A-10 in WWII??

Alistair Gunn wrote:

Kristan Roberge twisted the electrons to say:
Well columbia's solution would have been to park to the ISS and stay
there until NASA can get their arse in gear and rush another orbiter
into orbit...

... and where does Columbia find the fuel to do this?

there's no rule that says you have to RUSH to a higher orbit.

Kristan Roberge wrote:
Alistair Gunn wrote:

Kristan Roberge twisted the electrons to say:
Well columbia's solution would have been to park to the ISS and stay
there until NASA can get their arse in gear and rush another orbiter
into orbit...

... and where does Columbia find the fuel to do this?

there's no rule that says you have to RUSH to a higher orbit.

Delta-v is delta-v, and Columbia didn't have enough to get to ISS, period.
The speed of the proposed manuver is irrelevant. To go from Columbia's
original orbital inclination to the orbital inclination of the ISS would
have demanded a plane-change maneuver requiring far more fuel than the
shuttle's Orbital Maneuvering System carries (at least 4 times as much,
fuel, as it happens).

This proposal has of course come up before, and George Herbert was kind
enough to do the math:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...utput =gplain
--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"Our country, right or wrong. When right, to be kept right, when
wrong to be put right." - Senator Carl Schurz, 1872

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 06:25:55 GMT, Kristan Roberge wrote:



Alistair Gunn wrote:

Kristan Roberge twisted the electrons to say:
Well columbia's solution would have been to park to the ISS and stay
there until NASA can get their arse in gear and rush another orbiter
into orbit...

... and where does Columbia find the fuel to do this?

there's no rule that says you have to RUSH to a higher orbit.

The orbits are radically different, the Shuttle could not have come
close to the ISS. Not even "slowly" (as if that would matter).

Al Minyard