Why do gyroscopes hold to the surrounding stars?>

[fitz]

Why do gyroscopes hold to the surrounding stars?>

For the answer: (Click link below.)

http://www.amperefitz.com/abstract.htm

All Airliners and space vehicles MUST have gyroscopes that hold their
planes of rotation to the surrounding stars.

Gyroscopes exhibit the 23 hour, 56 minute and 4 second period of
rotation that it takes the earth to rotate once in space (in relation
to the stars). This is known as one sidereal day in nautical almanac
terms.

 

[Bob Myers]

On Wednesday, January 18, 2012 5:19:45 PM UTC-7, fitz wrote:

Why do gyroscopes hold to the surrounding stars?

For the answer: (Click link below.)

http://www.amperefitz.com/abstract.htm

All Airliners and space vehicles MUST have gyroscopes that hold their
planes of rotation to the surrounding stars.

No, they don't; that's complete and utter nonsense. While aircraft very often do have gyro-based instruments, they're not always required, nor do such instruments have anything to do with holding a "plane of rotation [relative] to the surrounding stars."

The link just takes one to equally nonsensical "information."

Bob M.

 

[Peter Hill]

On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 16:19:45 -0800 (PST), fitz <zeusrdx@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Why do gyroscopes hold to the surrounding stars?

For the answer: (Click link below.)

http://www.amperefitz.com/abstract.htm

All Airliners and space vehicles MUST have gyroscopes that hold their
planes of rotation to the surrounding stars.

Gyroscopes exhibit the 23 hour, 56 minute and 4 second period of
rotation that it takes the earth to rotate once in space (in relation
to the stars). This is known as one sidereal day in nautical almanac
terms.

Tosh. They don't have a clue what anything is doing around them. They
are carefully gimbaled and anti-shock mounted to ensure they don't.

A body will continue in its motion unless an external force is applied
to it.
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/newton3laws.html
A gyroscope exhibits the angular version of that law.

If it is not gimbaled then it will move under the action of external
forces such as gravity. The movement is somewhat surprising as it does
not fall but precesses.
--
Peter Hill
Spamtrap reply domain as per NNTP-Posting-Host in header
Can of worms - what every fisherman wants.
Can of worms - what every PC owner gets!

 

[Jon Elson]

Bob Myers wrote:

No, they don't; that's complete and utter nonsense. While aircraft very
often do have gyro-based instruments, they're not always required, nor do
such instruments have anything to do with holding a "plane of rotation
[relative] to the surrounding stars."
Yup, if they did have such gyros, then after 12 hours they's be flying

upside down. Also, on very long-distance flights, ignoring the
earth's rotation, they'd end up upside down because the ground is now
on the "wrong side". High-end inertial measuring systems compensate for
this by calculating both the earth's rotation and the change in longitude
latitude, so they compute where the center of the earth now is relative
to the position of the plane.

Simpler attitude gyro systems are allowed to drift, and have a pendulum that
keeps them right-side-up.

Jon

 

[Bob Myers]

On Thursday, January 19, 2012 3:24:43 PM UTC-7, Jon Elson wrote:

Bob Myers wrote:


No, they don't; that's complete and utter nonsense. While aircraft very
often do have gyro-based instruments, they're not always required, nor do
such instruments have anything to do with holding a "plane of rotation
[relative] to the surrounding stars."
Yup, if they did have such gyros, then after 12 hours they's be flying
upside down.

Yeah, I've experienced that approach into Narita several times...;-)

Bob M.