<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
Wow. Pretty amazing. Too bad the video cut off -- it would have also been cool to see it descend. :) But this was quite cool!<BR>
<BR>
Mitch.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
--------------------<BR>
> From: dichro@rcpt.to<BR>> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:24:25 -0800<BR>> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] spacebridge balloon launch appears to have succeeded<BR>> To: maltman23@hotmail.com<BR>> CC: rachel@xtreme.com; noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net<BR>> <BR>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Mitch Altman <maltman23@hotmail.com> wrote:<BR>> > Great photos! And way interesting to watch the video pop out through the<BR>> > clouds. :) Is there a way to know how high up it went? How did you get<BR>> > the cameras back?<BR>> <BR>> We had two GPSes onboard. The one that was known to work above 60k<BR>> feet was connected to the APRS tracker and radio, but didn't log any<BR>> data locally. That was the single position report that we got at<BR>> around 61k feet.<BR>> <BR>> The other GPS was internal to the Android phone, and, as we suspected,<BR>> it cut out at around 60k feet due to the common anti-cruise-missile<BR>> provisions. However, our Android code was also furiously logging all<BR>> the other sensors on the phone, including the accelerometer.<BR>> Processing this turns out to be a bear - it appears that either the<BR>> hardware or the interface software runs a smoothing filter over the<BR>> data before it's presented to the application, and we were running way<BR>> outside the envelope that it was expecting, so the data shows huge<BR>> discontinuities (eg, 1500 feet of vertical ascent in a second) between<BR>> smooth gradients which are probably largely fictional.<BR>> <BR>> When the GPS cut out we were rising at at least 1200 feet per minute<BR>> (which is a good match for anecdotally reported terminal ascent<BR>> velocity for other people's launches), and the accelerometer data<BR>> (although also rubbish due to unknown noise sources) shows a definite<BR>> dip about 311 seconds later, so we're calling that the burst point.<BR>> a+b*c gives us about 67k feet with confidence, possibly above 70k<BR>> depending on how you process the noisy source data.<BR>> <BR>> Next time I'll give you a more confident answer :)<BR>> <BR>> m.<BR>> <BR>> ><BR>> > Mitch.<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > --------------------<BR>> >> From: dichro@rcpt.to<BR>> >> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:00:34 -0800<BR>> >> To: rachel@xtreme.com<BR>> >> CC: noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net<BR>> >> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] spacebridge balloon launch appears to<BR>> >> have succeeded<BR>> >><BR>> >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Rachel McConnell <rachel@xtreme.com><BR>> >> wrote:<BR>> >> > I see where you got this camera thing sorted out:<BR>> >> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/<BR>> >><BR>> >> Those are from the camera that our new best friends from<BR>> >> http://spaceballoonproject.blogspot.com/ provided, actually. The<BR>> >> camera I was asking about we just pointed down and started recording<BR>> >> video at launch - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go56JzqoFK0 - which<BR>> >> turned out so well (until it ran into a max filesize problem, grumble)<BR>> >> that I think we're just going to glue flip video cameras all over the<BR>> >> outside of the next one.<BR>> >><BR>> >> (there's a longer version out there somewhere with a few minutes of<BR>> >> black screen with puzzled and slightly comic debate about how to<BR>> >> attach payload to a giant balloon - we weren't quite perfectly<BR>> >> prepared ;)<BR>> >><BR>> >> > AWESOME PICS. Anything up somewhere to read about this yet?<BR>> >><BR>> >> http://dichro.blogspot.com/2010/02/declaring-weeks-advance-notice-of.html<BR>> >> is the first, I think. More will surely come.<BR>> >><BR>> >> m.<BR>> >><BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > Rachel<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > Mikolaj Habryn wrote:<BR>> >> >> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Martin Bogomolni<BR>> >> >> <martinbogo@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>> >> >>> Can't you roll back the firmware of the SD400 using the links provided<BR>> >> >>> on chdk.wikia.com?<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> Not entirely sure - but will look into it tomorrow. Although the<BR>> >> >> firmware images are there, I didn't see a way of getting them onto the<BR>> >> >> camera.<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> m.<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Mikolaj Habryn <dichro@rcpt.to><BR>> >> >>> wrote:<BR>> >> >>>> I bought a Canon camera off ebay to use on the spacebridge balloon<BR>> >> >>>> launch this Sunday, but it turns out to have a firmware version on it<BR>> >> >>>> that's too recent to work with CHDK (and therefore support time lapse<BR>> >> >>>> shooting). Does anyone have a superfluous Canon (compatible with CHDK<BR>> >> >>>> - list on the right-hand side of http://chdk.wikia.com/) that they'd<BR>> >> >>>> be willing to swap for this SD400?<BR>> >> >>>><BR>> >> >>>> (I'd ask for a loan, but there's a reasonable chance of never getting<BR>> >> >>>> it back :)<BR>> >> >>>><BR>> >> >>>> m.<BR>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<BR>> >> >>>> Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net<BR>> >> >>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<BR>> >> >>>><BR>> >> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<BR>> >> >> Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net<BR>> >> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<BR>> >> Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net<BR>> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss<BR>> ><BR><BR> </body>
</html>