What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
118 Comments
- samard2002, on 08/18/2008, -1/+42What a ridiculous idea. Why not a system where it aims down a mountain at the exact same pitch as the slope of the mountain and then just skids to a halt, sliding down the mountain? Or we could build a big half-pipe and have objects hit it at just the right angle from space and they would go back and forth on the half-pipe, slowly losing momentum until they come to rest at the bottom of the half-pipe. Bitchin'!
From the article: "since scraping against the shaft wall is possible". That is the understatement of the week. - StuartGibson, on 06/14/2009, -0/+40Next on the agenda, some kind of giant mattress.
- yoda17, on 08/18/2008, -1/+41I must be getting old because this sound like a really dumb idea.
- aphexcoil, on 08/18/2008, -0/+37Houston, the tunnel has queefed ...
- FidelBlack, on 08/18/2008, -0/+35How would the astronauts get ready for landing if they are too busy screaming?
- madaday, on 08/18/2008, -2/+35This just sounds like there are too many variables for it to be safe.... one miscalculation, which we all know happens and this would not end well :(
- WiseWeasel, on 08/17/2008, -1/+24Hope they don't miss!
- Lewiji, on 08/18/2008, -0/+22Yes, but then so does strapping yourself into a cylinder packed with hundreds of tonnes of explosives to journey to a place where humans can't survive.
- Frost9999, on 08/18/2008, -1/+21It sounds like a fun system, but is also very complex compared to using a parachute. I would rather take my chances with the low-tech approach, thanks.
- disher91, on 08/18/2008, -2/+21There's something about "falling safely at terminal velocity" that makes me a little uneasy.
Nothing good can come from a flaming ball at terminal velocity. - Brocclibob, on 08/18/2008, -0/+19Sounds pretty damn suicidal.
- rabatjoie, on 08/18/2008, -0/+19"Like a “smart bomb” the vehicle would aim for an exact spot on the earth’s surface."
And as smart bombs never fail, also the proposed concept will be failsafe! Seriously, what's wrong with parachutes and landings at sea? - Haecceity, on 08/18/2008, -0/+18"scraping against the shaft wall is possible."
I would imagine it would be inevitable, especially given the turbulence involved. I'm no expert, but I'd guess that scraping a rock wall at 225mph is not advisable. - Frost9999, on 08/18/2008, -0/+17The mental image I get is something like trying to fire a bullet _into_ a gun barrel from 1000m
- powatom, on 08/18/2008, -0/+15@Battlecry - ever heard of cliffs? Mountains aren't just 'uneven'. They are completely warped. You cannot smooth them.
@Wartyboskfapped - good luck bulldozing a ***** mountain. We don't live in Sim City, you know. - uptwolait, on 08/18/2008, -1/+15I guess the author doesn't know thermodynamics, because when you compress air it gets DAMN HOT.
- AttilaD, on 08/18/2008, -0/+13I'm pretty sure this is just an excuse to drill for oil.
"James C. McLane III worked as an engineer for over 20 years in NASA’s manned space program. An Associate Fellow in the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics and a licensed Professional Engineer in the State of Texas, his current job in the oil and gas industry allows him to view human space activities from a fresh perspective." - inactive, on 08/18/2008, -4/+16This is the stupidest ***** idea I have heard.. today, at least.
- rabatjoie, on 08/18/2008, -0/+12if they do: EPIC FACEPLANT
- MtheoryX, on 08/18/2008, -0/+12@Vosona:
While I see what you're getting at, consider this:
At terminal velocity (the speed at which the lander would be falling in this "pit stop" scenario), water is no more forgiving than granite with regards to destruction of the lander and anyone inside. - powatom, on 08/18/2008, -2/+14This just in: Perfectly smooth and flawless mountains discovered.
- dilbert, on 08/18/2008, -0/+11Step away from the bong.
And the hole is called the *****-pit? - fucknuggets, on 08/18/2008, -1/+11This sounds more like a plot to destroy the earth using high velocity projectiles to puncture the earths core.
- 47f0, on 08/18/2008, -1/+11Are we getting a clue as to why he's no longer a NASA engineer? Hmmm....
Seriously dumb idea in so many ways. At least this guy is sofely squirreled away in the petroleum industry where his lame-brained ideas can only do major ecological damage - yikes.
Now for my idea. You get 4.2 million cans of Gillette Foamy shave cream... - jsmith39, on 08/18/2008, -0/+10or instead of playing a multi million dollar game of darts with a space craft we could I don't know... put wheels on the damn thing and land it like a plane?
- Battlecry, on 08/18/2008, -0/+9It would be easier to smooth out a mountainside than it would be to dig a tapering hole hundreds of meters deep.
- Frost9999, on 08/18/2008, -0/+9Here's a few more ideas I came up with as I typed them.
- Fire explosives from artillery on the ground that detonates just below the craft, slowing it down with a series of gentle kabooms.
- Build landers that are basically giant pogo sticks, but in the spirit of the 'pit stop' they would use pneumantic damping instead of a spring.
- Suspend a giant net beneath helium balloons. The lander can then fall into the net and be gently lowered to the ground.
- As the craft falls, use the air to start it spinning, then deploy helicopter blades. Auto-rotation brings it to a safe and controlled landing.
- Make the lander so big that terminal velocity is about walking pace to due having to displace so much air. - inactive, on 08/18/2008, -1/+10lol what a load of rubbish. all that just to save the weight of a parachute?.
also if you miss with a parachute you just got to wat a little while for the ships
if you miss with this then strawberry jam. - crazyjake, on 08/18/2008, -1/+10this just doesn't seem like a good idea...
- Vosona, on 08/18/2008, -0/+9Not like any other space program has ever had accidents.
Oh wait. - zadadka, on 08/18/2008, -0/+9To use the modern vernacular.....epic fail.
You simply can't make the adjustments necessary at such high speeds (which would be faster than "terminal velocity" [a misnomer] anyway), the local adjustments to GPS data would be simply too late to make the necessary adjustments descent angles....even if your hole started as being football stadium sized.
Plus, it wouldn't be falling straight down, it would be at an angle; so even if you could make those adjustments, your re-entry angle would have to be absolutely precise to match your angular shaft.
Stick with parachutes, sea landings and inflatable airbags... - timthe1st, on 08/18/2008, -1/+10It won't be flaming...once it slows down to terminal velocity the wind resistance on it would be quite low (the same as its weight) so once they balance out the descent would be quite stable. (Just like if you are using a parachute you are falling at terminal velocity)
- Hellman109, on 08/18/2008, -1/+9So instead of floaties and a parachute, it would have to land inch perfect into a hold.
Yeah great idea there... throw KISS out the window and keep it complex idiot right in! - Slybri, on 08/18/2008, -0/+7Who is the orbiter recovery method
that will save you onboard deceleration mass?
SHAFT!
ya damn right. - inactive, on 08/18/2008, -3/+10This just in: bulldozers and motor graders invented.
- zigardne, on 08/18/2008, -1/+8we've had more flights and satellites than every other nation,
Rip on NASA all you want, there's an American Flag on the moon. - colonelpanic, on 08/18/2008, -1/+8People + Rapid Deceleration = Dead People
I really don't like this idea. - BNash577, on 08/18/2008, -1/+7@ powatom
I think one major point of the whole argument here is that digging a hole hundreds of meters into the earth is equally as ridiculous as shaving a mountain. I mean, if you have to dig a hole with marble smooth walls, that's 360 degrees of smooth whereas a mountain side would be roughly 180. So from the ridiculous mental picture standpoint, your ***** makes no sense. but whatever, I'll leave it to the pro's to decide whether or not to use the half pipe idea. - CarlSD, on 08/18/2008, -0/+6"Missed it by that much, Chief"
- powatom, on 08/18/2008, -0/+6Also the bullet is on fire and the you have to curve the bullet in a similar fashion to the curving bullets on Wanted.
- MrFurious2k, on 08/18/2008, -1/+6I recognize that at high speed and a "narrowing" of the tunnel you'll start to get compression of air beneath the object. What I can't get past is that at that speed and inertia that you'd need a very significant narrowing of the tunnel to make a "seal" to allow compression to occur to the point where the vehicle stops as opposed to crashes. Too much narrowing and you have more than scraping the wall. Too little and it's a hot dog down a hall way.
- Vosona, on 08/18/2008, -2/+7Except the bullet is being guided by advanced computers and can change direction in case something goes wrong.
Speaking of which, it'd be a great idea to put these next to oceans so there's time to steer it into something less unforgiving than ground. - bluebirdgm, on 08/18/2008, -0/+5It's not impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, and they're not much bigger than two meters!
- dafragsta, on 08/18/2008, -0/+5Paging Dr. Freud.
- linuxpenguin, on 08/18/2008, -0/+5I've got a better idea: how about we put those years of Little League to use, have someone stitch us a gigantic baseball glove, and just catch it? The glove will act as a giant oven mitt so you won't get burned!
Hey, if you can catch a ball, you can catch a spaceship right? Just gotta use a bigger glove.
Although your idea sure sounds fun for the astronauts. . . - Lewiji, on 08/18/2008, -1/+5Terminal velocity is not a constant. The terminal velocity of someone with a parachute is different from someone without one. I'm gonna hazard a guess that they design the vehicles to have a safe terminal velocity.
- Garmonbozzia, on 08/18/2008, -0/+4As a skydiver, I can tell you that parachutes are fairly heavy, cumbersome and occasionally they can fail. However, if someone offered me the "alternative" of aiming for a specially designed hole in the ground, I'll gladly take the 'chute.
- Suricou, on 08/18/2008, -0/+4I have doubts over such accurate aiming. Perhaps not a shaft, but some type of slow-deceleration surface...
I have visions of a lake being drained and filled with thousands of tons of polystyrene packing foam. It should decelerate the craft safely, give sufficient depth, and be much easier to hit - only need an accuracy to within a hundred meters, not to within a few centimeters. The environmental impact poses an issue though. - brainflakes, on 08/18/2008, -1/+5Nice concept, but I wouldn't trust it with a manned vehicle!
- Suricou, on 08/18/2008, -0/+4Actually, that could work... Dig a circular pit a hundred meters wide and three hundred deep, and fill it with some type of foam.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 118 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is