Timeline for How can I calculate the weight a aero-spacecraft occupant experiences during sub-orbital but non-ballistic trajectories?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 4, 2021 at 4:30 | comment | added | Wesley Adams | @uhoh I'm really sorry about the original question! Don't know a whole lot about this subject and I'm not good at making my questions understandable. This edit gets at what I was asking perfectly. Also, I think I figured out the answer myself! It's just the gravity at that distance from the center minus the centripetal force you would feel using the velocity and distance from the center. This would only work for level flight, but that's fine given the question I was asking. I also now have a cool way to find the orbital speed (for a circular orbit) at a given altitude! | |
| Apr 4, 2021 at 4:21 | vote | accept | Wesley Adams | ||
| Apr 4, 2021 at 0:24 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | Original question didn't refer to occupants at all, but this is fine. | |
| Apr 3, 2021 at 22:31 | comment | added | uhoh | @RussellBorogove I think that the title is objective enough, and the "this" in the last sentence refers to "the weight a aero-spacecraft occupant 'feels' during sub-orbital but non-ballistic trajectories" I've reiterated the question from the title again within the body of the question, and changed "feels" to "experiences". How does it look now? | |
| Apr 3, 2021 at 22:11 | history | edited | uhoh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 111 characters in body; edited title
|
| Apr 3, 2021 at 17:26 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | I feel like the edit may have gone a little far; it now reads almost like a subjective question of astronaut experience rather than a question about the mechanics/physics of an SR-71. | |
| Apr 3, 2021 at 17:07 | history | reopened |
uhoh GremlinWranger DrSheldon Harish Chandra Rajpoot Russell Borogove |
||
| Apr 3, 2021 at 3:01 | comment | added | DrSheldon | @uhoh: Nice edit, voting to reopen. | |
| Apr 3, 2021 at 2:42 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Apr 3, 2021 at 17:12 | |||||
| Apr 3, 2021 at 2:32 | comment | added | uhoh | Once in a while I'll make a big edit to a new user's question in order to 1) help reopen it, and 2) help them see how to ask a question that fits better with the site's style. I've added more "science words" and "space words" in order to help get the question reopened. I've also tried to be careful not to change the question enough that it impacts the answer(s) that have been already posted. Personally I think insta-closing was unhelpful, unproductive and untoward here; there was no reason to pre-block answers so quickly. | |
| Apr 3, 2021 at 2:22 | history | edited | uhoh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 405 characters in body; edited tags; edited title
|
| Apr 2, 2021 at 22:38 | history | closed |
Organic Marble Harish Chandra Rajpoot Rory Alsop♦ Starfish Prime DrSheldon |
Needs details or clarity | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 21:20 | history | edited | Wesley Adams | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 8 characters in body
|
| Apr 2, 2021 at 21:19 | comment | added | Wesley Adams | Yeah sorry about that! @RussellBorogove interpreted what I was asking correctly. | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:48 | answer | added | Russell Borogove | timeline score: 4 | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:42 | comment | added | Organic Marble | @RussellBorogove throw in the Karman line to make it absolutely perfect. | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:41 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | Ugh, I have everything but the final answer, because today is not a trig day. | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:36 | comment | added | Organic Marble | Ah. So if one substitutes "force" for "acceleration", one could get your interpretation. | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:36 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | [Upward force required to] maintain altitude at zero horizontal velocity. | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:35 | comment | added | Organic Marble | @RussellBorogove what's your interpretation of "craft at rest"? | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:31 | comment | added | Russell Borogove | I believe OP means something like this: At 0 horizontal velocity, you need to provide 100% of your weight in upward force to maintain altitude. At orbital velocity, you need to provide 0% of your weight in upward force to maintain altitude. The question: At 14% of orbital velocity, do you only need to provide 100%-14% = 86% of your weight in upward force to maintain altitude, or is the calculation different? | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:10 | comment | added | Starfish Prime | Are you asking if the SR-71 flew at 100% of orbital velocity, would it be travelling at orbital velocity? | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 20:05 | comment | added | Rory Alsop♦ | Your question doesn't seem to make any sense - even to folks who do play Kerbal. What are you actually asking? What do you mean by "only need to accelerate upwards 86%"? | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 18:41 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 2, 2021 at 22:38 | |||||
| Apr 2, 2021 at 18:13 | comment | added | Wesley Adams | The SR-71's velocity and altitude are non-negligible in orbital mechanics, but are less than required for orbit. Hence "sub-orbital." I used it as an example of a sub-orbital trajectory because it might not be obvious to people who haven't played kerbal space program what I meant by it. | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 18:08 | comment | added | Organic Marble | Your question does not seem to match the title. It's also unclear. Consider an edit. "Required" for what? | |
| Apr 2, 2021 at 17:58 | history | asked | Wesley Adams | CC BY-SA 4.0 |