this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
72 points (100.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13944 readers
600 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] determinism2@hexbear.net 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is easier than landing on a strip. Reaching a specific point in space is a much looser constraint than reaching that same point with the correct velocity and acceleration to make a landing feasible beyond that point. There are way more unique trajectories (flying straight down into the point, approaching off-normal from the building face, sideways, upside down, relatively level, even skipping off the ground) that satisfy the first constraint that would not satisfy the second constraint.

[–] ReadFanon@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

At an estimated 850 km/h there is very little margin for error with regards to these unique trajectories however.

[–] AOCapitulator@hexbear.net 4 points 2 years ago

I agree, safely landing at 850 kph sounds tough