Re: [GZG] [FT] ?? on Streamlining as of FB1
From: DOCAgren@a...
Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 11:23:07 EDT
Subject: Re: [GZG] [FT] ?? on Streamlining as of FB1
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
In a message dated Sat, 06 May 2006 13:59:09 +0200
From: Oerjan Ariander writes:
> Doc Agren wrote (in a horribly formatted post that took me a while to
get
> into a readable format):>>
>
That most likely the wonderful side effect the latest upgrade for AOL
for
Mac.
>
> >Okay, Now that Streamlining cost Mass have the requirements of Thrust
4
> >for Full and Thrust 6 for Partial, been dropped that in More
Thrust? Or
> >do you still need the engine thrust? Thanks for imput on this
>
> This has been discussed several times on this list in the past (an
archive
> search for "streamlining" should find most those threads), but IIRC it
> pretty much comes down to how much accel you consider "1 thrust point"
to
> be.
>
> If "1 thrust point" = 1G (a common but by no means universal
assumption
> among FT players), then even a thrust-1, non-streamlined ship would
> theoretically be capable of landing safely on Earth (safely for the
ship
> itself that is, not necessarily for the rest of the planet) - it'd
take
> quite a while, and it probably wouldn't be able to take off again
without
> some external help (it'd need slightly *more* than 1G of thrust for
that),
> but it *would* be able to "float" down to the ground slowly enough to
avoid
> getting burned up by the friction. With thrust points this big I'd
expect
> the main effect of spaceship streamlining to be a limit on how fast a
ship
> can move and still safely enter an atmosphere - un-streamlined ships
would
> have to move *very* slowly and rely on raw engine power to lower
themselves
> essentially vertically, while streamlined ships could enter the
atmosphere
> at an angle, "skip-brake" and glide down to the surface much like
today's
> space shuttles do.
>
> I'm afraid that this answer didn't help you very much, did it...>>
>
But Oerjan, it did, it cleared up those threads into 1 simple answer
Thank
U...
DOCAGREN
Just a Lurker here on the Digest, But maybe I have a good idea or 2..
:-)