On 29 May 2003 00:05:08 -0700, David Masten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Having watched the Indy 500 this past weekend including the occasional >220+ mph (100+ m/s) crash, and then also considering the area to unit >mass of SSTO vehicles and thus its terminal velocity (quick back of the >envelope shows 110 m/s as reasonable), I am wondering if a VTVL vehicle >with engine out on (crash) landing can be designed to practically >disintegrate while the crew/passenger compartment remains intact and the >passengers walk away. If you put the passengers in fireproof suits, five point harnesses, and heavy crash cages, hit the deck at a shallow angle every time, and don't mind losing your passengers and crew every couple hundred flights (at least one NASCAR driver dies on the track every year, just not usually in a Winston Cup race), this would work fine. But you're going to hit the deck straight on at somewhere north of 100 m/sec. If you stop in 2 meters, you'll pulling 255 g. If you want the load around 100 g, you need 5 meters. If you want the load around 20 g, the maximum I would allow to ensure passenger survival, you need a full 25 meters. That assumes the vehicle collapses uniformly, like one of John's nosecones. That won't happen; some of the plumbing and ironmongery will resist destruction and send your g load through the ceiling and your pipes through your passengers. If you set a design criterion that this not happen, your designer is *really* going to hate you. Rather than design a vehicle that crashes safely, why not design one that doesn't crash? -R -- "We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true." -- Robert Wilensky, UC Berkeley _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
