|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
What are the pros and cons of the two. From here, apart from the fact that
there is more sea than land, it seems to me that landing in the sea could be far more problematical from the reuse point of view than a land landing, and also historically its only been used for US landings presumably as it was convenient when targeting was not that good. Maybe its just that the need for a wilderness area is too great for other countries to achieve when land is being considered. However, I'd have thought nowadays a land landing should be possible with much better understanding of the problems. Brian -- -- From the sofa of Brian Gaff - Blind user, so no pictures please! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
Jeff Findley writes:
Note that the Russians have *always* landed on land. Except for the times they've hit a lake, at least twice, once with a crew on board. At least that once didn't sink, unlike one of the unmanned tests. Still, it was winter, and the combination of a snowstorm restricting helicopter flights, ice making it hard to move the spacecraft, and cold making for a dangerous night meant that the rescue team was somewhat surprised to find the cosmonauts still alive when they finally got the spacecraft to shore and the hatch open. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
Chris Jones writes:
Jeff Findley writes: Note that the Russians have *always* landed on land. Except for the times they've hit a lake, at least twice, once with a crew on board. At least that once didn't sink, unlike one of the unmanned tests. Still, it was winter, and the combination of a snowstorm restricting helicopter flights, ice making it hard to move the spacecraft, and cold making for a dangerous night meant that the rescue team was somewhat surprised to find the cosmonauts still alive when they finally got the spacecraft to shore and the hatch open. The Soyuz capsule is qualified for a water landing in an emergency and training for this is mandantory for the crew. It also carries survival equipment like hydrosuits with a floatation vest. Some photos: http://www.africaninspace.com/home/g...ea/index.shtml http://suzymchale.com/ruspace/soysurvive.html Jochem -- "A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
... It is. It's just never been done in the US before. Note that the Russians have *always* landed on land. That's not quite true. We did land 100+ shuttle flights on land. And Stardust and I believe some other missions have landed on land. Jeff -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message ... In article , says... "Jeff Findley" wrote in message ... It is. It's just never been done in the US before. Note that the Russians have *always* landed on land. That's not quite true. We did land 100+ shuttle flights on land. True, X-38 and shuttle both land on runways. I should have specified that the US has never done it with a manned capsule. And Stardust and I believe some other missions have landed on land. True. A few unmanned capsules have landed on land in the US. Jeff And in fairness Jeff, I was pretty sure you knew that. Just added more for others reading along at home. :-) -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sea or land landings?
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 09:12:11 -0400, Jeff Findley
wrote: What are the pros and cons of the two. From here, apart from the fact that there is more sea than land, it seems to me that landing in the sea could be far more problematical from the reuse point of view than a land landing, This is true. Salt water and aerospace grade structures and electronics don't mix well. and also historically its only been used for US landings presumably as it was convenient when targeting was not that good. Maybe its just that the need for a wilderness area is too great for other countries to achieve when land is being considered. We've done it that way because we've always done it that way. Because we started out more or less with no choice. The first Mercury flights were suborbital and there's no suitable land downrange of the launch site for suborbital hops. Also, our launch sites are all coastal, and so have easy access to the sea. Russian and China launch from deep inland. Brian |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
moon landings | Leff T Wright | Amateur Astronomy | 16 | July 12th 08 09:55 PM |
Apollo landings | Hugh Janus | Amateur Astronomy | 22 | July 14th 06 02:09 AM |
best/worst landings | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 21st 06 12:03 AM |
Meteroite Landings | David A. Seiver | UK Astronomy | 7 | November 28th 05 07:30 PM |
Moon landings | [email protected] | Science | 9 | September 12th 05 10:44 PM |