Space Race WI: Rotating Space Station

Indeed, which also provides the answer to the question of "can you get a decent gravity rate on a 33ft diameter". Answer: probably not. Even 8 RPM at a 5m radius only buys 35% of a gravity--Marslike, from a spin rate and a low tangential velocity which might cause some ugly cross-coupling and adaption problems.
 
Indeed, which also provides the answer to the question of "can you get a decent gravity rate on a 33ft diameter". Answer: probably not. Even 8 RPM at a 5m radius only buys 35% of a gravity--Marslike, from a spin rate and a low tangential velocity which might cause some ugly cross-coupling and adaption problems.

Indeed and a bit worse. Remember those MORL reports I cited above? (And now that I need it it won't pull up of course) The actual NTRS report shows a cross-section of the MORL "spun" for AG around the long axis. Damn thing is smaller than I thought and an 'average' 6ft tall human's head is substantially closer to the spin center than his feet. In other words there looks to be a notable difference. (@0.02G?)

Now looking at about 35m, (two MORL modules with a third as a hub and some 'spare') at 3rpm gives about 0.35G at the furthest level. About 0.33G when 'standing' Still might be ugly

Randy
 
Indeed, which also provides the answer to the question of "can you get a decent gravity rate on a 33ft diameter". Answer: probably not. Even 8 RPM at a 5m radius only buys 35% of a gravity--Marslike, from a spin rate and a low tangential velocity which might cause some ugly cross-coupling and adaption problems.

A lunar gravity level of simulated gravity sounds pretty darn useful to me. It would help greatly with working out whether manned lunar bases were remotely practical.

Of course, I have a hard time seeing it getting funded during the 20th century as a long term moon base would have a rather impressive price tag and no real payoff before space industry became a needed thing.

fasquardon
 
Top