/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5363648
>Pressure is not the same as vibration.

You're right. The amount of pressure we're talking about is an order of magnitude more dangerous than launch vibration.

>When there is a weight limit this doesn't work. Electronics do have to be specially space hardened. This is just ignorant.

As was your claim that rebreather derivative life support was in any way gravity dependent.

>It does, the outer skin of spacesuits and spacecraft is to shield from impacts. It cannot sustain a large impact but it's complete bull to say it cannot take anything, there is a vast range of relative velocities possible in orbit. See shuttle window impact.

And you're seriously comparing this to crafting a mathematically flawless 6 inch thick titanium sphere

>Comparing apples to potatoes. A sub has access to water, from which it can make coolant and air as well as use it for consumption and propulsion.

Indeed, some of the many ways in which it's more technologically sophisticated.

>It is actually, supersonic parachutes for spacecraft are very sophisticated.

They are also related to the rocketry aspect. In my very first post I allowed that any additional cost was due to the need for rockets. We are comparing only the vehicles themselves, omitting the means by which they get to the respective realms in which they operate.

>And you accuse other people of uninformed arrogance.

Says the guy who thought a space capsule's life support system was wholly different from that of a submersible and in some way had to be modified to be gravity independent