|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re-Entry through satellite constellations
On 10/06/2019 2:54 am, JF Mezei wrote:
On 2019-06-09 09:44, Jeff Findley wrote: Capsules have an offset CG and that combined with their conical (or biconic) shape produces lift as they pass through the atmosphere. How much control do they have during that phase? And if they can control it, how is that accomplished? would thrusters still be effective in rotating the capsule to change its centre of gravity? That's not what he said. The 400ms in time difference would be between the "ideal" reentry burn time and one which had to be chosen to "miss" a Starlink. Thanks you you and Sylvia Else for explaining that part. But I am still curious on what sort of safety standards will be set. If you have a satellite passing every 2 minutes, how many seconds AFTER a satellite has passed will be be safe to descend through that altitude, and what will be the minimum of seconds BEFORE a satellite arrives that it will be considered safe to pass through ? You're not going to get a definite answer to this, because it involves a judgement about risk. There are things that can go wrong, such as a) uncommanded manoeuvres by the satellites (control systems can fail), b) misfiring on the re-entering spacecraft that wouldn't of itself endanger the crew, but change the trajectory enough to bring it close to a satellite, c) collision avoidance manoeuvres by satellites, that, for whatever reason, didn't get communicated in advance to the controllers of the space spacecraft. I note your comment below about a "freeze", but stuff happens, d) orbital position errors, and so on. Individually, these a likely to be low risks, but they add up. NASA will need to decide what is an acceptable level of risk, and there is no unique right answer (we'd all like zero risk, but it's not going to happen here, or indeed in any other transport technology). And will there need to be new policies in place to freeze Starlink/Oneweb"whatever orbits X amount of time before a re-entry (aka: no adjusting of orbits with their engines) to ensure the re-entering ship is using accurate orbital data of those satellites when calculating the precise re-entry time? Again, look at the landing accuracy of Apollo capsules. This was achieved partly due to their ability to generate a significant amount of hypersonic lift. How much was done with parachutes? None at all. While steerable parachutes exist, it's hard to justify them, or the weight of their control systems, on something which is in any case landing in the sea. Sylvia. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re-Entry through satellite constellations
JF Mezei wrote on Sun, 9 Jun 2019
12:54:15 -0400: On 2019-06-09 09:44, Jeff Findley wrote: Capsules have an offset CG and that combined with their conical (or biconic) shape produces lift as they pass through the atmosphere. How much control do they have during that phase? And if they can control it, how is that accomplished? would thrusters still be effective in rotating the capsule to change its centre of gravity? Scads and oodles. It's sort of the point of building them that way. That's not what he said. The 400ms in time difference would be between the "ideal" reentry burn time and one which had to be chosen to "miss" a Starlink. Thanks you you and Sylvia Else for explaining that part. But I am still curious on what sort of safety standards will be set. If you have a satellite passing every 2 minutes, how many seconds AFTER a satellite has passed will be be safe to descend through that altitude, and what will be the minimum of seconds BEFORE a satellite arrives that it will be considered safe to pass through ? Much less than a second. This has been answered multiple times. Write it on your ****ing hand so that you'll remember it. You want to play it both ways: the satellites are fast so there's only a couple of minutes in between them but you then want to act like they linger in the area when instead they are cooking along at 7.5 km/sec. You're one of those people who drives onto the on ramp to a highway and stops, waiting for there to be no oncoming cars in sight, aren't you? And will there need to be new policies in place to freeze Starlink/Oneweb"whatever orbits X amount of time before a re-entry (aka: no adjusting of orbits with their engines) to ensure the re-entering ship is using accurate orbital data of those satellites when calculating the precise re-entry time? Bull****. In fact, you could work it just the reverse and require the satellite to 'dodge'. They'll already be carrying a debris database so they can alter orbits to avoid all those things. Adding one more contraint would be trivial. Again, look at the landing accuracy of Apollo capsules. This was achieved partly due to their ability to generate a significant amount of hypersonic lift. How much was done with parachutes? None. Have you never seen a spacecraft come down by parachute? They use big round non-steerable chutes. In fact, one of the sources of inaccuracies back in those days was wind drift due to insufficient knowledge about winds aloft. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re-Entry through satellite constellations
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Constellations | [email protected] | Misc | 4 | March 5th 15 09:39 PM |
Constellations | Phil Hawkins | Amateur Astronomy | 16 | February 3rd 05 07:32 PM |
how to image constellations | Mark C. Lepkowski | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | May 10th 04 12:38 PM |
Constellations | Orions Belt | Amateur Astronomy | 28 | April 6th 04 10:58 PM |
Rey's Constellations | Joel Ohmer | Misc | 4 | October 28th 03 11:54 PM |