3 ms·
> although the landing procedures could more than nullify whatever comfort benefits they had. Could you expand a little bit here, what to you mean?
by micampe 13y ago
> although the landing procedures could more than nullify whatever comfort benefits they had.
Could you expand a little bit here, what to you mean?
- pavel_lishin 13y agoIf I had to guess, it's the fact that Russian spacecraft tend to land on the ground, and typically fire a rocket burst right before landing to slow down even more. It's the equivalent of getting kicked in the ass by a rocket-powered donkey, twice. American craft land in the water, which is much more forgiving to begin with, and I don't think they fire rockets before hitting the surface. (Although, I'd love to hear more about the other design differences.)
- Luc 13y agoThe modern Soyuz are pretty good though - 'soft landing' engines reduce the speed at impact to less than 5 feet per second (!), and there's shock-absorbing seats. Archive.org link due to government shutdown in the US: http://web.archive.org/web/20130928200146/http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/structure/elements/soyuz/landing.html http://web.archive.org/web/20130928200146/http://www.nasa.go...
- toomuchtodo 13y agoGood Guy Internet Archive. Serving government websites while their servers are "closed".
- jlgreco 13y agoVideo of the soft-landing engines: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2X2kaqYatI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2X2kaqYatI
- BostX 13y agoWater landing means that the spacecraft is limited to a certain volume/mass ratio in order to float (preferably not upside down), withstand some waves, under/over pressure and 'salty water conduct electricity' problems etc. or alternatively turn to a submarine. I doubt water landing is so much easier than ground landing. And what you gonna do in case of crash-landing or some hull cracks?