Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: eno_
That is my hunch, in view of how they treated the Challenger data. However, while the aero forces may have been far less than at sealevel, they were not insignificant at 40 miles up...at those speeds (12,000+ mph). There has to be a lot of frictional 'pressure' for the atmosphere to superheat to a plasma far above the surface temperature of the sun.

The loss of the stabilizer of course would have been all she wrote. Even as it was, if the fuselage's overall control system integrity had been maintained, with the drag forces encountered, I wonder if they were looking at a real possibility of landing far, far short of Kennedy Space Center...

31 posted on 02/17/2003 6:39:13 PM PST by Paul Ross (From the State Looking Forward to Global Warming! Let's Drown France!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Paul Ross
The loss of the stabilizer of course would have been all she wrote. Even as it was, if the fuselage's overall control system integrity had been maintained, with the drag forces encountered, I wonder if they were looking at a real possibility of landing far, far short of Kennedy Space Center...

One of the early lessons in our X- supersonic testing was the need for a large vertical stabilizer; larger than initially thought.

32 posted on 02/17/2003 6:47:01 PM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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