Imagine you have to deorbit a defunct satellite that still has enough fuel left to do the maneuver. Which is the correct way to go? A prograde maneuver, basically accelerating while pointing down to Earth, or retrograde to decelerate?
Don't care, I just wanna see it go fast
Drive it like you stole it. Floor it and send the bill to NASA. Chicks dig rebels.
Speed it up (prograde) modify the orbit in order to slingshot a couple of orbits and kiss it goodbye as you let it head off to deep space.
Shoot it down.
You want to decrease the tangential velocity allowing centripetal forces to do their thing
"Prograde pointed at the Earth" is called "radial." the answer is retrograde.
Or anti-radial...either way...
Neither matters. Burn up the fuel yes. It doesn't matter which direction. This will decrease the mass of the satellite. Depending on the size of the satellite it will either burn up in the atmosphere or impact the earth.
Okay, it's like this (though you may disagree): your velocity parallel to Earth is so big that aiming down wouldn't actually do much, just lower your perigee a bit and result in a more elliptical orbit and actually fling you farther out.
F uck you
So go retrograde:
Too fast and you bounce off.
I would say retrograde because it would come in a little more slowly.
No party differences.
I wait a bit more.
Why would there be party differences?
I thought Democrats may be more into STEM than Republicans.
Maybe it's even steven though.
There was a poll not so long ago that turned up libertarians as the STEM party