• just_another_person@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    Nah, it goes WAY back to pre-WW2. Russia basically made copying everyone else’s technology a major economic driver for them for decades, and it was all based around trying to sucker poorer countries into buying their awful products.

    Cameras, radios, cars, weapons. Hell they even stole NASA Space Shuttle designs and tech to build their own, which just ended up in a junkyard.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      And the Buran system was more impressive than the shuttle, capable of completely automated flight!

        • just_another_person@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          I don’t think it was ever confirmed. They only flew the thing once, which was confirmed. Anything else claiming superior tech I’d call USSR propaganda.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m not sure whether the orbital flight counts as test or operational, but that one. The prior test flights only had automated landings.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        So they say but since it never even went into space it’s a bold claim.

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’m reading that it orbited at an altitude of up to 263 km, well above the Karman line. Is that not space?

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Well that’s debatable but really the point is it never did a re-entry so we really don’t know how reusable it would have been.

            • catloaf@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              If it didn’t do a reentry, how did it get down from that altitude?

              • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                By landing?

                Reentry doesn’t mean flying downwards it means actually coming in at a high enough speed to generate heating. Otherwise it’s just falling.

                • catloaf@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I’m pretty sure any reentry from orbit is going to involve high enough speeds to generate heating.

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          It’s just like their foxbat claims…turned out it was a flying brick.

          Edit: apparently I pissed off some tankies lol

          It’s well known that the foxbat was heavily exaggerated in its capabilities. It’s how we ended up with the f15 and it’s insane capabilities. Just like now russia fighting in Ukraine, paper tiger.