In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Brian Kelly wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message
...

1500ºC is 2732ºF, over
a thousand degrees hotter than the melting point of steel!

"That's hot!"

. . WTF . . ?!

The atmosphere does indeed heat up in the area known as the Thermosphere

Does other odd things too. Bouncy, bouncy!

If you don't believe me, here is some info from NASA. They give even
higher values as a maximum.

"That's hot!"

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy...tmosphere.html

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosphere

gives a nice explanation of the Thermosphere, and there is a bit of info
there as to why Amateurs should be interested in it.

A good question is "Why doesn't everything that passes through the
thermosphere burn up?" Because they don't. In fact, despite these high
temps, things passing through this region would "feel" cold.

Would you rather stick your hand into water heated to 200 degrees F or air
heated to 400 degrees?

Why should Hams know about the Thermosphere?

'Cause it's hot? ;-)

You *don't* understand some *very* basic
things about the atmosphere, things that you should know as a Ham.

This whole thread got me thinking about how balloons work and how much helium
costs and such. One thing I found out is that 1000 cu ft of helium can be had
for about $200. A bit of $$ for an individual launch but not much if split up
amongst a group.

Another thing was the lifting power at high altitudes and low pressures, and
the concept and behavior of a balloon open at the bottom that's not filled all
the way with gas. Fascinating.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Brian Kelly wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

Brian Kelly wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...



Brian Kelly wrote:


. . . groan! . . . -100ºF is only a small part of it huh?

The atmospheric profile shows some interesting things. In the
Troposphere, the temperature drops pretty steadily until around 10 Km,
then it tends to stay pretty consistent until 20 Km. Above 20 Km, the
temperature actually rises somewhat until around 50 Km, at which point
it drops again until around 85 Km. At this point it becomes the
Thermosphere, in which the temperatures rise dramatically - they can get
from 500 to 1500 degrees C.


Of course, but 85Km out is ~280,000 MSL and the few atmospheric
*particles* and manmade *objects* which exist or pass thru that
altitude can get radiation-heated to pretty high temps. The temps of
the space *between* those particles and objects however is 'way down
the Kelvin scale. Your stated goal is 100,000 MSL which is only 30Km
out where all objects and particles are bloody friggin' cold no matter
what as the density of the atmosphere increases and blocks radiation
heating from the sun and conduction and convective cooling
increasingly prevails vs. radiation heating/cooling. So what's the
point to your geting into what's up at 85Km since a balloon ain't even
gonna come close to bobbing up to 85Km?

If your payload capsule is engineered properly for an ascent to FL 100
and back down Leonard will be OK which is really what matters. Back to
auditing a Heat Transfer 101 class for you Good Buddy.


Yo for chrissake Mike, I just noticed this gem, 1500ºC is 2732ºF, over
a thousand degrees hotter than the melting point of steel!


By the way post facto it finally dawned on me that I screwed that
statement up *big* time. Chase it down, spank me good for the screwup
and get even.

Nahh. People can make mistakes.




. . WTF . . ?!

The atmosphere does indeed heat up in the area known as the Thermosphere


. . . See above . . .


If you don't believe me, here is some info from NASA. They give even
higher values as a maximum.


http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy...tmosphere.html

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosphere

gives a nice explanation of the Thermosphere, and there is a bit of info
there as to why Amateurs should be interested in it.


?? I thought we were deep into ballooning ping-pong ball experiments
for the kids and gloming some brownie points for ham radio in the
process. Is it me again or did something got lost around here when I
wasn't looking?


Oh gawd, yes, Brian! This whole thread got started when I mentioned
that I was putting together this operation in response to Hans' telling
us about how Amateur radio is being marginalized. Then it turned into me
trying to tell the group about what we were trying to do amidst a couple
people that don't believe it can be done.

But since you were talking about the effects of the cold, I thought I
might point out just how weird things are "up there".

And it is hot in the neighborhood of the ionosphere.


A good question is "Why doesn't everything that passes through the
thermosphere burn up?" Because they don't. In fact, despite these high
temps, things passing through this region would "feel" cold.

Why should Hams know about the Thermosphere?


Those of us who are big into bouncing our signals around the planet
have been there since WHEN? Those who don't know about it are not my
problem.



I don't know how to water this down so I'll be blunt about it. You
really do need to consider biting the bullet and delegating the
technical aspects of this project to some technoid(s) and stick to
being the head cheerleader. Preferably before somebody gets hurt .


Thanks for the bluntness Brian. I always appreciate it.

I will be likewise blunt. You are completely wrong about the people
doing (or not doing) this. You *don't* understand some *very* basic
things about the atmosphere, things that you should know as a Ham. Given
those facts, I'll take your judgment of my qualifications to do this
thing under advisement.

Be ****ed or hate me, it's how it is.


Cool off and settle down Mike, I'm completely incapable of getting
****ed off much less hating any USENET poster. Particulary in this
off-the-wall ham radio based collection of particularly Odd Units.
Stick yer head up and sombody is gonna snipe ya for jollies and ya
handle it. So leave yer thin skin home and duck when you post here and
welcome to RRAP where pud-yanking is the name of the game.

That's how it is.


I apologize Brian. Call me incompetent any time you like. It was a
mistake to bring this subject up in here, I'll admit that.

I bring my hockey mentality in here most of the time. This was too much
of a crossover into my professional mentality. And it is apparent that
it won't be differentiated.


So I guess it's back to talking about the Morse code test! 8^)

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes:


Brian Kelly wrote:

Mike Coslo wrote in message

...


1500ºC is 2732ºF, over
a thousand degrees hotter than the melting point of steel!


"That's hot!"


. . WTF . . ?!

The atmosphere does indeed heat up in the area known as the Thermosphere


Does other odd things too. Bouncy, bouncy!

Space, or near space is a very strange place...

If you don't believe me, here is some info from NASA. They give even
higher values as a maximum.


"That's hot!"


http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy...tmosphere.html

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosphere

gives a nice explanation of the Thermosphere, and there is a bit of info
there as to why Amateurs should be interested in it.


A good question is "Why doesn't everything that passes through the
thermosphere burn up?" Because they don't. In fact, despite these high
temps, things passing through this region would "feel" cold.


Would you rather stick your hand into water heated to 200 degrees F or air
heated to 400 degrees?

Why should Hams know about the Thermosphere?


'Cause it's hot? ;-)

If it wasn't hot, we wouldn't have the ionization that allows us to
communicate all over the world on HF.



You *don't* understand some *very* basic
things about the atmosphere, things that you should know as a Ham.


This whole thread got me thinking about how balloons work and how much helium
costs and such. One thing I found out is that 1000 cu ft of helium can be had
for about $200. A bit of $$ for an individual launch but not much if split up
amongst a group.

And of course you don't need that much per typical launch.


Another thing was the lifting power at high altitudes and low pressures, and
the concept and behavior of a balloon open at the bottom that's not filled all
the way with gas. Fascinating.

Those balloons get BIG before bursting. I've seen some video of it. I
haven't seen what happens to the form of the zero-pressure balloons,
though. Certainly the zero-pressure balloons are a fascinating example
of a self regulating system.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:


Does other odd things too. Bouncy, bouncy!

Space, or near space is a very strange place...

'Cause it's hot? ;-)

If it wasn't hot, we wouldn't have the ionization that allows us to
communicate all over the world on HF.

bouncy bouncy

You *don't* understand some *very* basic
things about the atmosphere, things that you should know as a Ham.

This whole thread got me thinking about how balloons work and how much
helium
costs and such. One thing I found out is that 1000 cu ft of helium can be
had
for about $200. A bit of $$ for an individual launch but not much if split
up amongst a group.

And of course you don't need that much per typical launch.

So the cost is even less.

Another thing was the lifting power at high altitudes and low pressures,
and
the concept and behavior of a balloon open at the bottom that's not filled
all the way with gas. Fascinating.

Those balloons get BIG before bursting. I've seen some video of it. I
haven't seen what happens to the form of the zero-pressure balloons,
though. Certainly the zero-pressure balloons are a fascinating example
of a self regulating system.

With a closed rigid balloon (like the Hindenberg), the lift gas is at constant
volume, so the lift decreases with higher altitude and lower barometric
pressure and the maximum altitude is relatively low.

With a closed elastic balloon (like a stretchy latex balloon), the lift gas can
expand to a certain degree at higher altitudes, but must be at somewhat higher
pressure than the gas outside (because the gas inside must exert pressure on
the balloon walls to stretch them). With a very stretchy balloon, the decrease
in lift will obviously be much less than with a rigid balloon.

With an open-at-the-bottom balloon (like a bag from the dry cleaners), the lift
gas need be only at a very slightly higher pressure than the gas outside
(because the gas inside must support the walls of the balloon/bag). With a bag
that is much larger than the volume of gas at launch, the decrease in lift will
obviously be much less than with a rigid balloon or a stretchy balloon.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

I still might.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike, be nice.

I think you have a good project, and cannot understand why all these
"movers and shakers" of RRAP keep poo-pooing the idea. Maybe they are
paper tigers, code-tape Extra's, or just plain old windbags
themselves. Anyway, you have several of them in your backyard and I
haven't seen a single one throw in with you yet (but then I haven't
read all of the blabbering). Speaks volumes.

:((

My best advice is to associate the project with a Scouting
Troop/Venture Crew, or H.S. honors science class, etc, find a handful
of sponsors (easier when you have the scouting affiliation), and find
some motivated no-code Techs who aren't afraid of a challenge, or
maybe don't know enough to get out of the way.

;))

FWIW, the military has standing orders to assist the Scouts wherever
they can. They might be helpful in many ways, from lodging to launch
location to weather support. You could make a request to the Air
Force Weather Agency to have a Support Assistance Request (SAR) in
place to run the trajectory model and predict the final resting place
of your package (you supply launch time and ascent/descent rates),
preposition your recovery team in that vicinity, then adjust as
real-world conditions dictate.

Have Fun and Best of Luck, bb

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:24:23 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Leo wrote:

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:50:46 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Len Over 21 wrote:

a lot of stuff snipped

It's times like this that can bring people together. You and Brian
Kelly have something in common.


Realism?

Perhaps you could tell me, Leo? I've shown that it can and does happen
and that a lot of people are doing exactly what I speak of on a regular
basis. Believe or don't believe. It is your choice.

Mike, my point was that you have two folks with a fair amount of
knowledge and experience taking the time to give you feedback. They
aren't saying that you're nuts to be considering doing what you intend
to do, but they are offering you the benefit of their understanding of
engineering and physics as it pertains to your project.

If they are missing something (and me too, perhaps - this sure ain't
my area of expertise either!), then by all means show them where
they're wrong - but they are both pretty intelligent, educated and
knowledgeable guys, with years of real-world experience in their
fields - maybe worth at least a rational discussion? Or you could
throw a bunch of web references in their faces and get angry....

Your call.


- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:24:23 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Leo wrote:


On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:50:46 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Len Over 21 wrote:

a lot of stuff snipped

It's times like this that can bring people together. You and Brian
Kelly have something in common.


Realism?

Perhaps you could tell me, Leo? I've shown that it can and does happen
and that a lot of people are doing exactly what I speak of on a regular
basis. Believe or don't believe. It is your choice.


Mike, my point was that you have two folks with a fair amount of
knowledge and experience taking the time to give you feedback. They
aren't saying that you're nuts to be considering doing what you intend
to do, but they are offering you the benefit of their understanding of
engineering and physics as it pertains to your project.

If they are missing something (and me too, perhaps - this sure ain't
my area of expertise either!), then by all means show them where
they're wrong - but they are both pretty intelligent, educated and
knowledgeable guys, with years of real-world experience in their
fields - maybe worth at least a rational discussion? Or you could
throw a bunch of web references in their faces and get angry....

Your call.

Leo,

There is a world of difference between someone like Jim, who questions
and looks at my answers, and one member that says what I am considering
is impossible, and yet another that calls me incompetent.

And there is a lot of difference between me illustrating my points wit
web references, and finally getting annoyed after I am called incompetent.

Considering that to Len, this is an impossible task, and that Brian
Kelly has thinks I'm an idiot that is only suited for cheerleading, I
would have to say that they probably don't have anything to offer me in
my doomed project with which I am going to hurt someone.

My call.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

This whole thread got started when I mentioned
that I was putting together this operation in response to Hans' telling
us about how Amateur radio is being marginalized.

And you presented some very good ideas.

Then it turned into me
trying to tell the group about what we were trying to do amidst a couple
people that don't believe it can be done.

Also a bunch of us who know it can be done and is being done, but who didn't
know much about it until you brought up the idea.


I apologize Brian. Call me incompetent any time you like. It was a
mistake to bring this subject up in here, I'll admit that.

I disagree, Mike. Hans brought up a good *policy* subject, and you continued
the discussion.

I bring my hockey mentality in here most of the time. This was too much
of a crossover into my professional mentality. And it is apparent that
it won't be differentiated.

By whom?

At least W3RV was willing to look at the websites you mentioned, and realizes
it has been done. And while there may be some problems doing it in EPA, the
basic concept is workable.

Len apparently has simply *refused* to even look at the information you
presented.

So I guess it's back to talking about the Morse code test! 8^)

Nobody's done that for a while!

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Leo wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:24:23 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Leo wrote:


On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:50:46 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Len Over 21 wrote:



It's times like this that can bring people together. You and Brian
Kelly have something in common.


Realism?

Perhaps you could tell me, Leo? I've shown that it can and does happen
and that a lot of people are doing exactly what I speak of on a regular
basis. Believe or don't believe. It is your choice.


Mike, my point was that you have two folks with a fair amount of
knowledge and experience taking the time to give you feedback. They
aren't saying that you're nuts to be considering doing what you intend
to do, but they are offering you the benefit of their understanding of
engineering and physics as it pertains to your project.

If they are missing something (and me too, perhaps - this sure ain't
my area of expertise either!), then by all means show them where
they're wrong - but they are both pretty intelligent, educated and
knowledgeable guys, with years of real-world experience in their
fields - maybe worth at least a rational discussion? Or you could
throw a bunch of web references in their faces and get angry....

Your call.

Leo,

There is a world of difference between someone like Jim, who questions
and looks at my answers, and one member that says what I am considering
is impossible, and yet another that calls me incompetent.

And there is a lot of difference between me illustrating my points wit
web references, and finally getting annoyed after I am called incompetent.

Considering that to Len, this is an impossible task, and that Brian
Kelly has thinks I'm an idiot that is only suited for cheerleading, I
would have to say that they probably don't have anything to offer me in
my doomed project with which I am going to hurt someone.