Or rather a cone, weighted so that the apex points more or less in the direction of travel. Think of a high diver --- Gary McMurtry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The question would be can you design a vehicle to > transition from air > to water at 200+ miles per hour with minimum shock? > > Shape it to dive like a duck, then come back up to > float on surface, > with finder beacons. > > > >That a good idea > > > >A system can be designed to use a streamlined > capsule that could hit > >the water at rather high velocity without jarring > the payload. Make > >it bouyant and you get it back when it floats to > the surface. If > >something goes wrong and it cracks when hitting the > water, you would > >at least know where it is. The payload section > would need a lot of > >reinforcement, but the mass penalty is definitely > less than an > >airbag system. > > > >The question would be can you design a vehile to > transition from air > >to water at 200+ miles per hour with minimum shock? > > > >Joe L. > > > >James McEnanly wrote: > > > >>In the early manned space program, all of the > capsules > >>landed at sea. How well would a water landing > work? > >>--- Michael Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>>I'm told they might have used the kind of > balloons > >>> > >>>they used on the recent > >>>Martian landings, but that would have greatly > >>>increased the weight -- and > >>>therefore > the cost -- of what was supposed to > be a > >>>relatively inexpensive > >>>return system. But I bet they're rethinking that > >>>now. > >>> > >>>Maybe the balloon shock absorber idea could be > >>>turned upside down - you > >>>could cover the target zone with balloons. Hmm, > >>>that would be a large area. > >>> > >>>OK, how about this: when you figure out where the > >>>sample return capsule is > >>>going to land (to within a couple hundred > meters), > >>>send planes to > >>>carpet-bomb that area with bombs that produce > huge > >>>masses of foam for the > >>>capsule to plunge into. > >>> > >>>Let's see, if you engineer the capsule to > withstand > >>>20 g deceleration, and > >>>the capsule comes in at maybe 400 mph terminal > >>>velocity, straight down, and > >>>the foam can resist at 20 g, that's maybe only > 60-70 > >>>ft of foam. > >>> > >>>Hmm, but that foam is probably styrofoam-stiff. > Maybe no foaming process is > >>>fast enough. > >>> > >>>Well, then (yes, I *do* have a million half-back > >>>ideas, thank you for > >>>asking) if the foaming gases are shock-reactive, > you > >>>might get good > >>>deceleration even with a lighter foam. Plus, the > >>>whole foam pad > >>>self-disposes by combustion before you can say > >>>"environmentalist picketers." > >>>(Heat stress on the capsule? Yeah, but maybe no > >>>worse than what you get > >>>already with reentry.) > >>> > >>>Call it "scorched-earth splashdown". Kinda > crazy, > >>>but maybe not as crazy as > >>>trying to sift through a gazillion tiny shards of > >>>silicon and germanium to > >>>find a few that can still tell you something. > And > >>>if Scorched Earth > >>>Splashdown cost $10 million a shot, well, this > splat > >>>was a $260 million > >>>splat. Maybe it's worth experimenting with just > as > >>>a backup to the James > >>>Bond Helicopter Retrieve. (And it would > certainly > >>>be worthy of a scene from > >>>a James Bond movie if it worked.) > >>> > >>>OK, I'll go back to playing with matches now. > >>> > >>>-michael turner > >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ----- > >>> > >>> > >>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> From: "Michael Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> Date: 09/09/2004 09:04PM > >>> Subject: Re: the latest splat > >>> > >>> > I was there in the hangar at Dugway Proving > >>>Grounds as we watched the > >>> > capsule embed itself in the dry lakebed. My > >>>girlfriend works on the > >>> Genesis > >>> > project at JPL and I was along as her > guest. > >>> > >>> Gee, if I weren't married, I'd try to figure > out > >>>what cafes to hang out > >>> in, around JPL ;-) > >>> > >>> > It was a terribly sad moment, as you can > >>>imagine, and a long, sad > >>> > afternoon. Through my girlfriend, I had met > >>>some of the key engineers > >>>and > >>> > scientists involved. I saw that the project > >>>manager was on the verge > >>>of > >>> > tears as he tried to answer reporters' > >>>questions about what had gone > >>> wrong. > >>> > One scientist had been supporting the idea > for > >>>14 years, I believe he > >>> said, > >>> > and some of the engineers had lived it with > >>>three or more years. > >>> > >>> One of the unfortunate things about this > >>>incident is that it casts a > >>>shadow > >>> over an the idea really sounds very sensible > - > >>>it's just that the > >>>parachute > >>> system wasn't cooperating that day. Reentry > >>>survival equipment isn't > >>> really "payload" - it's just the last stage > of > >>>the overall sample > >>>delivery > >>> system. Why design the craft itself for soft > >>>landings when it costs so > >>> much to send things into space? If some such > >>>soft-landing gear > >>> weighs, say, 100 lbs, the cost of retrieving > by > >>>helicopter instead > >>> seems like it would be cost-competitive even > for > >>>the lower range > >>> of launch costs. > >>> > >>> > I work in publishing for the IEEE Computer > >>>Society. Sometimes, one of > >>>the > >>> > magazines I help launch doesn't do as we > >>>hoped, so over a period of > >>> several > >>> > months, we get the bad news. That's tough > >>>enough, but it must be > >>>really > >>> > wrenching to see your dreams come crashing > >>>down in a matter of > >>>seconds. > >>> > >>> I got out of software development because I > got > >>>so sick of the typical > >>> 60-80% project failure rate. But at least I > got > >>>to see some projects > >>> go to completion. I can't imagine what it > must > >>>be like to see a project > >>> end up in splinters after a decade or more. > It > >>>must be a little like > >>> watching > >>> a home you built burn down. > >>> > >>> > (Incidentally, I understand that the > Stardust > >>>material would withstand > >>>the > >>> > kind of impact that shattered the silicon > and > >>>germanium wafers in > >>>Genesis > >>> > to smithereens. The Stardust material is an > >>>almost lighter-than-air > >>>foam. > >>> I > >>> > forget the name, but I got to hold a piece > >>>when my 10-year-old > >>>daughter > >>> and > >>> > I went to JPL's open house this summer.) > >>> > >>> "Aerogel"? > >>> > >>> -michael turner > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> == > >>> You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick > mailing > >>>list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> Project information and list (un)subscribe > info: > >>>http://klx.com/europa/ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> = You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick > mailing > >>>list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > >>>http://klx.com/europa/ > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >>===== > >> > >>Sincerely > >> > >>James McEnanly > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>__________________________________ > >>Do you Yahoo!? > >>New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! > >>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail == > >>You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > http://klx.com/europa/ > >> > > > >== > >You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > http://klx.com/europa/ > > > == > You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing > list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Project information and list (un)subscribe info: > http://klx.com/europa/ > > ===== Sincerely James McEnanly __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
