Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Shuttle Columbia STS-107 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Jackson who wrote (349)	2/5/2003 9:47:50 AM
From: J.B.C.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 627

Bill, your skipping theory is nice but not practical. Imagine you're skipping stones on water; you toss one at "x" velocity horizontal it doesn't skip once, enters the water and descends to the bottom, it's velocity to the bottom is dictated by gravity and the water's viscosity and it has the maximum horizontal speed and incurs a low "load" factor because of its horizontal component. Let's pretend that it travels 5' forward in the water due to the horizontal speed when entering the water and descends 10', which is the depth of the water. Its vertical velocity is V1. You toss a second stone at the same horizontal velocity of "X" and get 10 skips out of it before it enters the water. Its horizontal velocity is 0 when it enters the water its vertical velocity is V2. It travels the same depth of 10' What relationship do V1 and V2 have? They're both dictated by the same forces, gravity and viscosity. What difference is there to the 2 stones? The second stone incurs a greater load factor because it has a zero horizontal component. The premise is a little different with the space shuttle because it does have some aerodynamic capability, but actually has zero at orbital altitude. At some point you no longer can skip, and have to come in a fatally steep drop. The current methodology imparts closest to the lowest loads on the shuttle possible. Jim