Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ames!hc!beta!cmcl2!phri!dolphy!jmg
From: jmg@dolphy.UUCP (Jeffrey Greenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Disk Striping (description and references) plus class brief
Message-ID: <155@dolphy.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Aug-87 12:00:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: dolphy.155
Posted: Wed Aug 12 12:00:24 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Aug-87 07:45:32 EDT
References: <2432@ames.arpa> <3721@well.UUCP> <2838@phri.UUCP>
Organization: What Can I Say To You?
Lines: 13

> In article <3721@well.UUCP> rchrd@well.UUCP (Richard Friedman) writes:
> > If you try to make a disk go too fast in an attempt to
> > improve transfer rates, you approach Mach 1 in the turbulent flow around
> > the surface of the disk, and the resulting shock wave destroyes the disk,
> > literally.
> 
> 	So, why not put the disk in a vacuum?

You'll lose the Winchester effect where the head is supported by the 
laminar flow floating close enough to get high recording density.

Why can't the head be placed very close to the disk in a vacuum... is
it a difficulty of producing a smooth disk surface at a resonable cost?