https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVMB7kay-SM

Andi’s link gives some very nice basics, and don’t these basics look complicated?

Location in elliptical orbit is very difficult to determine, which is one reason why it is difficult to predict collisions in orbit. Perturbation due to Earth’s shape is rather simplified, and there are varying levels of precision that can be employed using fairly expanded math models. Please note that orbital plane change needs a delta-v that is related to twice the sine of the angle of the change, which translates into a whole lot of propellant when making this kind of change.

Finally, notice that orbit rendezvous is so complicated that the article does not provide math but only provides a single paragraph giving vague information on technique.

These are only some of the topics in that link that I wanted to point out as being more complicated than presented. I once took a graduate level course that still didn’t have time to cover everything in enough depth. Those guys in the 1960s, such as Dr. Orbit (Buzz Aldrin) who began figuring out all this detail amaze me.

I didn’t take the course on launch into an orbit or reentry from orbit, but wish I had. These are two more topics of great complexity and are fun to think about.

http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm

As for the Buran, the Space Shuttle may have been a disappointment, and Congress should have insisted on an improved replacement right away (and should have insisted that Constellation and SLS were improvements, too). But at least we know that the Shuttle could be reused, could carry a crew, could do much science, could take a payload to orbit, could retrieve an orbiting payload, and could service an orbiting satellite. We don’t know that Buran could do any of those.

If you want to compare the theoretical capabilities of the two, then the Space Shuttle comes off much better than the reality, as the fleet should have flown 64 times per year for twice the mission duration and carry more payload all more safely than it turned out to be able to do. Buran’s actual known capabilities are similar to the first unmanned Apollo spacecraft.

Cancelled?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFjw6Lc6J2g

At 5 miles per second (8 km/sec) orbital speed, Jay’s observation puts Nauka 300 miles ahead of ISS, more or less, depending upon the actual number of seconds in the observed minute. This may help us visualize the actual slow dance of docking to a space station, as opposed to the final steps presented by Kubrick’s interpretation of Clark’s book “2001: A Space Odyssey.” This particular dance is slower than most due to extra steps and a bit of a stumble early on.

Here we are, in the next century (or did he intend it to be the next millennium?) and we are finally, if slowly, making Clark’s vision happen.

Jay: As I understand it, each port should have its own Kurs system, with each approach module its own corresponding system on board. They work off of each other.

I wondered if there was KURS system on Pirs for docking or if they were using Zvezda’s? I did look it up and Pirs did have a KURS system, and they will use the KURS on Zvezda’s nadir port for Nauka. This brings up another question: is there a KURS system for each docking port or do they use only one system with multiple antennas and switch on the port’s antenna? I cannot find that piece of information.