Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Brian Kelly wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Whoa: I'm not trying to pee on your parade here Mike, honest, but
let's take a look at a few immutable physical realities. Temperatures
at 100,000 MSL generally range from -50ºF to -150ºF "depending".
Lightweight (ounces) high-end ($500 class) consumer-level GPS
receivers are rated to temps only down to غ-5ºF and 30,000 MSL max.
altitude. Then comes the same kinds of limits on the rest of the
electronics you're visualizing. How would engineer your way around
these limitations on a freeware budget?
Good question.
The payload package is often constructed of foam sheathing, such as
used in housing construction. 3/4 or inch sheathing can be cut to shape,
and sealed pretty easily. One of my research sources found that the heat
generated by the electronic equipment nearly matched the heat lost
during flight. The internal temperature actually rose by about a degree.
I do plan on having an internal temperature sensor to get a knowledge
base started of this issue.
That "knowledge base" has existed going back to the 1800s. Save
yourself from reinventing the wheel and sit in on a Heat Transfer 101
class and learn how to do it all by the numbers on the back of an
envelope.
From 100,000 the load could easily land downwind a hundred or more
miles away from the launch site.
In some cases, yes. Recovery teams will be deployed somewhat east of
the launch site. As the mission profile unfolds, they will head in the
general direction of the predicted landing site.
That might work in Colorado and Arizona but here in the northeast
corridor? Launch from State College PA and the thing drops on a low
income housing project in Brooklyn?
The bureaucrats ain't gonna allow a shot to 100,000 and back down
anywhere east of the Mississippi for obvious reasons and sure as hell
not in PA which leaves me out. You're talking a western badlands
proving grounds level experiment. Good luck with the red tape they'll
smack you with. How much would you budget for liability insurance?
You might want to read the links I provided to Len.
Reading all those would wear out Firefox. But I did scan enough of 'em
to come to realize that you're correct about amateur balloons having
reached 100,000 feet so I have to eat some words I posted.
But you're still going to have to sort your way thru the the very
fuzzy requirements of FAR 101 and I suspect you're seriously
underestimating the amount of drudgery that's likely to take. I've
dealt with the FAA types in the corridor over issues I had with FAR
103. They wound up arguing amongst themselves for months on end I and
gave up trying to get any decisions or answers out of 'em.
I also caught up with the fact that none of these missions can be
insured. And you wanna drop objects out of the sky in an uncontrolled
manner into spots unknown somewhere along the east coast? Fuhgeddit!!
That we can do it while having fun is a real bonus.
Bag this 100,000 foot thing, you're 'way over your head with it.
Yeah, I like swimming in the deep end.
Those of us who have a history of running multidisciplinary
engineering projects usually know better . . . your mileage won't vary
after you get some history behind you . .
The altitude is only a small part of the thing.
.. . . groan! . . . -100ºF is only a small part of it huh?
I'm not breaking any new ground with the idea of launching anything. My
intentions are the research and payload integration.
Welp, good luck with it Mike - Keep us posted.
- Mike KB3EIA -
w3rv
|