Why can't they come down slowly?

[BB-Q]

Space shuttles and the like?

It's something I've never understood. If you have to travel at thousands of mph to escape the Earth's gravity then it must be hard to leave. Consequently it should be easy to come back. So why do they have to come back in at thousands of mph too? Could they not get geostationary, nudge the thrusters downwards until gravity starts to get a hold and then just drop down?

I know I'm over simplifying it but it does seem a bit dramatic to me.

[paoloh]

Are you drunk?

[skip_1]

Geo-stationary orbits would be at 100o's of mph though as far as I know?

[thetrash]

You should work for NASA bet no one has thought of that before.

[Balmoral Green]

Now this is funny.

[Puggit]

Now I'm confused - satellites need to travel at a certain speed to stay in geostationary orbits. So if they slow down, then they drop.

The OP said they needed to go fast

[mybrainhurts]

What if they're on a conveyor belt...?

[moleamol]

Oh, they go that fast to escape the gravity? Wow, I never realised that.

[sone]

Because your landing a rocket not a plane. I would imagine the wing loadings are massive on the shuttle. Hence the need for drastic forward motion to create lift under those stubby wings.

I think!

[paoloh]

sone said:

Because your landing a rocket not a plane. I would imagine the wing loadings are massive on the shuttle. Hence the need for drastic forward motion to create lift under those stubby wings.

I think!

Wrong

[moleamol]

paoloh said:

sone said:

Because your landing a rocket not a plane. I would imagine the wing loadings are massive on the shuttle. Hence the need for drastic forward motion to create lift under those stubby wings.

I think!

Wrong

He's not wrong about the wings not creating much lift.

[paoloh]

moleamol said:

paoloh said:

sone said:

Because your landing a rocket not a plane. I would imagine the wing loadings are massive on the shuttle. Hence the need for drastic forward motion to create lift under those stubby wings.

I think!

Wrong

He's not wrong about the wings not creating much lift.

Are you arguing with a drunk man????

[Blib]

Let them laugh BB-Q, but you're not alone, I've not quite got my head around the re-entry speed thingy either.

[moleamol]

paoloh said:

moleamol said:

paoloh said:

sone said:

Because your landing a rocket not a plane. I would imagine the wing loadings are massive on the shuttle. Hence the need for drastic forward motion to create lift under those stubby wings.

I think!

Wrong

He's not wrong about the wings not creating much lift.

Are you arguing with a drunk man????

I don't know, am I?

[paoloh]

Blib said:

Let them laugh BB-Q, but you're not alone, I've not quite got my head around the re-entry speed thingy either.

Speak with Mrs Blib, she'll explain

[sone]

paoloh said:

moleamol said:

paoloh said:

sone said:

Because your landing a rocket not a plane. I would imagine the wing loadings are massive on the shuttle. Hence the need for drastic forward motion to create lift under those stubby wings.

I think!

Wrong

He's not wrong about the wings not creating much lift.

Are you arguing with a drunk man????

I may not be right but I'm not wrong either!.

[paoloh]

moleamol said:

paoloh said:

moleamol said:

paoloh said:

sone said:

Because your landing a rocket not a plane. I would imagine the wing loadings are massive on the shuttle. Hence the need for drastic forward motion to create lift under those stubby wings.

I think!

Wrong

He's not wrong about the wings not creating much lift.

Are you arguing with a drunk man????

I don't know, am I?

I think so but I maybe drunk....

[eharding]

BB-Q said:

Space shuttles and the like?

It's something I've never understood. If you have to travel at thousands of mph to escape the Earth's gravity then it must be hard to leave. Consequently it should be easy to come back. So why do they have to come back in at thousands of mph too? Could they not get geostationary, nudge the thrusters downwards until gravity starts to get a hold and then just drop down?

I know I'm over simplifying it but it does seem a bit dramatic to me.

You may want to get a bag of ice to cool your brain down. The explanation is on a par with the legendary Father Ted/Father Dougal "cows - small vs. far away" discourse.

Right, here we go.

The spaceships you see getting ready to go at Cape Buzz Lightyear are, really, *really* big....and most of that "big" is fuel....because to get into orbit - and you need to be going like the clappers to be in orbit - you need an absolute shed load of it.

The spaceships you see coming back to earth as much, *much* smaller. That is because all of the *big* bit has been burnt. See above.

Now then, the tricky bit is getting rid of all of the speed you've spent all that money on the "big" bit going fast in the first place.

Yes, you could make the initial "big" bit "absolutely bleedin' enormous", and haul enough fuel into orbit so that you could slow to a walking pace whilst still at orbital height, and descend gracefully.

But you'd be a bit of a plank if you did.

The most efficient way of doing it is to bleed off the excess energy by turning it into heat by using the atmosphere as a brake.

Now then Dougal, do you think you've grasped the concept of....oh, arse; he's fallen asleep.

Edited by eharding on Saturday 21st February 22:27

[Blib]

So, if there was a 'petrol station' in orbit, the shuttle could fill up whilst in space and then burn that fuel to slow down and glide, like a leaf down to Earth?

[sone]

i was talking about the final touchdown not the aptmosphere mularkey.