• This forum is the machine-generated translation of www.cad3d.it/forum1 - the Italian design community. Several terms are not translated correctly.

capsule apollo

  • Thread starter Thread starter rinato
  • Start date Start date
maxopus said:
The ragasso does the witty... did you see the principal?
What do you say we vaporize it now or we cook it in salt?
Click to expand...
What do I have to do? If they're gonna... and then I'm a kid, he's gonna be fun.

p.s.: for a while keep it, then we see.. .
:smile:
 
Er Presidente said:
What do I have to do? If they're gonna... and then I'm a kid, he's gonna be fun.

p.s.: for a while keep it, then we see.. .
:smile:
Click to expand...
I agree, it seems awake and endowed with sound curiosity:, opposite a disciple you can always comfortable.
 
rinato said:
It has been paulpaul hhe to talk of portance/resistance not null... I have only deduced that being inevitable resistance, somewhere there must be portance.
that, then, talking about "nothing" is mathematically correct, it seems difficult to me, I guess it meant "equal to 1".

So you think that there is no portance, and the 7th trajectory is maintained only of rudder? I also think this strange because the fall had begun to 7th naturally tends to a parabolic trajectory, and the rockets would always be lit to recover the angle. Or not?


Well, come on, that some temerary to sit next door we find it for sure for the ceremony. otherwise we give it to you at 1st semester, and to all the others per second. 6 months ahead.
Click to expand...
erpresident has already told you everything about control (or never would I expect to replace him in this field!).
with "support" I meant the perpendicular component of the aerodynamic force to the direction of progress, and with "resistance" the component parallel to this. every body moving in a fluid is subjected to an aerodynamic force: the direction (and module) of this (and therefore the relationship between portance/resistance) depends, among other things, on the shape of the body and the angle of incidence.
a null relationship in mathematics exists here: numberer = 0. If anything there is no relationship with the null denominator, in which case it may make sense to speak of limit of the relationship to tend to zero of the denominator.
if the cm had had a zero portance/resistance ratio would have the aerodynamic force always parallel to the direction of progress: at that point, even turning to pleasure the cm along the axis of roll you could not have changed the trajectory, since you would not have had any component of the aerodynamic force outside the horizontal plane. instead having also a small "portance" (meaning precisely as a perpendicular component to the resistance) varying the arrangement of rollio you could vary the trajectory.
 
paulpaul said:
erpresident has already told you everything about control (or never would I expect to replace him in this field!).
with "support" I meant the perpendicular component of the aerodynamic force to the direction of progress, and with "resistance" the component parallel to this. every body moving in a fluid is subjected to an aerodynamic force: the direction (and module) of this (and therefore the relationship between portance/resistance) depends, among other things, on the shape of the body and the angle of incidence.
a null relationship in mathematics exists here: numberer = 0. If anything there is no relationship with the null denominator, in which case it may make sense to speak of limit of the relationship to tend to zero of the denominator.
if the cm had had a zero portance/resistance ratio would have the aerodynamic force always parallel to the direction of progress: at that point, even turning to pleasure the cm along the axis of roll you could not have changed the trajectory, since you would not have had any component of the aerodynamic force outside the horizontal plane. instead having also a small "portance" (meaning precisely as a perpendicular component to the resistance) varying the arrangement of rollio you could vary the trajectory.
Click to expand...
without anything to remove to er president, here dissolves the fogs! Thank you.
 
Er Presidente said:
Great!
I was convinced that to return to the earth they made an entrance into an Earth orbit, instead no!
So it's a real nightmare, so much of a hat to those who succeeded in such an enterprise, even more incredible.
Click to expand...
mat robes:smile:
probably the weight of the service module + extra fuel to make an additional burn of circulating the orbit during the return would have caused the weight to the launch of the saturn... and therefore accepted a speed of return simply never experienced before! By the way, I think they couldn't experiment it if not with human crew in the return of Apollo 8 from the moon, since I find that the other test missions of the cm were in Earth orbit... so with a very lower return speed!
 
rinato said:
Of course. But you know, because you want to answer with jokes and arrows, it's easy to run out of humor to sarcasm, and there can be pain. then you are moderator: who bans you!
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I thought after so many years there was a certain confidence, I apologize if I went out of the borders, it won't happen again.
 
Er Presidente said:
I'm sorry, I thought after so many years there was a certain confidence, I apologize if I went out of the borders, it won't happen again.
Click to expand...
no one came out of the borders, to what I see.
only that the joke was going a little long and there will be someone who doesn't give a damn, while finding interesting the topic of the thread.

Perhaps, rather I do not use enough face to underline the spirit of my posts. in the future I will provide.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
44,997
Messages
339,767
Members
4
Latest member
ibt

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 0 (members: 0, guests: 0)
Back
Top