Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site sri-unix.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!hplabs!sri-unix!knutsen
From: knutsen@sri-unix.ARPA (Andrew Knutsen)
Newsgroups: net.columbia
Subject: Re: IMAX and the Shuttle flights
Message-ID: <184@sri-unix.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 11-Jul-85 15:38:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-unix.184
Posted: Thu Jul 11 15:38:29 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Jul-85 14:22:37 EDT
References: <1306@islenet.UUCP> <900001@pbear.UUCP> <6695@Shasta.ARPA>, <2135@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Organization: SRI, Menlo Park, CA.
Lines: 16


	Re the IMAX gyro problem, it seems to me all you'd need is
one extra wheel to counter the excess angular momentum of both film
reels. It would spin first in one direction, slow to a stop at the
middle, then spin the other way. This would take either a micro or
some sort of clever sensor to control, but due to the varying masses
some control would be required even with two wheels.

	Actually, I dont have all that much experience with counter-
rotating gyros. Someone recently claimed that gyro action could not
be compensated for, but from my understanding of the effect the
precession problems could be alleviated at least.  Would there still
be a resistance to rotation? I would say that might even be a "feature"
rather than a "bug".

Andrew