Buzz Lightyear Goes to Space

[Pi1otguy]

JOOC how would you compute a weight and balance calulation in Zero G???

Zero G from what reference point? From here on earth it's falling around us at close 1 G, sort of. From the shuttle pax reference it's zero g relative the surfaces inside the shuttle.

Then again, I'm whizzing by at amazing speeds at my comp.

 

[Clark1961]

JOOC how would you compute a weight and balance calulation in Zero G???

The same way you'd do it any other place. Just keep in mind that the calculation is actually total and center of mass with or without the gravity constant.

Hey what'a ya know, they tol' me that going to stability school would be useful some day...

 

[vontresc]

The same way you'd do it any other place. Just keep in mind that the calculation is actually total and center of mass with or without the gravity constant.

Hey what'a ya know, they tol' me that going to stability school would be useful some day...

Yeah but wouldn't that be a mass and balance instead?

 

[Clark1961]

Yeah but wouldn't that be a mass and balance instead?

Yes, it'd be total mass. Multiply that by the gravity constant and it'd be weight. Just because the gravity constant is implicit in our weight and balance calculation we can't pretend it isn't there. The algebra to separate the gravity constant in the calculation is trivial.

Also keep in mind that the center of mass calculation should be in three dimensions...

There, now was all that stuff pedantic enough for ya'll?

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Yeah but wouldn't that be a mass and balance instead?

Define weight.

In a metric country, you buy potatoes by the Kg, not the Newton. In the U.S. you buy them by the pound which is legally defined in terms of the Kilogram - mass.

The scale used to weigh that beef you just bought was calibrated by applying a reference mass - not a force.

In fact, the old mechanical Toledo butcher shop scales "honest weight, no springs" would give the same result for the same mass on the moon as they do on Earth since they work on on the "balance" principal.

On the other hand, if you put a 5 pound bag on a stand and it collapses, we say it weighed too much. And it is common to refer to free-fall as "weightless" or to talk about how much something would "weigh" on different planetary bodies suggesting that at least sometimes weight can imply a force.

The real problem here is that the words like "weight" were in common use long before the concepts of mass vs. force (and g = mass/force * distance/time**2) were made clear. So when using the word "weight" the only way we can determine if it is being used as an indication of mass or force is by examining the context in which it is used.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program, already in progress.

 

[JeffDG]

if the shuttle experienced no gravity, it would not stay in orbit.

The term "Zero G" always bugs me...weightlessness: OK, Zero G: just not true.

There's nowhere in the universe where there is no gravity.

 

[ScottM]

The term "Zero G" always bugs me...weightlessness: OK, Zero G: just not true.

There's nowhere in the universe where there is no gravity.

I have been to a lot of places but I have not made it to every part of the universe to know for sure that there is no place with zero g.

But I do agree about the term, bugs me a little. I prefer micro-gravity environments.