 | | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
|
In lugnet.space, Sylvia Tresto wrote: > Okay, just something I thought of while fiddling with my LEGO: An aerodynamic > desigh is only handy in atmosphere and not necessary in space, right? I remember > it from physics lessons and some posts in this (...) (22 years ago, 24-Jun-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Gungan Attack Sub & Outpost
|
|
Brad, Thanks for the compliments! That's from a Duplo egg which came out a couple years ago. I've also used a red one for another MOC. (URL) Regards, ACPin & Sons (22 years ago, 24-Jun-03, to lugnet.starwars, lugnet.space, lugnet.aquazone, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Another one rides the BUS...PCSBUS that is.
|
|
(...) Faultless as always. Great overall form, sweet sweet greebling, and a cunning acronym. Just what we've come to expect. And that's the thing. Are you really puching the envelope with each new craft, or is it all more of the same. Don't get me (...) (22 years ago, 24-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
|
(...) Eesh. Star Trek script writers tend to accept hypothetical physics as gospel truth (with the result that much of Star Trek physics has since been disproven), and a lot of hard-core Trekkies do the same thing with any physics presented on Star (...) (22 years ago, 24-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
|
(...) I wouldn't say that. Star Wars was intentionally written with cinematic effect in mind. And which is worse, the show that intentionally ignores physics, or the show that tries to obey physics and fails? (22 years ago, 24-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More Moonbase Components
|
|
Sorry for the very delayed reply : ( I just uploaded that file to brickshelf : ) (...) (22 years ago, 24-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dat.models)
|
| |
| | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
|
(...) It does behave more like a fluid at extremely high speeds. However, have you seen what happens to an airplane when it hits water at mach speeds? It's not pretty, and that's essentially what you'd have to be dealing with in a near vacuum. By (...) (22 years ago, 23-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
|
(...) Not really. When you're dealing with individual particles hitting other individual particles, there really isn't any such thing as a 45 degree angled surface. It's more like billiard balls, where the relative angle of impact is determined by (...) (22 years ago, 23-Jun-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: The Selendian Scout
|
|
"George Haberberger" <George.Haberberger@...xerox.com> wrote in message news:HGxpLH.IxI@lugnet.com... (...) he'll (...) support, (...) future (...) it up (...) one (...) I'm having some website problems. I use Internet Explorer 6, sp1 (which I (...) (22 years ago, 23-Jun-03, to lugnet.space)
|
| |
| | Re: Hypothetical design question
|
|
(...) That's essentially correct. Two cars hitting each other head-on at 30MPH is effectively the same as one car hitting a stationary vehicle at 60MPH. Obviously the two accidents would not be perfect mirror images of each other, but the level of (...) (22 years ago, 23-Jun-03, to lugnet.space, FTX)
|
