Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[M]mysterious space plane to land after a YEAR in orbit - and no one knows what it did up there
dailymailuk ^ | : 09:12 EST, 4 June 2012 | Rob Waugh

Posted on 06/04/2012 6:03:18 PM PDT by BenLurkin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 last
To: dr_lew
I'm not getting the tall r term. What is that? I may be tired.(only stupid question is the one not asked)

/johnny

81 posted on 06/04/2012 9:51:12 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: stickywillie

Haven’t seen that sales number in a long time, what’s the special? :-)


82 posted on 06/05/2012 8:09:03 AM PDT by mcshot (God bless the USA! OMG PLEASE vote ABO or OWW and our Country dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Here's a pic of the last one after it's safe return - notice the 'suits' referred to by the article above.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

The X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle sits on the runway at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif., Dec. 3, 2010, during post-landing operations. Personnel in self-contained atmospheric protective ensemble suits are conducting initial checks on the vehicle and ensuring the area is safe. The X-37B launched April 22 from Cape Canaveral, Fla., allowing teams to conduct on-orbit experiments for more than 220 days during this first mission.

83 posted on 06/05/2012 10:06:31 AM PDT by Sax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew; JRandomFreeper

For a circular orbit, the required speed is : v = sqrt(mu/r)
where mu is the gravitational parameter and r is the orbital radius. mu = GM, where G is the universal constant of gravitation, M is the mass of the central body (technically it should be M+m, but we assume m small relative to M).

so if v = 17000 mph, then r is 1.0820655*re (re = radius of Earth, I solved this using canonical earth units, it’s easier). This means the orbit is 324.98 miles up, which is very reasonable (I believe the space station is 230 miles).


84 posted on 06/05/2012 11:19:06 AM PDT by Eltair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Eltair
The space station uses a lot of fuel and time locking down the solar panels and re-boosting to maintain orbit and then unlocking the solar panels.

Atmospheric drag is a drag.

I limited my calculations to 1.08(something) because I'm just a cook, and 6 decimal place accuracy seems come-uppish for a cook. 2 decimal places seemed appropriate. I'm glad to see my decimals were probably correct for the problem. At least within an order of magnitude, and having a relationship to reality that didn't have us orbiting in rock or near the moon.

/johnny

85 posted on 06/05/2012 11:33:13 AM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Yeah, no problem on the decimals, I just reported what matlab spat back. I just wanted to verify your work since I didn’t particularly like the method I saw being used (using surface gravity). Not sure if that was yours or dr’s (have to go back and look).

I’ve worked on the ISS program actually. I know all about the headaches they go through positioning solar arrays and reboosting the station. Fun times :)


86 posted on 06/05/2012 3:00:30 PM PDT by Eltair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Eltair
I think I used surface gravity or a near analog... gotta remember, I am just a cook. 10 meters per second = 32 feet per second.... That's why I left off the decimal points. I know I'm wrong, but I'm close.

My formulas are all from very, very old books. Think steam engine old.

/johnny

87 posted on 06/05/2012 3:17:11 PM PDT by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

(1/2)mv^2 is an energy equation. Force is equivalent to mass multiplied by acceleration, not mass multiplied by speed squared.


88 posted on 06/05/2012 5:09:31 PM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Lol, no problem, orbital mechanics hasn’t changed much in decades anyway. When I took it (and when I taught it this past spring) I used a book from 1971: Fundamentals of Astrodynamics. It’s an excellent book for basic orbital. And since so much of the 2-body problem is geometry, it’s easy for anyone to understand.... well anyone who knows geometry.


89 posted on 06/06/2012 7:53:00 AM PDT by Eltair
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Oh, brother! Now I’m getting blamed for this one!

LOL!


90 posted on 06/06/2012 12:37:58 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Which hydrazine? Monomethyl or UDMH?


91 posted on 06/06/2012 12:40:26 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: brityank

The H202 is probably closer to 95% if they want the optimum fuel to oxidizer ratio and propellant Isp.


92 posted on 06/06/2012 12:47:58 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

Probably MMH, it has ha higher specific impulse.


93 posted on 06/06/2012 1:46:47 PM PDT by null and void (Day 1233 of our ObamaVacation from reality [and what dark chill/is gathering still/before the storm])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: null and void

The Hydrazine family is always taking the wrap for something!
LOL!


94 posted on 06/06/2012 2:19:06 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: null and void

The Hydrazine family is always taking the rap for something!
LOL!


95 posted on 06/06/2012 2:19:15 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

Yes it is. Either their speed data is wrong or it was a powered orbit, not just standard freefall orbit


96 posted on 06/08/2012 8:54:59 PM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson