Light Flight of Buran

Light Flight of Buran

The Buran Exhibition Center in the museum complex at Verkhnyaya Pyshma is a space where light works not as a background, but as an independent narrative language.
The lighting installation traces the orbital vehicle’s flight from launch to landing: a precisely tuned sequence based on the real physics of atmospheric reentry.

In this article, we talk with Dmitry Khabibulin, the project’s lighting designer and engineer, about how the Buran lighting system was created: how to translate the logic of a spaceflight into the language of light, why careful treatment of the exhibit is more important than pure spectacle, and how long it takes to fine-tune a lighting scenario.

Role and tasks

Do you remember your first contact with the Buran project? Where did your work on the lighting in this space begin?

My first contact with the project was very emotional.
I remember the first time I saw Buran — it was a moment of complete immersion in the scale of the task.
The work began with a thorough study of the architecture of the space, the technical features of the orbiter, and the history of the program.

How did you personally formulate the main goal of the lighting design in the exhibition center: to illuminate the object, to play out the story of the flight, or something else?

I saw the main goal not just as lighting the object, but as creating a light-based narrative that would convey the full drama of a spacecraft’s flight.
It was necessary to find a balance between technical authenticity and artistic expression.

In brief, what does your scope of responsibility as a lighting designer include — from concept to adjustment?

Developing the lighting concept, creating lighting scenarios, selecting equipment, coordinating installation work, and the final adjustment of all systems.
From the initial idea to implementation, it is a full cycle of working with light.

Concept and principles

How did the overall lighting scheme take shape? Did you proceed from the architecture of the hall, from the scale of Buran itself, or from the exhibition scenario?

The lighting scheme emerged gradually, through many iterations.
Together with the project’s art director, Lev Mavrin, we started from the architecture of the hall, but the main reference point was Buran itself and its scale.
The exhibition scenario became the framework on which we strung the individual lighting solutions.

What principles did you set for yourself at the start — for example, things that absolutely could not be done with light next to such an object?

The core principles were set very rigidly: no aggressive lighting solutions, a careful attitude toward the historical object, and a priority of authenticity over flashiness.

Equipment and control

What key requirements did you set for the lighting fixtures: brightness, color rendering accuracy, reliability, fine-tuning capabilities?

The requirements for the fixtures were high: maximum color rendering accuracy, reliability for 24/7 operation, and the ability to fine-tune every parameter.
Special attention was paid to energy efficiency.

How did you build the lighting control system? What did it mean for you to make it convenient for the museum team in everyday use?

The control system was designed with the museum staff’s daily work in mind.
The interface had to be intuitive, and the scenarios easy to switch.
In addition to the lighting control system of the Buran complex, an audio controller was implemented, enabling integrated scenarios that combine lighting effects with musical or sound accompaniment.

Does the project include any nonstandard technical solutions that you are particularly proud of?

The uniqueness of the solution lies in the fact that the system works as a single living organism.
It does not just turn the lights on and off — it creates the atmosphere of a spaceflight, immersing the visitor in an authentic environment.
At the same time, all technical solutions are hidden from the visitor’s eye, creating the illusion of a natural flow of light.

Exhibition scenario

The exhibition includes several lighting scenarios. Why did the exhibition scenario become the main challenge?

The exhibition scenario turned out to be a real challenge: it was necessary to translate the physics of flight into light-based metaphors, from the soft light of launch to the dramatic intensity of atmospheric entry.

The exhibition scenario imitates launch, time on orbit, descent into the atmosphere, and landing. How did you translate the logic of the flight into the language of light?

The exhibition scenario is the heart of the project, where light becomes the language that tells the story of the flight.
Each phase received its own lighting metaphor.
Launch is a gradual build-up of light from soft, diffuse illumination to bright, directional beams.
Orbit is even, cool lighting with transitions toward warmer tones.
Descent is the dynamic change of color from warm to more intense shades.
Landing is the gradual decrease in intensity and an imitation of the glowing thermal protection of Buran’s fuselage.

How long did it take to fine-tune this scenario until it felt cohesive and did not turn into a light show?

Fine-tuning the scenario took about two months of intensive work.
This meant numerous real-time run-throughs, adjusting the speed of transitions between scenes, fine-tuning color changes, and synchronizing lighting effects with the audio track.

Color and heating physics

You selected the light colors by cross-checking with the actual heating of tiles and thermal protection during atmospheric entry. How can physical processes be translated visually into a light palette at all?

Visualizing heating is a complex process that requires a precise understanding of physics and an artistic vision.
The Kelvin scale became the main tool: each temperature regime had its color equivalent.
We heated a tile and obtained the visible emitted light according to this scale.
The heating gradients were worked out in detail, and real data served as the basis.

Did you consult engineers or historians about exactly how the orbiter should glow?

We worked without external expert consultations, which required a special approach.
We independently analyzed available materials, studied documentation on thermal protection materials, and worked with temperature data.
Everything was verified in practice.

Did you have to abandon spectacular ideas because they contradicted real physics or distorted the perception of the exhibit?

Yes, we did.
We rejected overly bright effects without physical justification and excessively dynamic transitions.
The selection criteria were preservation of authenticity, correspondence to real physical processes, clarity for the visitor, and emotional impact.
If a solution failed at least one of these points, we discarded it.

Experience and reflection

How did the first full-scale run-throughs of the scenarios go? What turned out to be non-obvious on paper but became apparent during live adjustment?

The first run-throughs revealed several non-obvious points that had to be refined.
Real light is always different from computer modeling.
But everything was fixable: the lighting system allows for very fine adjustment, which we carried out in subsequent run-throughs up to the final version.

How did the first visitors and your colleagues in the field react to the lighting?

Visitor feedback showed that we hit the mark.

What was the most difficult aspect of this project for you personally: the scale of the object, technical constraints, or the dramaturgy of light?

The hardest part was combining artistic expressiveness with technical authenticity.

If you now had the opportunity to add another lighting scenario or refine the existing ones, what would you do?

I would expand the system of interactive lighting effects that allow visitors to immerse themselves even more deeply in the orbiter’s story.
Overall, this is possible thanks to the adaptive, configurable lighting system through the creation of new scenarios.