(Continuing from previous post)

Steve writes, "...then multiply the weight of the capsule - which is very heavy OK"

No. Weight is utterly irrelevant when talking about drogue chutes. It doesn't matter how heavy the object is, it matters only how fast it is moving and through what density of air. That determines the aerodynamic load per unit area of aspect. How much of that load gets applied to the parachute depends on the parachute's drag coefficient and its aspect area.

Parachutes can have different drag coefficients depending on how they're designed. Small parachutes with holes poked in them and reefed in (i.e., their mouths drawn closed with reefing lines) have smaller drag coefficients than others. Drogues are parachutes specifically designed to have a low drag coefficient.

Steve continues, "...then with just small portion of brain synapses firing, realize no parachute is gonna do anything on the back of the thing, but disintegrate. Period End. This is not even worthy of debate."

Not with you, obviously, because you're evidently incapable of rational debate. You allude to "basic physics" but you aren't really employing any physical principles in your answers.

I'm the one talking about physics, not you. You're simply repeating your claim over and over again and calling people stupid when they question you. You smugly try to tell people that no one has refuted your claims, when in fact you simply ignore the refutation -- or else you don't understand it.

Further, you wrote in an earlier post that your aim was to get people to read and discuss your claims. Now that the discussion is going badly for you, you want to cut off the discussion. Isn't that unfair?

Steve writes, "The sudden jerk from the parachute would make the astronuts eyes pop out of their skull and squash to front of the craft."

Except that the astronauts were facing the other way.

Parachutes don't open with a "sudden jerk".

Steve writes, "Ask any sky diver what kind of a kick he gets the second his parachute opens..."

I don't have to -- I've been there and done that. You get a smooth deceleration, and that's with a parachute that has a drag coefficient many times that of a drogue, and happens in thicker air. Funny how all those skydivers still have their eyes in their sockets.

Steve writes, "...now multiply that by infinity."

Either do the math or don't.

Steve writes, "Come come now PANS, you gotta think a bit before you debate..."

We are. We're the ones telling you about all the things you *didn't* know before you wrote your article. We're the ones describing how parachutes work. We're the ones demanding that you do the math you seem to think you're an expert in.

Drogue chutes are no mystery. They're used in countless applications and well-understood. I understand them. You, obviously, do not.

Now I suggest you rapidly dispense with the bluster and either support your claim or retract it. But repeating your claim and calling everyone else stupid for not accepting it just on your say-so reveals your true aims.

Email