Буран/BURAN shuttle, Copy or Inspiration

[compsystems]

Source: https://translate.google.com/translate?s...&edit-text=

[Mark Hardman]

While we could focus on the similarities and differences between the two program's shuttle hardware, I think the real difference was in the intended purpose and use of Buran. In a 2011 interview published in New Scientist, cosmonaut Oleg Kotov had the following exchange:

Quote:New Scientist: After the cold war, why didn’t Russia maintain its shuttle programme?
Oleg Kotov: We had no civilian tasks for Buran and the military ones were no longer needed. It was originally designed as a military system for weapon delivery, maybe even nuclear weapons. The American shuttle also has military uses.

The idea was to drop weapons from orbit?
Yes, absolutely. A shuttle is particularly useful for this because it can change its orbit and trajectory – so an attack from it is almost impossible to protect against. But the need for such military applications ended.

Absolutely chilling IMHO.

Mark Hardman

[compsystems]

Unfortunately or fortunately, chernobyl ended with the USSR and many projects (space and science) were canceled in the following years.

Something related:
DRAKON is an algorithmic visual programming language developed within the Buran space project

http://drakon-editor.sourceforge.net/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAKON

[Vtile]

I can see the similarities of the Dragon lang. and IEC-61131-3 Sequential Function Chart lang.(is older than the standard IIRC) or that old french system what the namw of it were have escaped from my head hm.. Anyway it a bit odd that these high-level highly abstract and highly autodocumenting languages haven't had more foodhold outside certain niche markets.. eh, maybe they aren't kewl enough.

[Mark Hardman]

(12-28-2016 09:23 PM)compsystems Wrote:  Unfortunately or fortunately, chernobyl ended with the USSR.

"Very good, Louis. Short, but pointless."
-- Egon Spengler (Ghostbusters 2)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_th4Xe6Dsm4

[Massimo Gnerucci]

(12-29-2016 01:45 AM)Mark Hardman Wrote:  "Very good, Louis. Short, but pointless."
-- Egon Spengler (Ghostbusters 2)

[jch]

(12-28-2016 11:57 PM)Vtile Wrote:  I can see the similarities of the Dragon lang. and IEC-61131-3 Sequential Function Chart lang.(is older than the standard IIRC) or that old french system what the namw of it were have escaped from my head hm..

Do you mean Grafcet ?
I remember learning it in the early 80s, mainly to program PLCs.

[Vtile]

(12-29-2016 07:34 PM)jch Wrote:  

(12-28-2016 11:57 PM)Vtile Wrote:  I can see the similarities of the Dragon lang. and IEC-61131-3 Sequential Function Chart lang.(is older than the standard IIRC) or that old french system what the namw of it were have escaped from my head hm..

Do you mean Grafcet ?
I remember learning it in the early 80s, mainly to program PLCs.

Yes that was it - Grafcet, but did it have language application or were it "only" a design system..? IIRC 5-series of Siemens Simatics did have something that were similar to Sequential Function Charts (if so name were certainly different, since it were before standard as Simatic 5 introduced in the 1979 ... wikipedia is a friend Graph5)..

[jch]

(12-29-2016 10:59 PM)Vtile Wrote:  Yes that was it - Grafcet, but did it have language application or were it "only" a design system..? IIRC 5-series of Siemens Simatics did have something that were similar to Sequential Function Charts (if so name were certainly different, since it were before standard as Simatic 5 introduced in the 1979 ... wikipedia is a friend Graph5)..

I used it as a design tool when I was a student, and I then had to translate the program to hexadecimal instructions for a PB100 PLC.
However I never got to use it IRL, as well as PLCs.

[compsystems]

http://danielmarin.naukas.com/2017/01/08...-el-buran/