(For JFM, there's a picture of /Columbia/ descending to Edwards. The
angle is chosen to give the most appropriate airspeed;
On 2021-11-17 20:58, Snidely wrote:
(For JFM, there's a picture of /Columbia/ descending to Edwards. The
angle is chosen to give the most appropriate airspeed;
Would it be fair to state that the descent rate wouldn't be that
different, but by gaining speed, shen they do the final flare up, the
wings get the descent rate top drop to near 0 for a smooth landing ?
With low airspeed, they wouldn't be able to droop the descent rate by
much when they flare up, right ?
<URL:https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/11/sts-2-40th-anniversary/>
Well, 5 days ago. STS-2. NasaSpaceFlight.com has a retrospective:
<URL:https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/11/sts-2-40th-anniversary/>
Turn-around was about 5 months, it seems, but another month was added
for tile repairs after RCS hypergolics were spilled. An abort spoiled
the Nov 4 date, and the Nov 12 date was also in issue due to mux/demux failure.
Launch was 7 months after the STS-1 launch. The flight lasted 2 days
instead of the planned 5, due to a fuel cell failure. This was also
the first flight where SRB joint o-ring erosion was found.
(For JFM, there's a picture of /Columbia/ descending to Edwards. The
angle is chosen to give the most appropriate airspeed; I'm not sure
what the sink rate for level flight would be if you started trying it
at the speed and elevation pictured.)
/dps
--
"What do you think of my cart, Miss Morland? A neat one, is not it?
Well hung: curricle-hung in fact. Come sit by me and we'll test the
springs."
(Speculative fiction by H.Lacedaemonian.)
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 365 |
Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
Uptime: | 24:25:46 |
Calls: | 7,748 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 12,888 |
Messages: | 5,740,025 |
Posted today: | 1 |