[AR] Re: Just where does space start?

  • From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "JMKrell@xxxxxxx" for DMARC)
  • To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 16:37:43 -0400 (EDT)

The altitude of 120 km (400K ft) is where a reentry vehicle produces  an 
ionization trail. The measurable atmospheric pressure changes from 10-6 to  
10-5 Torr. 
 
The Air Force considers 50 miles as the minimum orbital  altitude. This 
figure could be from their extensive space  debris tracking. 
 
John Krell   
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 8/31/2014 12:24:39 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
paul.mueller.iii@xxxxxxxxx writes:

 
I did a little searching on wikipedia and it seems the 100 km number does  
have a mathematical basis derived by Theodore von Karman (more than just a  
round number in the vicinity of where the atmosphere gets really thin): 
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A1rm%C3%A1n_line_ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kármán_line)   (that URL has funny characters 
because of the accents over 
the "a"s in  Karman).

It is the number used by the generally accepted governing body  for 
aeronautical and astronautical records, the Federation Aeronautique  
Internationale 
(FAI). The only one who use 50 miles is the US Air Force, from  the days of 
awarding Astronaut wings to X-15 pilots who flew that  high.


Paul M



On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 12:35 PM, David Weinshenker  
<_daze39@earthlink.net_ (mailto:daze39@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) > wrote:

Bill Claybaugh wrote:
> Perhaps it would be best to simply accept  the mathematically
> convenient "100 km" number proposed by the EU and  apparently
> accepted by this community for the last 20  years.


I prefer to accept the (equally mathematically  convenient) "400 k ft."
figure of the Space Shuttle "entry interface"  threshold. This at least
is a convenient number with the weight of an  engineering (rather than
a political) decision behind it: that's the  value someone came up with
for the altitude of the boundary between  "coasting" and "gliding" flight.

No doubt it's biased on the high  side, as is perfectly appropriate for
the intended use: the guidance  logic would want to stop "zeroing out"
the dynamic pressure effects  before they actually reached significant
levels. I'm not sure what the  altitude is where the aero effects were
actually noticeable in the  numbers.

-dave  w







Other related posts: