YNM

Even ISS still need reboosts. Manned spacecrafts routinely operate at 200-300 km, except for space stations (though Salyut 7 is quoted to have a perigee of 210 km height).

v0 is circular orbital speed (sqrt(GM/(H+Rearth)), you can get the density (ρ) from one of the standard density models (I'm sure your colleagues has them), g is the gravitational acceleration at the height (GM/((H+Rearth)^2)), S and CL is the wing area and lift coefficient (idk, ask one of your colleagues, maybe one of their high-altitude gliders), m is the aircraft/spacecraft mass. L is the lift force, which is why it has to be equal to m*g (weight of the craft). And here I am trying to learn to ensure everything is pertinent to the ground and not sinking or collapsing into it...

It isn't. You're the one who works in the world's largest aeronatical and astronautical reaearch organization, you can definitely just plug numbers into this equation : And see where the line is actually.

You just put huge windmills in the North Sea. Would they pay Benelux to do it, or... fall gelb ? XD

Not too arbitrary TBH. 100 km is (about the) Karman line, where any lift-supported flights will need to go at or faster than the circular orbital speed. And it's also not too arbitrary because below that you'll already reenter and before it you just started heating up. idk, I'd say that it's a matter of conveniency. 50 mi is a round number, same as 100 km.

Not to FAI or IAF. They hold the records on that.

And that still messed up the parachutes ? EDIT : It appears that a similar event occured to Soyuz TMA-11, albeit less severe. (press release by Roscomos on RIA Novosti.)

Extremely dissimilar design. Soyuz reentry capsules are like the housing for headlights; Vostoks are perfectly spherical. One has an infinite axis of symmetry and the other has a limited axis of symmetry (only one, in fact). Again, you don't want them to reenter hatch first. Keeping the station unmanned is actually less extreme than pushing the limits of what the rockets or ferry spacecraft can do.

Did they have people in them at the time ? Were they unscathed or not ? What would NASA goes to say to RKA ? We're not taking balls here. You may well be with the methods of rescue etc. but I'd say that the least balls option is to leave the station for a short period of time, if they can't make MS-11 successfuly or in-time. Didn't it had more problems, or has it been fixed ? The problematic Progress spacecrafts were launched by them right ?

A little bit, not much more than other space capsules. But yeah, it's only if you were pointed correctly you'll be able to let it guide itself. Otherwise, I think no one likes the crew to return already blendered.

If they were already pointed in the right direction. If you reenter parachute-end first it'll still be a disaster.

Huh ? Last time I was in one there wasn't much headroom but definitely enough space for turning in the gangway. Unless some really vile people has turned it into 2-3 configuration.

Alternatively you can use extremely obscure reference, just make sure you have a long enough string.

In which case there are ways for you to induce the proper e-mail notification for comparison. One way is to login through the incognito mode on your browser. For Gmail account, for instance, this is how they look like : If your google notification was different, then it might be a phishing scam. If it's legitimate then you have to take evasive actions. In any case, better safe than sorry. EDIT : It appears that other online services (I still have Facebook) is a lot less sensitive to these prompts. Well, so much for a tech company.

In a data breach, that's what you want to be wary of. Hence changing your password when something fishy is being smelled is one of the right ways of doing them. Obviously through the correct channels.