3 ms·
Well then, it's easy: Just always face the exhaust in that direction! It's not rocket science!
by cooper_ganglia 3y ago
Well then, it's easy: Just always face the exhaust in that direction! It's not rocket science!
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> always face the exhaust in that direction! It's not rocket science! You don't see a problem with trying to accelerate with two exhaust streams at 180º to each other?
- ithkuil 3y agoWhat if the front one is only a small fraction of the thrust at the rear? Would that be enough to "clear the path". Surely it would cost some efficiency but it may beat he alternative
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- timschmidt 3y agoWhipple shields [1] don't weigh much, and don't involve negative acceleration of any kind. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield
- the_third_wave 3y agoIn other words the space-equivalent of a supercavitating torpedo like the Shkval [1], more or less an underwater rocket which creates its own gas bubble around the projectile by deflecting part of the exhaust stream to nozzles on the front of the device. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VA-111_Shkval
- cooper_ganglia 3y agoIn a universe where every action has an equal and opposite reaction, why not make those reactions argue about it?