OT: Russian "Almaz" Space Station

[CStock88]

http://www.rusadventures.com/tour19.shtml

I found this rather interesting, seeing as I'm big on space and science and stuff. Apparently, back in "The Day", as they say, the Soviets designed this little beauty for, ah, reconnaissance, I suppose (at least, that was what was alliterated to in the original article - I won't post it here, however, as it links directly to a gaming website.)

Well, anyways, the important part of it all... apparently, the Almaz was armed with a 23mm anti-aircraft cannon. Also, apparently, the Soviets - as part of their Salyut program, or some such - managed to actually test-fire the darned thing, in space - supposedly proving, once in for all, that guns do, in fact, work in space.

Of course, if you know about the chemical reactions that occur during a gun firing, this shouldn't be that much of a leap of faith for you.

The space station is also referred to on NOVA. And, if you happen to be in Russia, according to the website, you can pay a hefty price tag, and sit in the gunner's seat of one of the Almaz space modules.

So yeah. I thought it was cool. And I thought I would share it with you all.

[headquarters]

the yankees had their sattelites and their own military program - gemini I think .

Both sides planned for orbital fighters and bombers to combat spacestation and satelittes .The Russian side was eager to get a system up to combat the US spy satelittes .The Almaz station was tested with modified 30 mm and 23 mm autocannons against target drones.Making shootdowns ,the program was deemed possible but a variety of factors such as the development of treaties towards leaving space out of the cold war etc ended it .The Russkis had a few others like the "Golden Eagle " station manned observation sats and probably more and more secret stuff as well.(The first US sats- I think the Keyhole program -took a gazillion more pics than the whole U2 plane recce had done in years during the first weeks.)

There were alot more interesting space weapons like the US nuclear powered orbital bomber - The US wanted to have a few permanently hovering above Moscow just to set the mood there .Its engines were tested ,but it never became a reality .

Then there is the L-5 society ,the group that worked for permanent orbital military bases at LaGrange -5 to dominate the skies and the world .

Today the race is more or less pewtering out due to proposed missile shields etc and other ground based systems .(boring )

but the good old NAZI Sanger bomber project supposedly is started up again by DARPA - the atmosphere skipping global reach heavy bomber thingy.


Militarization of space is a fun subject !

[Jason Weiser]

Makes one wonder what might have actually been deployed if the Cold War had gone on ala Twilight. I suspect a newer generation of KH imagery sats for starters.

And this is interesting..from the Lacrosse article on wiki:

It has been said[citation needed] that the B-2 bomber was originally intended to use directly down-linked targeting data from Lacrosse satellites in order to aid it in its role of hunting down and destroying Soviet mobile ICBM launchers. It had been anticipated that the Lacrosse satellites would be replaced by the radar component of the Future Imagery Architecture (FIA). The severe program problems encountered by FIA in the early 2000s appear to have led to off-loading of radar reconnaissance to the Space Based Radar, later simplified to Space Radar, with initial launch anticipated around 2015.

The DC Working group has discussed this...and we're not of the opinion that the ASAT warfare would have been enough to make LEO hazardous...Space is big, really big, and it's hard to say that enough junk could be put up there to block out given orbits.

[Raellus]

Wow. That's pretty cool.

I always thought that firing a large caliber gun in space would shift the vessel firing it via the escaping gases of the muzzle blast and the recoil of the weapon itself. I saw it acting as a sort of mini-thruster.

I imagine this 23mm canon settup would require some sort of elaborate stabilization system or counter-thrusters. Any info on how this was supposed to work?

Imagine getting the first gun-kill in space!

[Raellus]

BTW, anyone seen the special two-hour episode of Dogfights entitled Dogfights of the Future? I think I still have it on my DVR. They have a segment on "dogfights" in space that was pretty interesting. They used two hypothetical space plane designs, one American (with scramjet engines, If I recall correctly) and one Chinese, I believe. No turning and burning, just stealth, positioning, and beam weapons. They mentioned that guns and missiles would cause problems with the space planes' performance due to the recoil/muzzleblast. Something about sudden deceleration or being shoved off course (nececitating reentry) or something else along those lines.

Check it out if you get the chance.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by headquarters

the yankees had their sattelites and their own military program - gemini I think

Not Gemini -- that was a step on the course to the moon. You're thinking of the Dyna-Soar, which would have been a small shuttle-like aircraft that could have deployed small satellites, sabotage teams, and even used as a Sanger-like skip-bomber. It never got built.

[CStock88]

As far the Almaz station's solution to the recoil problem, the Russians rather ingeniously paired a set of counter-thrusters, out of the station's standard thruster nozzle assembly, to be set off - both electronically, and mechanically - by the trigger pull of the gun, so when you fired off rounds, the attitude jets would fire an appropriate amount of thrust to counter the effect. This was mentioned in the original article that I saw this thing in.

As for the DC Working Group, I'd certainly hope ASAT Warfare wouldn't be enough to make LEO so dangerous to be off limits! For one, it'd put a damper on returning to space anytime soon (2300 AD, I'm looking at you!). For two, it'd make me sad. For three, they'd have to shoot a heck of a lot of satellites to fill up that much volume! (All these are arranged in order of importance, of course

Is the DC Working Group thinking about the Soviet Fractional Bomb System, if I remember correctly, where they would "pre-position" ICBMs in orbit, then later de-orbit them as needed to strike targets as they become available? I always thought that was a particularly neat concept, really.

Also, Raellus, last time I checked, the key phrase to remember when it comes to space combat is: Eggshells With Sledgehammers. Stealth in space is a misnomer, for a lot of technical reasons involving heat, and the background heat of space. This could probably be worked around with space planes that operate super-close to Earth, I would think, but I'm not sure. If you get away from the Earth by any appreciable amount (i.e., leaving the actual atmosphere, yo), the heat requirements of your life support system alone will paint you as a super-obvious target. Unless you happen to be a robot, then you can actually chill yourself down to appreciable amounts.

God help you, however, if you ever fire your engines. :\

But yeah, I'm not sure about missiles, but in anything remotely like the near-future (i.e., the next 50 years) I could certainly see guns being a problem with space planes. Plus, depending on how high up you get, and depending on how far weaponized laser technology gets, guns might be... superfluous. Then again, that's what they said in the Jet Age, too, eh?

Time Shall Tell (TM).

Oh, and also, if anything I say turns out to be wrong and repudiated by a Reputable Source (TM), then I claim innocence and/or ignorance as my defense.

[Jason Weiser]

Originally Posted by CStock88

Is the DC Working Group thinking about the Soviet Fractional Bomb System, if I remember correctly, where they would "pre-position" ICBMs in orbit, then later de-orbit them as needed to strike targets as they become available? I always thought that was a particularly neat concept, really.

Probably not...considering the nature of the canon exchange, FOBS use would be hellaciously escalatory.

This FAS article discusses it better than I would, but I can't see the Soviets taking this action due to the nature of the exchange.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/wo...ssia/r-36o.htm

[Nowhere Man 1966]

I've heard stories of a program called "Blue Gemini" from a book by Howard Blum called "Out There" about alleged UFO coverups and the story was to make a one man Gemini capsule and the gained space would house a laser system for defense against aliens or Soviets. It was started in 1961.

IIRC, the precursor to Skylab was the Manned Orbiting Laboratory and that was supposed to have military use as well. Originally the Gemini capsule were to by used to ferry crews up and back.

About guns working in space, IIRC, you have the oxidizer in the powder so if that is the case, an M-16 would work.

[CStock88]

Originally Posted by Jason Weiser

Probably not...considering the nature of the canon exchange, FOBS use would be hellaciously escalatory.

This FAS article discusses it better than I would, but I can't see the Soviets taking this action due to the nature of the exchange.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/wo...ssia/r-36o.htm

I didn't think FOBS would be used, but since we were on the topic of space stuff, I thought I'd ask.

[Rainbow Six]

This thread has reminded me of a conversation that my mates and I had in the pub a while ago.

Does anyone know if any sort of weapons were ever carried on the space shuttle (or other manned US space prorammes for that matter)? Not heavy weapons for attacking Soviet satellites etc, but sidearms or assault rifles that could be used for self defence if the shuttle returned to earth somewhere unfriendly...

[Marc]

do not know for sure, but I suppose that there is no need for them to carry any kind of personal weaponry. NASA control center is well aware of the current position, trajectory and velocity of the shuttle in every moment, even in the case of a problem during the reentry that forced the shuttle to make a forced landing. They will know in advance (if limited) the location of the landing/crash site. If such a thing happens in a hostile area, US government will apply the corresponding pressure and deploy a rescue team inf needed (possibly in advance). This will be the best protection for the crew.
Perhaps the NASA staff thinks that is better for the security of the crews and the shuttles not to have weapons on board. Delicate machinery and electronics, weapons and an work plenty od stressful situations can be a bad combination.
Ei! Just an opinion. I have no info about the subject! BTW, the rescue of a shuttle crew in hostile territory after a succesful forced landing is a good scenatio seed. Mmmm... I must annotate it...

[chico20854]

Originally Posted by Marc

BTW, the rescue of a shuttle crew in hostile territory after a succesful forced landing is a good scenatio seed. Mmmm... I must annotate it...

There was a scenario in Challenge Magazine about the rescue of one of the shuttle crews from West Africa, I believe.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by chico20854

There was a scenario in Challenge Magazine about the rescue of one of the shuttle crews from West Africa, I believe.

You're right...I could be wrong but I think it was the Gambia the scenario was set in.

Our original conversation was actually about how different Planet of the Apes could have been if Charlton Heston and his crew had been armed with M16's when they first encountered the gorillas (bear in mind we were in the pub at the time and had had a few beers...).

[Marc]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

You're right...I could be wrong but I think it was the Gambia the scenario was set in.
Our original conversation was actually about how different Planet of the Apes could have been if Charlton Heston and his crew had been armed with M16's when they first encountered the gorillas (bear in mind we were in the pub at the time and had had a few beers...).

Ah! A productive pub discussion about a transcendental matters....
By the way, you make me remember a sci-fi TV serie I saw when I was child. I do not remember the title, but it was about an international expedition that returns to Earth from, I think, one of the moons of Jupiter. The members of the expedition are from USA, European Union, Soviet Union and other countries. Japan, perhaps? They manage to make a forced landing in a desert area but nobody goes to pick them up. They are unable to communicate with anybody (I do not remember the reason), but among the group, the theory that a world war has erupted while they are returning to Earth begin to rise...
You make me remember it because they don't have any sidearm but one of the astronauts kills one of the other crewmembers with a flare pistol.
BTW, anyone knows the title of the TV-serie? I've tried to make some google research without results... Mmmm...perhaps it was a film...

[Nowhere Man 1966]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

You're right...I could be wrong but I think it was the Gambia the scenario was set in.

Our original conversation was actually about how different Planet of the Apes could have been if Charlton Heston and his crew had been armed with M16's when they first encountered the gorillas (bear in mind we were in the pub at the time and had had a few beers...).

Yeah, same here with a few of my friends although I would have had Charleton Heston and crew using Tommy guns or something like MP-5's. I'm glad at least someone else had the same idea.

As to the shuttle crews, I don't know if they would be armed or not, but at the very least for each crewmember, they should have a .45 and a box of ammo in their survival kit like Slim Pickens had in "Dr. Strangelove."

Chuck

[Marc]

Originally Posted by chico20854

There was a scenario in Challenge Magazine about the rescue of one of the shuttle crews from West Africa, I believe.

Thanks Chico! I will look for it.

[MW Turnage]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

This thread has reminded me of a conversation that my mates and I had in the pub a while ago.

Does anyone know if any sort of weapons were ever carried on the space shuttle (or other manned US space prorammes for that matter)? Not heavy weapons for attacking Soviet satellites etc, but sidearms or assault rifles that could be used for self defence if the shuttle returned to earth somewhere unfriendly...

I'm almost 100% certain that there's never been any defensive arms carried on US craft. There was never a need, really: the capsules would never survive a non-water landing, and the probability of an AR-7 or the sort being useful were too slim by several orders of magnitude to justify the weight, space and risk. As for the Shuttle, every conceivable strip that could be used in an abort have already been scouted and prepared for, with folks already prepped and on alert on the ground during a launch. The orbiter is just simply not going to survive a landing if things are bad enough that none of those can be reached.

Now the Soviets and Russians did have a survival weapon in their capsules from the late 80s until 2006: the TP-82. It had two .50 smoothbore barrels and a rifled 5.45 barrel underneath, plus a stock that doubled as a machete. There was only a small production run on the ammo and the remaining rounds were considered dicey enough that they've since gone to a regular automatic pistol (I haven't seen a reference to what model, though). The Cosmonaut corps insisted on this after a capsule went far off-course in the late 70s/early 80s and the crew spent a long night facing off a pack of wolves in Siberia.