[Nuke]

they probibly wouldnt want to try my idea bacause of the question marks. that does not mean it wouldnt work. il know am wrong when i see my idea fail. ive yet to see that.

[Kosh]

Originally posted by Ford Prefect

Yeah, but keeping the ISS in orbit isn't synonymous with space exploration. A perpetually unfinished space station hanging around and sapping resources from an already impoverished space program doesn't exactly look like the march of progress.

It used to be. From what I read about it on the Wiki, it was NASA that screwed everything up. Now all the other space agencies are angry at NASA. I could be mistaken though.

[Unknown Target]

Would you be willing to bet people's lives on proving yourself wrong or right?
And anyway, the reason NASA doesn't let it's pilots fly on "gut instinct" and "balls of steel" is because not all pilots are equal. If NASA put all their trust in the pilot's skill, then what happens when a bad pilot goes up there? You lose ten people and fourty billion dollars worth of equipment - because you entrusted all of that to a pilot's gut instinct.
It works for simple things like flying an atmospheric aircraft (it's simple and easy, don't tell me it's not, because I've done it), but not for complex things where a simple degree off to the wrong side can destroy everything.

[Nuke]

in that case il fly the damn thing, im getting really good at orbiter

seriously what sounds safer, a hot reentry in a plasma ball pulling 3 or 4 gs, or a cold one where you pull about 1.5-2gs, have constant radio contact, and a smoother interface into areodynamic flight. they are too comfortable with the existing system, than to test concepts that could be far more practical and much safer.

[Bobboau]

you sound like one of those guys who goes on about military tactics because you've played some counterstrike and think you know everything. come on now, this IS rocket science, if you'r going to make some claimms like this at least make some calculations and show us something more than "I know better than every profesional space agency in history, trust me".
out of curiosity, have you tested this in that space simulator thing?

[Kosh]

Here is the problem: You are coming into an atmosphere at an incredibly fast velocity.  The heat is caused by the friction between the atmosphere and the shuttle.

I'm not so sure that the angle of re-entry really matters. The outside of the shuttle would get extremely hot.

[Ford Prefect]

The angle certainly does matter. That's one of the main reasons reentry is such a precise process.

I think Nuke is right. There are better ways to travel into and out of orbit, but we just don't have the money.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Nuke
no, what happens is when you start something new you come up with several possible ways to solve the problem. so you pick the meathod you think will work best at the time. once you have worked with that solution for some time you simple forget that there are other possibilities. its not so much conspiricy as it is conservatisim. go with what has worked in the past, and foregt about other possible ways to solve the problem. but as the technology change, the best way to solve a problem may also change. nasa wants to stay in its comfort zone, rather than take a risk doing something that can potential to work better.

Source up or shut up.

[Nuke]

my point is if you put your craft in the spot where theres only a few atmospheric molecules per cubic meter and keep it there for a long period of time, you will eventually slow down to safe speed without the deathly side effects of plasma heat buildup. when the shuttle re-entteres its always hitting denser air because its coming in at 45 degrees buttom first. i know i dont have any data mainly because i suck at math. its an abstract idea that people with the power of geekyness should examine. i do foree a number of obstacles that need to be overcome. you would have to be able to generate adequit areodynamic lift in a near vaccume environment. you also have to be able to have extreemly percise control in the same environment. maintaining altitude would be very difficult. you would have to take creat care not to loose control and re-enter space, as it would cause you to re-enter at an angle your craft wasnt intended to. its like surfing, but whipeout is fatal. probibly would need some high tempurature composits.

i tried this in orbiter, but orbiter has a poor means of simulating death caused by airframe stresses and re-entry screwups. id need to be able to measure hull tempurature and drag induced deceleration to know if it stands a chance of working. i should e-mail a bunch of aerospace people and see what they think.

[Nuke]

Originally posted by Shrike
Source up or shut up.

my ass

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Kosh
The heat is caused by the friction between the atmosphere and the shuttle.

Actually no. The heat is caused by the shuttle compressing the air ahead of it as it descends not by friction at all. Look at the shape of the Apollo mission re-entry capsules. Do those look like something that has been steamlined to reduce friction to you?