We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.

New answers tagged

4

Note: a 600m radius station spinning at 1rpm gets an artificial gravity of about 0.67G, not the 0.8G mentioned in the question. The various bits of maths below assume that the 1rpm is correct, and that the 0.8G is wrong. Passengers on the elevator will experience two forces: one, the centrifugal force, which depends on the distance from the axis, and two, ...


2

Yes, there will be wind shear, but it is irrelevant: On Earth, there is a 1656km/hr difference over a distance of 10,000 km between how fast the air is moving at the poles and how fast it moves at the equator. Because it is so spread out, the sheer is so minor that this coriolis effect is only noticeable at the global scale. On your O'Niell cylinder, you ...


-1

Thinking about blenders got me thinking about tornadoes. If we consider the largest recorded tornadoes, the 2013 El Reno tornado was 4.2 km wide with max wind speeds of 302 mph. An O'Neill Cylinder with those specifications only produces 0.4g acceleration. With an O'Neil cylinder we are literally talking about bottling up a supertornado and selling lots in ...


2

Overall, you'll get convection and Coriolis effects from air movement just as you would on a rotating planetary surface. The biggest difference, relative to Coriolis, is that the axis of rotation is parallel to the ground and there's a big velocity difference over a relatively small height range. On Earth, the Coriolis effect on a strong updraft near the ...


6

Consider the implausible worst case. The ISS keeps its current velocity (7.66km/s) whilst passing through the atmosphere, somehow. It retains full structural integrity, and hits the ground entirely intact. It weighs 417289 kg, giving it a kinetic energy of ~12TJ, or the equivalent of about 3 kilotonnes of TNT. Consider that the largest nuclear tests were in ...


23

To get a clue, we can look at the fate of space station Mir, which deorbited (in a controlled fashion) in 2001. At 130,000 kg, it was roughly one-third the mass of ISS, but more compactly built. Mir broke up in orbit 8 minutes after entering the atmosphere, and most of the fragments burned up in the atmosphere. Most of the unburned fragments fell into the ...


6

As with all these questions, perhaps the best place to start is by comparison to the Chicxulub Asteroid. This is the event that effectively wiped out the dinosaurs. That was an asteroid generally thought to be 1015 Kg in mass at a minimum. The ISS is closer to 4.5 x 105 Kg in mass, so it's at least 10 orders of magnitude less mass than the asteroid that ...


11

The space station while very heavy and large is essentially built like a "tin can" with walls as thin as they possibly can be to contain the volume inside. On reentry, it would reach a maximum terminal velocity of a few hundred km/h, which is devastating if it lands on your head, but otherwise not so much. Think of it like a plane crash except without all ...


1

The rotation you're describing is impossible. A planet rotates around its center of mass. The only way for this to occur is if its center of mass were to lie outside of the body. This can't happen, unless somehow the edge of the planet was significantly denser (and thus more massive) than the rest of the planet. But if the mass of the planet is high enough ...


5

From geostationary orbit, by definition, the Earth will always present the same face. The terminators (sunrise and sunset lines) will creep across the surface, but the portion of the Earth that is visible (nearly 50% of the surface, cloud cover and lighting permitting) will not change (assuming the slight oversimplification of an orbital position that doesn'...


Top 50 recent answers are included