Path: utzoo!attcan!telly!lethe!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!titan!heskett From: heskett@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Donald Heskett) Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle Subject: Re: apollo stuff again.. Message-ID: Date: 21 Dec 90 19:32:44 GMT References: <1990Dec21.184751.28323@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> Sender: news@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu Organization: Applied Research Laboratories, University of Texas at Austin. Lines: 19 In-reply-to: jkonrath@silver.ucs.indiana.edu's message of 21 Dec 90 18:47:51 GMT > a bit ago someone was discussing the Apollo capsule's re-entry. The > capsule comes in at a 5.5 degree re-entry angle into a re-entry > corridor that is basically shaped like a narrow cone, 300 miles wide > and 40 miles deep. The reason the low angle is becuase the capsule 'bounces' > several times off the atmosphere to slow down. Not all craft had to > do that: Mercury and Gemini used a steeper angle, because they were slower > craft. > Now, how I picked this up: I got a game called Apollo 18: Mission to the > moon, by accolade. I think you are wrong about the Apollo capsule bouncing off the atmosphere. If I remember correctly, its re-entry trajectory was monotonic non-increasing; i.e., always downward. Games are fun, but they usually cannot be relied on as sources of reliable information. According to Kenneth Gatland, at least some of the Russian Zond lunar probes did perform "skip" re-entries. However, from his description, that this was not for purposes of lessening the re-entry heating.