STS51L Accident Questions

Derek Lyons wrote:

The Shuttle can carry it's destination with
itself, where the CSM has to have one provided.

erm...Derek, please take a moment and realize exactly what you just said...

--
Terrell Miller


"Every gardener knows nature's random cruelty"
-Paul Simon George Harrison

Neil Gerace wrote:

The crew of a Caravelle taking off from Zurich tried to disperse a fog with
their own engines. They taxied down the runway at low speed but high thrust,
cooking their brakes and causing an inflight fire that brought the plane
down and killed everyone on board.

but they dispersed the fog, didn't they?

Alrighty then

--
Terrell Miller


"Every gardener knows nature's random cruelty"
-Paul Simon George Harrison

Peter Stickney wrote:

The other one was a real terror and would probably have worked- put
perforated pipes offshore at suspected beaches that the Germans might
land on in time of invasion, and pump gasoline through them- this rose
to the surface and was ignited (by some chemical that had been added to
it IIRC), turning the sea into a mass of flames.
I'd hate to think what the landings at Normandy would have been like if
the Germans had had enough gasoline to implement a scheme like that.
Even if the fire itself didn't get you, the burning gasoline would
superheat the air while depleting its oxygen.


It wouldn't have worked - the wave action would break up the burning
oil slick, which would have 2 effects - gaps in the flames, and the
burning oil would turn into a mass of small burning oil puddles, which
wouldn't receive enough fuel to keep burning.

doesn't matter, by the time the flames disperse all the ammo in the
Higgins boats would have cooked off and the entire invasion force would
be charred hamburger patty


--
Terrell Miller


"Every gardener knows nature's random cruelty"
-Paul Simon George Harrison

"Andrew Gray" wrote in message
. ..
On 2005-03-17, Peter Stickney wrote:

Let's see now - Three Points:
Bats use their echolocation to detect food in the air,
at distances long enough to allow maneuvering to intercept the target.
Are you suggesting that an F-117 has a lower acoustical cross-section
than a Mosquito?

Yes.

It probably has a much bigger one than a mosquito, though...

Ow

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...

I saw a bat fly into a chain link fence once. I'm still trying to figure
that one out.
If it can't echolocate a chain link fence, there's a opening in the
ecosystem for a giant web spinning bat eating spider.

There's an opening in the world's navies for a chain link submarine too.

Pat Flannery wrote:
Derek Lyons wrote:

In this instance - I am. I've studied sonar, and operated both active
and passive sonars.

The real problem with the faceted idea is that the modieded laminer flow
body of rotation design of our subs would already be pretty good at
deflecting active sonar waves (particularly with the anechocic tiles
installed), except for the sail and the sternplanes. You get one of
those facets lined up at 90 degrees to the emmiting sonar, and you're
going to have a problem.

It would be a problem... If sonar worked like radar. It doesn't.

Among other things, long range active search sonars don't use high
frequencies. They aren't side-scan sonar seeking high resolution...
How much resolution do you need when the object you are seeking is a
hundred feet long against a background an infinite distance away?

(Plus the phsyics of sonar propagation mitigate against shorter
frequencies - they don't travel as well as longer frequencies.)

There's also the fact that active sonars are used in combat only as a
last resort. Ping and folks can hear you for a *long* way.

BTW, here's what you need for your desk:
http://www.worldaircorps.com/tmpages/c5820r3w.htm

I've been thinking about that one for a while.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Terrell Miller wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:

The Shuttle can carry it's destination with
itself, where the CSM has to have one provided.

erm...Derek, please take a moment and realize exactly what
you just said...


And you think it's not what I meant?

A Shuttle can launch a wide variety of missions without requiring that
there be something for it to meet in orbit. It carries it's purpose
with itself.

A CSM is quite limited in what it can do usefully on orbit without
requiring a second launch.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Derek Lyons wrote:
Terrell Miller wrote:


Derek Lyons wrote:


The Shuttle can carry it's destination with
itself, where the CSM has to have one provided.

erm...Derek, please take a moment and realize exactly what
you just said...



And you think it's not what I meant?

A Shuttle can launch a wide variety of missions without requiring that
there be something for it to meet in orbit. It carries it's purpose
with itself.

....which begs the question: what point is the journey, then?

y'know?


--
Terrell Miller


"Every gardener knows nature's random cruelty"
-Paul Simon George Harrison

Derek Lyons wrote:
A Shuttle can launch a wide variety of missions without requiring
that
there be something for it to meet in orbit. It carries it's purpose
with itself.

A CSM is quite limited in what it can do usefully on orbit without
requiring a second launch.

First, I don't see exactly what advantages this has (other
than bundling launch failures together so that they affect
multiple aspects of the mission rather than being more or
less isolated).

Second, this is a non-issue with regards to the subject of the
sub-thread. If there is a payload that can be launched into
LEO that can serve as a "target" for the Shuttle, in that it
serves as a mission that is sufficiently useful to warrant
launching the Shuttle with said payload in the cargo bay,
then that same payload would obviously warrant a cargo-only
launch for rendezvous (if necessary) in a cargo-bay-less
manned spaceflight scenario. So, it's a distinction without
a difference.

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 19:47:47 -0500, Terrell Miller
wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:

The Shuttle can carry it's destination with
itself, where the CSM has to have one provided.

erm...Derek, please take a moment and realize exactly what you just said...

"Germans bombed Pearl Har..."

"Forget it. He's on a roll."

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr