Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat
From: Tony Rusi (marsbeyond_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 06/24/04
- Next message: Daniel Walker: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Previous message: william mook: "Re: cheap access to space - majority opinion"
- In reply to: Harald Kucharek: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Next in thread: David Given: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Reply: David Given: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Reply: Henry Spencer: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
To: sci-space-tech@moderators.isc.org Date: 24 Jun 2004 09:18:51 -0700
> SpaceShipOne dropped down from a height of 100km, while a shuttle drops
> down from a height of some 400km AND has additionally a horizontal
> velocity of some 8km/s. And an Apollo spacecraft dropped down from some
> 400000km. That's in both cases a *LOT* of kinetic energy more to kill
> than SSO had to.
Interesting, for any spacecraft, if more fuel were used on orbit to
bring the (actually tangental) velocity component closer to zero, then
reentry heating shielding requirements are minimal like SS1. Maybe a
heat tile damaged spaceshuttle could re-enter the same way? Maybe this
last crew could have been saved with more fuel and/or less space
shuttle mass and momentum. Maybe they could have taken an engine and
tank off, performed a slowing burn, got into their emergency transfer
beach balls and parachuted from 200k? Iknow probably not enough fuel,
no way to pull an engine and tank off, no transfer beach balls on
board, etc. etc.
- Next message: Daniel Walker: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Previous message: william mook: "Re: cheap access to space - majority opinion"
- In reply to: Harald Kucharek: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Next in thread: David Given: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Reply: David Given: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Reply: Henry Spencer: "Re: SpaceShipOne and reentry heat"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|