If you look... it would be 9.7 x 673mph NOT 761mph... since the X43A was NOT at sea level.... 6528.1MPH
Posted on 11/16/2004 1:59:56 PM PST by Jambe
Live thread of 3rd and final X43-A drop.
Drop scheduled approx 5:30 EST. B52 is airborne.
no ieda, B1B?
The B1 can carry more payload and can fly faster than the B-52... maybe that is what they will use?
Raytheon was selling microwave ovens in the mid 1950's and teflon's discovery was a sheer accident. Neither was in any way related to the "space program".
Regards,
GtG
Reckon they had meal service?
You know dang well their luggage ended up in Atlanta, too.
< low down grumbled pilot voice >
"Hello, this is your Captain speaking . . . I'm not dumb enough to strap myself to this death trap, so I'll be piloting todays flight from the comfort of a ground based control room."
"Expected flight time this afternoon is just under 20 minutes, with a ceiling of 70 thousand feet, We'll have you over the pacific at an expected speed of Mach 10"
"We have a 100% chance of splashdown during landing today, so forget about the seat-bottom-becomes-a-flotation-device thing because we'll all be vaporized upon impact in the Pacific."
"Thank you for choosing NASA for your flight today"
< / low down grumbled pilot voice >
Impact upon the Pacific? I thought this was the connecting flight to Minneapolis!
Impact upon the Pacific? Well it's better than O'Hare. lol
The concept of miniaturization can certainly be credited to NASA. But actual miniaturization was accomplished by private contractors.
However, most of the other technological advances that have been credited to NASA were, in fact, developed by other entities both within other government agencies and civilian companies.
As another posted stated: Much of the credit has gone to NASA for PR purposes.
One argument I have heard is that super glue was developed as a result of NASA and the shuttle and that somehow justifies NASA and the budget. There is no super glue used on the shuttle. Of course, super glue cannot withstand the enormous temperature fluctuations under which a shuttle goes, to say nothing of vibration.
Just another of the many myths perpetrated and perpetuated by NASA themselves.
Sure...but absent the $ from NASA, they'd've been content with computers the size of rooms.
I gotta disagree, but only because of the "give that money" part. Anytime government "gives" money to "private business" it's no longer private business and the whole process falls apart. That's what NASA does now, they "give money" to companies like Boeing or Rockwell whose interests, in the long run, aren't in actually accomplishing anything, but are built around keeping the flow of money coming from the government.
That's not what we need.
The Burt Rutans of the world need to get their own funding (they're well on their way to doing that now, thankyou very much) and they won't have any interest in maintaining the bureaucracy that keeps us from getting anything done. They'll be out their among 'em finding ways to make money.
I'm looking for some sharp operator to start a financial fund dedicated to funding space operations dedicated to making a profit. Mining the asteroids is my bet for first pay off (no gravity well to fight), but I'm willing to listen to other ideas.
Teflon was used as a seal in the gaseous diffusion apparatus used to enrich uranium in the 235 isotope (making it "bomb grade") much as the Iraqi's are now doing. It was the only material they could find that would resist uranium hexafluoride, the corrosive gas used to concentrate U-235 for the weapon. Teflon was not a bomb component as such.
Regards,
GtG
I am going to assume that you are joking.
However, if you aren't then I certainly hope that you are not in a profession that requires math, physics, one of the other sciences or, for that matter, in any profession that requires the use of logic.
Using your logic, then satellites in low-earth orbit traveling @ 18K/hr are standing still since sound cannot travel in a vacuum. Their speed would be zero to infinity. Likewise, those satellites in high-earth orbit which are traveling at a substantially higher speed are also standing still for the same reason.
I certainly hope and pray that you are joking.....for your sake.....not for mine. :-)
Well i knew alitude had an effect but I did not know it was so great, did you see the web page that I posted? there is a huge variance in mph from sea level to 30,000ft ! I thought there might be 5-15mph difference but... wow... No, I am not a scientist by any stretch, but I quickly did recover the bad information that I posted and fixed it...
From The Drudge Report, i read that it hit Mach 9.7 that would translate to 6,528.1mph...
761 X 9.7, using 761 mph of sound at sea level, ( which is the most generally accepted speed of sound, ) would make the speed achieved today to be 7381.7 mph.
The term "Mach" is used as a point of reference and has absolutely nothing to do with the thinness of the atmosphere or the speed of sound at 100K feet.
Mach 1, by definition, means achieving a speed of 761 mph regardless of the atmosphere.
And I still think you are pulling me leg. :-)
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.