(Steve Robeson K4YZ) wrote in message ...
Subject: Near Space Science - was They just don't get it!
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 11/18/2004 7:42 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

William wrote:
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.

What speaks volumes is that you, Brain, in one breath make an accusatory
statement, then immediately excuse yourself with ..."(but then I haven't read
all of the blabbering)".

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.

A good idea, Brian. I've made a few presentations on other subjects
with the scouts, and it has been a lot of fun.

Started off strong, reasonable suggestions, followed up with sleights and
insults.

FWIW, the military has standing orders to assist the Scouts wherever
they can.

That I did not know.

As they do for Civil Air Patrol, JROTC, ROTC, and a handful of other civic
minded programs.

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.

This is a gold mine of a post, Brian. Thanks much!

It would have been had he been able to start it off without being
insulting and demonstrating his arrogance. He cudda been a contender. He had
to be condescending, instead.

73

Steve, K4YZ


Didn't this guy promise not to address me until Dayton?

I sure wish he could keep his word just once.

bb

Leo wrote in message . ..
On 18 Nov 2004 15:04:20 -0800, (William) wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Dave Heil
writes:

If you break 100,000 MSL we'll ship Leonard off to Sean O'Keefe at
NASA so that O'Keefe can pin astronaut wings on Leonard.

HOWL! Now that's funny!

Yes, it was incredibly funny, yet there are those who think that there
is a lack of humor in r.r.a.p.

I like W3RV's idea. I thought it might be more appropriate to consider
naming the vehicle itself "Leonard" but I was advised that there is
already a gas bag with that name.

Remember, too, that the balloons Mike is considering obtain their lift from
helium (a noble gas) rather than hot air.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What an ignoble thing to say, James.

You didn't expect something different, did you?

73, Leo

I used to, but James has changed. He's become bitter since the restructuring.

"William" wrote

He's become bitter since the restructuring

Restructuring? What restructuring?

..73, de Hans, K0HB

"Mike Coslo" wrote


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.


"Many difficult endeavors are belittled because if they are not
belittled, the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not
taking part in them?'"
--H. G. Wells

73, de Hans, K0HB

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote:


You mean the way Len says something rather than what he says?

Because we can have a civil discussion?

I think some people assume that the newsgroup is only for arguments and
antagonistic behavior.

There are a number of dot policy groups in USENET and arguing, venting
spleens, running brag tapes and antaganism is what all of 'em are
about. Check out sci dot space dot policy or whatever it is for
another example. This NG was founded to get arguing over the code
tests out of whatever ham NG is was tearing up back then. RRAP is
still true to it's founding principles and it ain't about to morph
into a place where you'll find much in the way of ongoing civil
discussions for anybody.

Somewhere in this thread you indicated that posting your balloon
project in the NG was probably not a good idea. It wasn't.

- Mike KB3EIA -

w3rv

Leo wrote in message . ..
On 18 Nov 2004 15:04:20 -0800, (William) wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Dave Heil
writes:

If you break 100,000 MSL we'll ship Leonard off to Sean O'Keefe at
NASA so that O'Keefe can pin astronaut wings on Leonard.

HOWL! Now that's funny!

Yes, it was incredibly funny, yet there are those who think that there
is a lack of humor in r.r.a.p.

I like W3RV's idea. I thought it might be more appropriate to consider
naming the vehicle itself "Leonard" but I was advised that there is
already a gas bag with that name.

Remember, too, that the balloons Mike is considering obtain their lift from
helium (a noble gas) rather than hot air.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What an ignoble thing to say, James.

You didn't expect something different, did you?

73, Leo

Jim has gone over to the QuiteDarkSide.

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
...

Mike, my point was that you have two folks with a fair amount of
knowledge and experience taking the time to give you feedback.

Who are they, Leo?

Who on this newsgroup has even attempted to launch a radio-carrying ballon
to 100,000 feet? Or even to half that?

Me.

bwaahaahaa

Not to FL 100 but close enough RRAP purposes.

How close, just for grins?

The Maryland state
enviornmental agency and NOAA operate remote contolled air sampling
and WX monitoring stations at the air field where I based my
ultralight in Harford County. The state recruited volunteers who were
regulars at the field to fill and launch balloons they supplied as
kits for assembly and launching on specific dates at specific times
over a period of a about a month.

1990 or so. I volunteered and was involved in three launches. A state
guy conducted a two-hour meeting at the field during which us
volunteers were taught hands-on how to do the assemble, test and
launch work.

The drill was to unpack the kit, lay everything out on the overrun
grass off the south end of the turf runway, hook it all together,
inflate the balloon and tie it down. At this point the electronics and
batteries were checked out by sending a system test routine to the
ground station rcvr. There were zero failures at ground level on 20 or
so missions from that airport. There was one inflight failure at some
very high altitude according to feedback from the state.

Usually a 2 or 3 man crew per launch was involved, two out on the
grass and one in the FBO office who dialed FAA Leesburg, announced the
launch then got on the local UNICOM freq and broadcast a "balloon in
the air" alert and our job was over that day.

The payload instruments inhaled and analyzed air samples at various
pre-programmed altitudes. The payload radio shipped the analyzer
output data back to the ground station which was networked back to the
agency group doing the studies via a dedicated phone line. They also
had other networked rcvrs scattered around the state listening to the
payload radio for backup purposes.

Good show!


73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
(La Cucaracha) writes:

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

No way, he surfed 'em and you can bank it but he doesn't have the
gonads to 'fess up and admit he was wrong. As usual.

Nope. WRONG. ERROR.

Didn't need to surf some selected websites NOW.

Tsk. I'd already known of amateur BALLOONISTS who went
unmanned high-ballooning a decade ago.

So...where was I "wrong?"

La Cucaracha, you are way over your head on this...but then
that happens with regularity.

Mike Coslo claimed he could go to "100,000 feet altitude" or
near space" (as he states it) with "latex weather balloons."
I claim he can't do that...with those same "latex weather
balloons." Atmospheric density and pressure won't allow it and
those "latex weather balloons will burst below 50,000 feet.

Does La cucaracha know of Standard Atmosphere? It's in all
the fancy flying texts, been there for decades. Pressure,
density, temperature all there, all quite good enough for estimating
some balloon experiments with their ultimate altitudes versus
total balloon plus payload weights. Doesn't have to be exquisitely
textbook accurate to begin with, just some estimates, what is
colloquially called "ball park figures."

Did you see any estimates of weight, altitude, or ANY cost figures
presented in here? I didn't. I doubt anyone else saw them.

Apparently the "dreamers" (or, as they self-ephemistically call
themselves, "concept managers") don't consider some estimates
as necessary. Nope, they have a CONCEPT but that is way way
short of ANY sort of estimated numbers of anything.

"Concept" is just a hunch, a sort of emotional daydream of an idea,
ephemeral like a gas without those estimates.

Apparently these expert-knowledge balloonists can float on Will
and Idea, because others have done so before? Tsk.

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

YES! QRX while I dial up Carl Stevenson on the other line . .

Why? Does your whip need fresh blood?

Nobody's done that for a while!

Must be. Cucaracha Kelly's whip hasn't drawn blood in a long
time.

In article , Leo
writes:

Sad indeed, but true! Of course, it's far more important to make a
concerted effort to bash the messenger rather than analyse the essence
of the data presented in the message - that's how this thing seems to
work......!

In article ,
(William) writes:

Len, so one part of the project, the corner cube reflector, is easily
fabricated using inexpensive materials. Excellent. No need to bother
Kelly. I'm sure he's much too busy gearing up for field day or the
sweeps.

That "corner-cube" type of retroflector was once part of survival
rafts on USAF aircraft. Light enough to be lifted by kite (also part
of the raft).

Corner cubes can be highly irritating. At Rockwell, the optics
designer's mini-bull-pen had one made by one of the drafts people
from three flat mirrors. Whenever you were there and looked at
that one wall, regardless of position or at which table, you found
yourself looking back at you. :-)

Regarding the latex balloons, the little PIBAL balloons are not going
to get there, if those are the balloons that Mike is referring to.

Tsk. The ROI (Rules Of Engagement) in this newsgrope is that
everyone MUST do something they say. :-)

Well, I've told Mike that them surplus-store "latex weather
balloons" ain't going to do it, Kelly implied as much. But, if he
gets negative comments he goes all pouty and sniffly and
condemns the dastardly (if an NCTA) negative commenters as
trying to discourage him or that "it is impossible."

I
don't know what kind of fabric the rawinsonde balloons are made from,
but they routinely get to 100mb, and often get to 10mb (~30km). Mike
just needs to get whatever is currently available and go with it. It
will work.

Of course they will work. But, Mike (if he wants to be grande
"concept manager") should memorize the public info on Standard
Atmosphere tables before stepping into the self-declared CEO
(Creative Efficiency Officer) spot. CO$T is involved with this whole
thing...it ain't just filling cute party balloons at some state fair.
Just considering the Standard Atmosphere -

1. Atmosphere density decreases remarkably at altitudes above
around 10 kilofeet. A closed balloon envelope displaces only
so much atmosphere despite its size and the density (or
"weight") remains essentially the same. That provides one of
the upper-altitude maxima for the project...when related to the
payload weight.

2. Atmospheric pressure also decreases with increasing altitude.
A closed balloon envelope has to take that into account, either
by being only partly filled at launch altitude (envelope weight is
dependent on expansion capability, the unfilled part being just
dead weight at launch). Balloon envelope maximum size will
establish the maximum payload lift, having to correspond with
item (1.) and the lower of either altitude will be the limit.

3. Atmospheric temperature gets remarkably cold at altitude and
there's a roughly 70 C drop between altitudes of 10K feet and
100K feet. As temperature goes down, gas pressure will go
down and that impacts on both envelope structure strength
and displacement, thus a fine point on lifting capability.

4. There's been inadequate mention of the "lifting gas" availability
handling, and cost. Only one mention was made of a "typical
cost" at one locality...but not by the "concept manager."
Helium gas in heavy cannisters/tanks (high cost if not returned
to vendor) is readily avilable for welders' use (Heliarc welding).
That stuff is "safe" except that, as is, it is under a lot of
pressure which must be reduced somehow for filling relatively
delicate balloon envelopes. Hydrogen gas is available in the
same cannister/tanks but is highly flammable and may be
subject to some local rules on hazard materials' handling.
Low-pressure hydrogen can be produced easily by high school
science electrolysis very cheaply but large balloon envelope
sizes need a lot more of it than is done in classroom
experiments..

5. The slightest mention of BASICS involved in getting the balloon
and payload up at all is "discouraging the concept."

I think planning several launches, each with increasing difficulty, is
a way to tackle the problems and see what works and ~who~ works.

Concept managers don't have to concern themselves with
details. That's up to the serfs who do all the work, foot their
own bills, and have some idea of Standard Atmosphere data.
Concept managers have their CONCEPTS and that is the end
in itself. snort

Nothing sent aloft should be so valuable that it cannot be lost, and
expect losses. A receiver for the command burst, a beacon transmitter
for tracking and recovery, and a telemetry recorder (internal temp,
external temp, and pressure) will verify the attained altitude. He
can play with the cross-band repeaters, atv cameras, and hyperspectral
imaging during a later launch.

Absolutely so. Just the same, an off-the-cuff estimate of costs
per launch could go from $200 to even $500. depending on the
payload "science." As I said, this isn't inflating some party
balloons at a fair. Three words: Sponsors, sponsors, sponsors.

The problem of congested airways is still there. He might consider
having a trained group of DFers locally/College Station to recover the
package, and move his launch site and crew to Indiana to tame that
problem. If he does it with the Scouts, they are always mobile, and
actually like going places for a purpose. And Scouting opens doors
that might otherwise be closed.

All highly do-able if he gets the right volunteers and sponsorship.

Sponsors aren't going to buy into the "concept manager" stuff
unless there's something in it for the sponsor.

Now watch all the "noble" PCTAs chime in with "cockroach" humor
and the resident Gas Bag try to call others for one. Way to much
DREAMING of glories in here and not enough practicality.