Gosh, doesn't *this* look familiar!
[img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20020314/capt.1016124073.russia_tourist_spaceship_mosb108.jpg[/img]
Journalists work near a life-sized mock-up of S-XXI space ship, foreground, as M-55 carrier aircraft stands behind it at an air base in Zhukovsky, near Moscow, Thursday, March 14, 2002. The S-XXI is being developed by the Maysishchev design bureau which helped build the Soviet Buran space shuttle as a suborbital ship for space tourists. A 3-minute ride into space will cost a would-be space tourist $100,000. (AP Photo/Ivan Sekretarev)
[url]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/020314/168/197gr.html[/url]

Full story:
[url]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020314/ap_on_sc/russia_tourist_spaceship_5[/url]

Rutan's company website, which includes information on his Proteus (background image on main screen) payload-carrying aircraft (including a "space plane" just like the Russians') is here: http://[url]http://www.scaled.com/[/url]

What's new about the Russians ripping off aircraft designs from the United States of America?

I already know about the Tu 144.

My family owns a rutan inspired canard aircraft, and it's great, I love out LongEZ.

It will be intresting to see if the Russian design will beat Rutan with his Proteus/Unnamed rocket craft to the X-prize. I would be happy to see space tourism take off, even if it is a Russian craft. Seems like there is so much lack of commitment in the US for an RLV, so maybe a working Russian design will give us the kick in the ass we needed.

In the 1980s, the Russkies tried to launch "their" version of the Space Shuttle, which was supposed to be the shuttle for the then new MIR space station....somehow, the design reminds me of something...
[img]http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/rsa/gifs/buran_an225.jpg[/img]

On the other hand, I have no idea who Burt Rutan is, but the design of the vehicle in the original post does remind me of the Eugen Saenger shuttle, developed in the German Junkers labs, during the late 1950s/early 1960s
[img]http://www.raumfahrt-info.de/space3/images/saenger.jpg[/img]

No, you didn't.

According to what I saw on Fox News tonight, they described it as a US/Russian joint venture. Since Rutan is persona non grata with most of the US aerospace industry AND NASA, they probably just went and bought the design from him.

Kar98, thank you -- that's a beautiful picture of the Buran on top of the Antonov.  I'll try to find the one I have of the Shuttle on top of a 747.  Looks like the Russians even stole the tailfin design from Boeing -- the 747 "Shuttle shuttle" has similar fins/rudders on the sides of the horizontal stab.

... the Russians have been ripping off western aerospace engineering for decades, what's new?

Ironically, the F-117 stealth fighter technology was ripped off by us from a junior genius engineer from Moscow. The Soviet Union reviewed his paper and didn't catch the significance and allowed publication. We simply made it work!

P.S. Burt Rutan is a friend of mine.

So what?  More power to them.

At least they are working towards making space more accessable.  I hope the Russians suceed.

They'll concentrate on the interesting stuff while NASA blows up a few more Mars probes.

As an aerospace buff, I'm rooting for them.

There was an incident near the end of WW II where 2 American B29s were running low on fuel and were forced to land in Russia or Russian held territory (my memory is a bit sketchy).  Stalin ordered them to confiscate and disassemble the two bombers into a pile of parts and figure out how to fabricate them.  Before long the Russians had a fleet of B29 look-a-likes.

The Russians seem to have a poor history of innovation.  They're great at ripping off stuff and perfecting it.  The "Concordski" is the classic example.

I remember that one!  The chief aircraft designer of that Bureau -- Tupolev, wasn't it? -- was so pissed that he forced a literal duplication of every part.  One of the aircraft had a bullet hole through a wing which had apparently just been cleaned up (not yet patched);  he duplicated that da-n hole in every aircraft they produced. [:p]

Ah, the web.  Here's the story, right down to the holes:
[url]http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/Tu-4.html[/url]

Well, sort of.  Now what was that big puff of black smoke from? [:)]

Mainly because he tries to be sensible & affordable and chooses not to work in the typical govt. fashion of ridiculously expansive programs.

I am not 100% sure why either. Personality conflicts? Genuses are sometimes difficult. He did design that commuter/corporate turboprop for Beechcraft about a decade ago, but that has been his only involvement with a US aircraft manufacturer in all the years he has been a designer. But American companies will not buy his stuff or support him. He has been extreamly critical of NASA over the years for their failure to move beyond the shuttle and produce a truely inexpensive reusable orbital vheicle.  And they in turn have not been receptive to his proposals. Including one for a aircraft launched shuttle very similar to this picture of the Russian here.

Oh, and he is a big advocate of private companies exploiting space, building space stations, and operating their own fleets of orbital vheicles. To this end he helped organize, and also is working on a entry for, the X-Prize competiton. 10 Million US dollars for the first individual or non-government organization to orbit a manned vheicle twice in 14 days. If this would lead to the invention of a really workable space "airliner" it would kind of steal NASA's oats as right now they enjoy a monopoly on space launches, not that they make any money on it. It does keep the US flag in orbit and justifies their jobs.

I guess this makes him the aerospace equivilant of Preston Tucker...