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