Re: Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- From: Michael Ash <mike@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:37:06 -0500
Dr J R Stockton <jrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Otherwise, note that any such ship must have a perfect frontal
protection against impacts with particles from electrons to grit.
Therefore, there is no absolute need to minimise the cross-section. Put
the normally-inhabited parts in pods in the ends of arms, and adjust the
arms in the manner of a variable-sweepback wing to keep the apparent
gravity more-or-less perpendicular to the floors and parallel with the
walls.
I don't really understand this reasoning. The system must be perfect, so
it's ok to make its job arbitrarily difficult? Seems to me that just
because the system is perfect for some cross section X, it doesn't
necessarily follow that it will also be perfect for some cross section Y >
X.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
.
- References:
- Quick question about a STL trip
- From: sigidunum
- Re: Quick question about a STL trip
- From: IsaacKuo
- Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- From: Jacey Bedford
- Re: Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- From: IsaacKuo
- Re: Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- From: Jacey Bedford
- Re: Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- From: IsaacKuo
- Re: Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- From: Dr J R Stockton
- Quick question about a STL trip
- Prev by Date: Re: Silverbacks
- Next by Date: Re: Silverbacks
- Previous by thread: Re: Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- Next by thread: Re: Quick question about a STL trip - and another...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|