hitting land with a water-based landing system probably isn't great, but that still seems nonfatal (if unpleasant). is the "danger" blurb all just incorrectly carried over from apollo, where skipping means a potentially still-elliptical orbit and life support would run out?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @khyperia
It's a combination of some of these things. Here's an ESA article from 2015 about it:https://blogs.esa.int/rocketscience/2015/02/05/the-facts-on-reentry-accurate-navigation-is-everything/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @badboy_
Gotcha, thanks! Yeah, the minor thermal load for long periods of time seems potentially bad, I'm obviously not a heatshield expert, haha. although I'm side-eyeing "generates little or no lift", makes me doubt the article a little - e.g. apollo's 0.368 L/D is not insignificant
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Skipping isn't necessarily catastrophically bad depending on the orbit, but if you skip on a lunar re-entry that can mean many hours or even days before re-entry. The service module was jettisoned at this point, so that can be bad. More generally it's about thermal load though
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
The shallower your re-entry the more thermal load overall the craft will have to endure, but in exchange you will have less peak heating. More thermal load means you need more ablative heat shielding, meaning more mass, so you want to have the steepest reentry you can survive
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
For crewed craft, g forces endured by the crew is also a factor, which are lower on shallower re-entry. The film return capsule in the CORONA program would have taken upwards of 20-30 Gs at peak. Gemini wouldn't have had more than 3-4
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
TL;DR: Yes, your intuitions were correct both for apollo and the minor thermal load for increased periods of time being bad for LEO missions
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
But really it's more of the craft being designed for a specific re-entry profile, which could be steep or shallow or even intentionally skip as Gemini did, but the craft does need to re-enter at the angle it was designed for or you will exceed peak heat or run out of ablator/o2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Ok one other thing: "although I'm side-eyeing "generates little or no lift", makes me doubt the article a little - e.g. apollo's 0.368 L/D is not insignificant" Apollo generated significant lift. Orion will too (.25 LD), it's basically required for lunar/interplanetary re-entry
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
But craft that are designed for LEO re-entry typically do not generate lift, since the peak heating they'll endure is not high enough to require it. You do it to stay in the upper atmosphere for as long as possible, but LEO craft don't want the increased thermal load
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.