except the external tank is reused, was estimated at $5.15 billion.

It was under these conditions that Nixon announced the creation of the shuttle in January 1972. The election race was already underway, and the Republicans were happy to enlist the support of voters in the “aerospace” states. On July 26, 1972, North American Rockwell's Space Transportation Systems Division was awarded a $2.6 billion contract, which included the design of an orbital vehicle, the manufacture of two testbeds and two flight products. The development of the ship's propulsion engines was entrusted to Rocketdyne - a division of the same Rockwell, the external fuel tank - to the Martin Marietta company, and the boosters - to United Space Boosters Inc. and the solid fuel engines themselves - on Morton Thiokol. On NASA's part, leadership and oversight were provided by the MSC (orbital stage) and MSFC (other components).

Initially, flying ships were designated OV-101, OV-102, and so on. Production of the first two began at the US Air Force Plant N42 in Palmdale in June 1974. The OV-101 ship was released on September 17, 1976 and was named Enterprise after the starship from the science fiction television series Star Trek. After horizontal flight tests, they planned to convert it into an orbital vehicle, but OV-102 was to be the first to reach orbit.

During tests of the Enterprise - atmospheric in 1977 and vibration in 1978 - it turned out that the wings and the middle part of the fuselage needed to be significantly strengthened. These solutions were partially implemented on the OV-102 during the assembly process, but the ship's carrying capacity had to be limited to 80% of the nominal capacity. The second flight prototype was needed to be fully functional, capable of launching heavy satellites, and in order to strengthen the design of the OV-101, it would have to be almost completely disassembled. At the end of 1978, a solution was born: it would be faster and cheaper to bring the STA-099 static test machine to flight condition. On January 5 and 29, 1979, NASA awarded contracts to Rockwell International for the development of STA-099 into the OV-099 flight vehicle ($596.6 million in 1979 prices), for the modification of Columbia after flight testing ($28 million) and for construction OV-103 and OV-104 ($1653.3 million). And on January 25, all four orbital stages received proper names OV-102 became Columbia, OV-099 became Challenger, OV-103 became Discovery, and OV-104 became Atlantis. Subsequently, to replenish the shuttle fleet after the death of the Challenger, the OV-105 Endeavor VKS was built.

So what is a "Space Shuttle"?
Structurally reusable transport space system(MTKS) The Space Shuttle consists of two salvageable solid rocket boosters, which are actually the first stage, and an orbital vehicle with three oxygen-hydrogen propulsion engines and an outboard fuel compartment, forming the second stage, while the fuel compartment is the only disposable element of the entire system. It is envisaged that solid fuel accelerators will be used twenty times, the orbital vehicle will be used one hundred times, and oxygen-hydrogen engines are designed for 55 flights.

During the design, it was assumed that such an MTKS with a launch mass of 1995-2050 tons would be able to launch into orbit with an inclination of 28.5 degrees. a payload weighing 29.5 tons into a sun-synchronous orbit - 14.5 tons and returning a payload weighing 14.5 tons to Earth from orbit. It was also assumed that the number of MTKS launches could be increased to 55-60 per year. In the first flight, the launch mass of the Space Shuttle MTKS was 2022 tons, the mass of the manned orbital vehicle during insertion into orbit was 94.8 tons, and during landing - 89.1 tons.

The development of such a system is a very complex and time-consuming problem, as evidenced by the fact that today the indicators laid down at the beginning of development have not been met. total costs for the creation of the system, the cost of its launch and the timing of its creation. Thus, the cost increased from 5.2 billion dollars. (in 1971 prices) up to 10.1 billion dollars. (in 1982 prices), launch cost - from 10.5 million dollars. up to 240 million dollars It was not possible to meet the deadline for the first experimental flight scheduled for 1979.

A total of seven shuttles have been built to date, five ships were intended for space flights, two of which were lost in disasters.

"Space Shuttle" ( Space Shuttle- space shuttle) - a reusable US manned transport spacecraft designed to deliver people and cargo to low near-Earth orbits and back. The shuttles were used as part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) state program"Space Transportation System" (STS).

Shuttle Discovery ( Discovery, OV-103) began construction in 1979. It was transferred to NASA in November 1982. The shuttle was named after one of the two ships on which British captain James Cook discovered Hawaiian Islands and explored the coast of Alaska and northwestern Canada. The shuttle made its first flight into space on August 30, 1984, and its last from February 24 to March 9, 2011.
His “record” includes such important operations as the first flights after the death of the Challenger and Columbia shuttles, the delivery of the Hubble Space Telescope into orbit, the launch of the Ulysses automatic interplanetary station onto the flight path, as well as the second flight to "Hubble" for carrying out preventive and repair work. During its service, the shuttle made 39 flights into Earth orbit and spent 365 days in space.

(Atlantis, OV-104) was commissioned by NASA in April 1985. The shuttle was named after an oceanographic research sail vessel that was owned by the Massachusetts Oceanographic Institute and operated from 1930 to 1966. The shuttle made its first flight on October 3, 1985. Atlantis was the first shuttle to dock with the Russian orbital station"Mir", and in total he made seven flights to it.

The Atlantis shuttle delivered the Magellan and Galileo space probes into orbit, which were then sent to Venus and Jupiter, as well as one of NASA's four orbital observatories. Atlantis was the last spacecraft launched under the Space Shuttle program. Atlantis made its last flight on July 8-21, 2011; the crew for this flight was reduced to four people.
During its service, the shuttle completed 33 flights into Earth orbit and spent 307 days in space.

In 1991, the American space shuttle fleet was replenished ( Endeavor, OV-105), named after one of the ships of the British fleet on which Captain James Cook traveled. Its construction began in 1987. It was built to replace the space shuttle Challenger that crashed. Endeavor is the most modern of the American space shuttles, and many of the innovations first tested on it were later used in the modernization of other shuttles. The first flight took place on May 7, 1992.
During its service, the shuttle completed 25 flights into Earth orbit and spent 299 days in space.

In total, the shuttles made 135 flights. The shuttles are designed for a two-week stay in orbit. The longest space journey was made by the Columbia shuttle in November 1996 - 17 days 15 hours 53 minutes, the shortest - in November 1981 - 2 days 6 hours 13 minutes. Typically, shuttle flights lasted from 5 to 16 days.
They were used to launch cargo into orbit, conduct scientific research, maintenance of orbital spacecraft (installation and repair work).

In the 1990s, the shuttles took part in the joint Russian-American Mir - Space Shuttle program. Nine dockings were made with the Mir orbital station. The shuttles played an important role in the project to create the International Space Station (ISS). Eleven flights were carried out under the ISS program.
The reason for the cessation of shuttle flights is the depletion of the spacecraft's service life and the huge financial costs of preparing and maintaining space shuttles.
Each shuttle flight cost about $450 million. For this money, the shuttle orbiter could deliver 20-25 tons of cargo, including modules for the station, and seven to eight astronauts in one flight to the ISS.

Since the demise of NASA's Space Shuttle program in 2011, all shuttles have been "retired". The unflying shuttle Enterprise, which was located at the National Air and Space Museum of the Smithsonian Institution in Washington (USA), was delivered to the aircraft carrier museum Intrepid in New York (USA) in June 2012. Its place at the Smithsonian Institution was taken by the space shuttle Discovery. The shuttle Endeavor was delivered to California in mid-October 2012. science center, where it will be installed as an exhibit.

The shuttle is scheduled to arrive at Kennedy Space Center in Florida in early 2013.

The material was prepared based on information from RIA Novosti and open sources

Atlantis enters Earth's atmosphere as it returns from the ISS

On July 8, 2011, the shuttle Atlantis was launched for the last time to the ISS. This was also the last flight of the Space Shuttle program. On board the device was a crew of four astroauts. The crew included the ship's commander, astronaut Chris Ferguson, pilot Doug Hurley and flight specialists - astronauts Sandra Magnus and Rex Walheim. On July 19, the shuttle undocked from the ISS module and returned to Earth on July 21.

At this time, Michael Fossum was on board the ISS, who was delivered to the station by Soyuz TMA-02M in June 2011. He also received the role of commander of ISS-29. On July 21, Michael Fossum decided to capture the final flight of Atlantis on camera. According to him, during the filming work his hands were shaking - he understood that none of the shuttles would fly anywhere else, this would be the last return of Atlantis to Earth.

Fossum has been to the ISS twice before, both times on the Discovery shuttle: in 2006 and 2008. During the departure of Atlantis, he recalled seeing the shuttle's fiery trail as it landed at NASA's Kennedy Space Center. “I remembered how bright and vibrant it was and decided that using some photography techniques, I could get a great view of Atlantis landing from the station,” says Fossum.

The photographs were taken from here, from the ISS dome.

In order to get great shots, the astronaut needed to practice. During the nine days that Atlantis was docked to the ISS, he spent his free time trying to shoot in low light. The photographer installed a camera holder on the ISS window and photographed the northern lights. Over the course of nine days, the astronaut changed many camera settings in order to achieve best effect when shooting.

Until the moment Atlantis undocked, a high atmosphere reigned at the station. But after the shuttle undocked and a number of astronauts flew away, the mood of the remaining people changed dramatically. “On the last day, with three shifts working eight hours, I decided to say bye to everyone because I knew they would fly out and something like this wouldn’t happen again. We decided to have a special ceremony..." Fossum said.

The event was held, the astronauts said a lot of good things to each other, and the shuttle went home. Fossum managed to take about 100 photographs during the descent of Atlantis. While taking photographs, he noticed that his hands were shaking, because all this was the last time, and the historical moment was supposed to remain in the photographs.

Atlantis delivered a large amount of food to the ISS, and the crew threw a kind of farewell party with a bunch of delicacies (if food for astronauts can be called that).

Last launch of the space shuttle Atlantis

The Space Shuttle or simply Shuttle (eng. Space Shuttle - “space shuttle”) is an American reusable transport spacecraft. When the project was developed, it was believed that the shuttles would fly frequently to orbit and back, delivering payloads, people and equipment.

The shuttle project has been developed by North American Rockwell on behalf of NASA since 1971. When creating the system, technologies developed for the lunar modules of the Apollo program of the 1960s were used: experiments with solid rocket boosters, systems for their separation and receiving fuel from an external tank. The project produced five shuttles and one prototype. Unfortunately, two shuttles were destroyed in disasters. Flights into space were carried out from April 12, 1981 to July 21, 2011.

In 1985, NASA planned that by 1990 there would be 24 launches per year, and each space shuttle would make up to 100 flights into space. Unfortunately, the shuttles flew much less frequently - over 30 years of operation, 135 launches were made. The most flights (39) were made by the Discovery shuttle.

The first operational reusable orbital vehicle was the space shuttle Columbia. It began construction in March 1975 and was transferred to NASA's Kennedy Space Center in March 1979. Unfortunately, the space shuttle Columbia died in a disaster on February 1, 2003, as the vehicle entered the Earth's atmosphere to land.

The final landing of Atlantis marked the end of an era.

What is a shuttle? This is a flying design American manufacturers. The word "shuttle" itself means "shuttle". Designed for repeated launches, the shuttles were originally intended to fly back and forth between Earth and its orbit to deliver cargo.

The article will be devoted to shuttles - spacecraft, as well as all other shuttles that exist today.

History of creation

Before answering the question of what a shuttle is, let's consider the history of its creation. It begins in the late 60s of the 20th century in the USA, when the question of designing a reusable space mechanism was raised. This was due to economic benefits. Intensive use of the space shuttle was supposed to reduce the high costs of space.

The concept provided for the formation of an orbital point on the Moon, and missions in Earth orbit were to be carried out by reusable vessels called the Space Shuttle.

In 1972, documents were signed that determined the appearance of the future shuttle.

The design program has been prepared by North American Rockwell on behalf of NASA since 1971. During the development of the program, technological ideas from the Apollo system were used. Five shuttles were designed, two of which did not survive the crashes. Flights were carried out from 1981 to 2011.

According to NASA plans, 24 launches were to be carried out annually, and each board was to perform up to 100 flights. But during the work, only 135 launches were completed. The Discovery shuttle distinguished itself by the largest number of flights.

System design

Let's look at what a shuttle is from the point of view of its design. It is launched via a pair of rocket boosters and three engines supplied with fuel from an impressively sized external tank.

Maneuvers in orbit are performed using engines of a special system designed for orbital maneuvers. This system includes the following steps:

• Two rocket boosters that operate for two minutes from the moment they are turned on. They give direction to the ship, then detach from it and fly into the ocean using parachutes. After refueling, the boosters are put back into operation.
• Refueling tank with hydrogen and oxygen supply for main engines. The tank is also thrown away, but a little later - after 8.5 minutes. Almost all of it burns in the atmosphere, and its fragments end up in the oceanic space.
• A manned vessel that lands in orbit and houses the crew and assists in scientific research. Having completed the program, the orbital vehicle flies to Earth and lands like a glider on the area allocated for landing.

Externally, the shuttle looks like an airplane, but, in fact, it is a heavy glider. The shuttle has no fuel reserves for its engines. The engines operate while the shuttle is connected to the fuel tank. While in space, as well as during landing, the ship uses not very powerful small engines. It was planned to equip the shuttle with jet engines, but the idea was abandoned due to the high cost.

The lifting force of the ship is low; landing occurs due to kinetic energy. The ship goes from orbit to the cosmodrome. That is, he only has one chance to land. Unfortunately, there is no opportunity to turn around and make a second circle. For this reason, NASA has built several reserve sites for landing aircraft.

Operating principles of accelerators

Side boosters are large, super-powerful solid-fuel devices that produce thrust to lift the shuttle away from the launch area and fly to an altitude of 46 km. Accelerator dimensions:

• 45.5 m long;
• 3.7 m - diameter;
• 580 thousand kg - mass.

It is not possible to stop the boosters after starting, so they are turned on after the other three engines have started properly. 75 seconds after launch, the boosters separate from the system, fly by inertia, and reach maximum height, then land in the ocean using parachutes at a distance of approximately 226 km from the launch. In this case, the landing speed is 23 m/s. Technical service specialists assemble the accelerators and send them to the manufacturing plant, where they are refurbished for reuse. Repair and reconstruction of shuttles are also explained by economic considerations, because creating a new ship is much more expensive.

Functions performed

According to the military’s requirements, the aircraft was supposed to deliver cargo up to 30 tons and deliver cargo up to 14.5 tons to Earth. For this, the cargo compartment had to have dimensions of 18 meters in length and 4.5 m in diameter.

The space program did not set as its goal “bomber” operations. Neither NASA, nor the Pentagon, nor the US Congress confirm such information. The Dyna-Soar project was developed for bombing purposes. However, over time, intelligence activities were carried out within the framework of the project. Gradually Dyna-Soar became research project, and in 1963 it was completely canceled. Many of Dyna-Soar's results carried over into the shuttle project.

The shuttles delivered cargo to an altitude of 200-500 km, they carried out many scientific developments, serviced spacecraft at orbital points, and were engaged in assembly and restoration work. The shuttles carried out flights to repair telescopic equipment.

In the 1990s, shuttles participated in the Mir-Shuttle program, conducted jointly by Russia and the United States. Nine dockings with the Mir station were carried out.

The design of the shuttles was constantly improved. Over the entire period of use of ships, thousands of devices have been developed.

The shuttles helped in the implementation of the formation project. Many modules on the ISS were delivered using the shuttles. Some of these modules are not equipped with engines, and therefore are not capable of autonomous movement and maneuvering. To deliver them to the station, you need a cargo ship or shuttle. The role of the shuttles in this direction cannot be overestimated.

Some interesting data

The average stay of a spacecraft in space is two weeks. The shortest flight was carried out by the Columbia shuttle, which lasted a little longer than two days. The longest voyage of the Columbia ship was 17 days.

The crew consists of two to eight astronauts, including a pilot and commander. The shuttle orbits ranged from 185,643 km.

The Space Shuttle program was canceled in 2011. It existed for 30 years. Over the entire period of its operation, 135 flights were made. The shuttles covered 872 million km and lifted cargo with a total weight of 1.6 thousand tons. 355 astronauts visited orbit. The cost of one flight was approximately $450 million. The total cost of the entire program was $160 billion.

The last launch was the launch of Atlantis. In it, the crew was reduced to four people.

As a result of the project, all shuttles were canceled and sent to a museum storage facility.

Disasters

Space shuttles have suffered only two disasters in their entire history.

In 1986, the Challenger exploded 73 seconds after launch. The cause was an accident in a solid fuel accelerator. The entire crew died - seven people. The shuttle debris burned up in the atmosphere. Following the crash, the program was suspended for 32 months.

In 2003, the space shuttle Columbia burned down. The cause was the destruction of the ship's heat-protective shell. The entire crew died - seven people.

The Soviet leadership closely monitored the process of implementing the program to create and implement the American space shuttles. This project was perceived as a threat from the United States. It has been suggested that:

• shuttles can be used as platforms for nuclear weapons;
• American shuttles can steal satellites from Earth orbit Soviet Union.

In the end soviet government decided to build its own space mechanism, with parameters not inferior to the American one.

In addition to the Soviet Union, many countries, following the United States, began to design their own multiple spacecraft. These are Germany, France, Japan, China.

Following the American ship, the Buran shuttle was created in the Soviet Union. It was intended to perform military and peaceful tasks.

At first, the ship was conceived as an exact copy of the American invention. But during the development process some difficulties arose, so Soviet designers had to look for their own solutions. One of the obstacles was the lack of engines similar to the American ones. More precisely, in the USSR, engines had completely different technical parameters.

The Buran flight took place in 1988. This happened under the control of the on-board computer. The landing of the shuttle determined the success of the flight, which many high-ranking officials did not believe in. The fundamental difference between the Buran and the American shuttles was that the Soviet counterpart was able to land on its own. American ships did not have such an opportunity.

Design Features

"Buran" had an impressive size, like its overseas counterparts. The cabin accommodated ten people.

An important design feature was the heat-protective shell, the weight of which was over 7 tons.

The spacious cargo compartment could accommodate loads large sizes, including space satellites.

The launch of the ship was a two-stage process. First, four missiles and engines were separated from the ship. The second stage is engines with oxygen and hydrogen.

When creating Buran, one of the main requirements was its reusability. Only the fuel tank was disposable. American boosters had the opportunity to splash down in the ocean. Soviet accelerators landed in the steppes near Baikonur, so their secondary use was not possible.

The second feature of the Buran was that the engines were located on the fuel tank and therefore burned out in the air. The designers were faced with the task of making the engines reusable, which could reduce the cost of the space exploration program.

If you look at the shuttle (the photo shows it) and its Soviet counterpart, you get the impression that these ships are identical. But this is only an external similarity with the fundamental internal differences between the two systems.

So, we looked at what a shuttle is. But these days, this word refers not only to ships for extraterrestrial flights. The idea of ​​the shuttle was embodied in many inventions of science and technology.

Car-ship

Honda released a car called the Shuttle. It was originally produced for the USA and given the name Odyssey. This free car was a success in the New World due to its excellent technical parameters.

The Honda Shuttle was released directly for Europe. At first, this was the name given to the Honda Civic station wagon, which resembled a microvan. But in 1991 it was removed from a number of produced modifications. The name "Shuttle" remained unclaimed. And only in 1994, Japanese machine builders released a new minivan with that name. Why the manufacturers decided to settle on such a model name, one can only guess. Perhaps the idea of ​​a fast space shuttle struck the car creators, and they wanted to create a unique fast car.

The Shuttle is a 5-door station wagon with high cross-country ability. The body has rounded corners, most of the surface is glazed. The salon is distinguished by the possibility of transformation. The seats are arranged in three rows, the last one is retracted into a niche. The cabin has air conditioning, comfortable seats with plenty of space.

The car is extremely comfortable while driving thanks to the energy-intensive front and rear suspension. The Shuttle successfully copes with the tasks assigned on the road. However, there were no more deliveries of this model to Europe; its place was taken by the Honda Stream.

Developing in 2011, it begins production of the Fit Shuttle line. The line is based on the Honda Fit hatchback.

The car has a 1.5 liter unit and a 1.3 liter hybrid. Both front- and rear-wheel drive vehicles are produced.

The Honda Fit Shuttle is characterized as an economical, spacious, ergonomic and comfortable car on the road. The car drives great on the streets of big cities. It is suitable for family vacation and for business.

The Honda Fit Shuttle is equipped to meet the highest safety requirements. It contains airbags, ABS, ESP.

"Fit Shuttle" is still very popular among car owners and has the highest ratings.

Together with children

You can take a flight on the star shuttle with your child by turning on the image and purchasing a Lego toy. The first space-themed set was released by the company back in 1973. It was a game in the form of a constructor. Since then, several series of “space” sets have been produced, belonging to different price levels.

The popular set with article number 60078 includes:

• service shuttle;
• space satellite;
• astronaut figures;
• stickers;
• assembly information.

The packaging depicts a spaceship, astronauts, planet Earth and its satellite - the Moon. In Lego, the shuttle is the main element of the set. It is made from parts white with dark inserts and bright red stripes. Its cabin can accommodate two astronaut figures. There are two of them in the set - a man and a woman. In the ship they sit next to each other. To get into the cabin, you need to remove it top part.

The Lego Shuttle set has become the desired embodiment of the dreams of everyone who dreams of ideas space wars. Its main component is not a fictional ship, but a completely realistic one. The space shuttle receives positive reviews about itself; it strongly resembles authentic American ships that roamed the expanses of space. Along with this unique set You can plunge into the world of space travel and flights together with your child. Moreover, you can play not only with boys, but also with girls, because it’s not for nothing that the set includes a female astronaut figure.

Stolen ship

The Lego company also created the Tydirium shuttle, which reminds us of numerous episodes of Star Wars. In total, the company has produced six such ships since 2001. They all differ in size.

The Imperial shuttle was stolen by the rebels, and now it is necessary to return it. Exciting adventures with the heroes of star travel await little players.

The set includes minifigures: Princess Leia, Han Solo, Chewbacca, Rebels - 2 pcs. The shuttle itself is made in white with gray inserts. The cockpit fits two figures and opens through the top of the nose. There is a cargo compartment behind the cab. Manufacturers say the shuttle assembly process could take 2 to 6 hours. With the help of minifigures, you can play out many exciting scenes.

Space games for computer

Bethesda, inspired by the idea of ​​exploring outer space, released the game Prey for consoles and computers with an interesting plot. It is based on a non-existent reality in which American President John Kennedy remained alive after the assassination attempt and began to intensively develop space exploration projects.

Aliens from outer space are attacking planet Earth. They are called typhons. The USA and USSR are joining forces in the fight against enemy forces. But the USSR is collapsing, and only the United States has to eliminate the Typhons. Scientists can control the brains of aliens and also gain their abilities.

One of the missions of the game is to get on the shuttle. For many this is a real problem.

Experienced players have conquered the shuttle in Prey and are giving advice to newcomers. In order to climb onto the ship, you need to go down to one of the lower rooms and find the key card there. The key helps you open the door and find the elevator. You need to go up the elevator, find a terminal there, which is activated, after which a bridge appears. Using the bridge they get on the shuttle.

Bus options

Nowadays, shuttles are called not only spaceships in reality and in games, but also bus transport. As a rule, these are fast buses that deliver passengers from the airport to the hotel, to the metro station, or vice versa. It can also be corporate transport that transports passengers to various events. The shuttle schedule is prepared in advance. As a rule, they run quite frequently, which is extremely convenient.

So we've sorted it out ambiguous word"shuttle", looked at all the areas in which it is used, and also gave fascinating stories related to space shuttles.