[Noisebridge-discuss] [Space] a riddle for you all

[Ozzy Satori]

Yeah, and up in such thin atmosphere, it makes sense that the two falling
components stayed relatively close to one another until atmospheric drag
provided a force to separate them based on drag.

I'm _really_ interested by this tendency to stabilize during descent.
 Perhaps my mucking around with exotic statically stable supersonic
aerodynamics is a bit excessive- but even a basic finned teardrop shape
could provide a nice stable camera platform for a hella cool return video,
(Say, Flip HD video of the stabilized dive-bomb from burst altitude to 10k,
followed by an arduino-based parachute release?)

Just thinking out loud.
-Ozzy


On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com>wrote:

> That next frame also raises an interesting question.  Did we stop spinning
> and oscillating wildly on the descent?  It seems likely, considering the
> images.  This suggests we omit all theories for the destabilization that
> don't explicitly include the balloon.
>
> Sounds like descent pics are likely to be, on the whole, better than ascent
> pics.
>
> Also, thinking on it, it might not be as lucky as you'd think.  Correct me
> if I'm wrong but if the box stabilized out, it would likely do so with the
> greatest weight towards the back, which would mean the camera, since not
> much else was nailed down.  Since we're shooting with a wide angle, we'll
> get quite a lot of area in the shot.  It would seem to me rather probable
> that we'd manage to get a shot with our detritus in it.
>
> Christie
> _______
> "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." -- W. Blake.
>
> The outer bounds is only the beginning.
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Ozzy Satori <ozzymandi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It does appear as though there is some line or rope attached to the
>> balloon fragment, trailing behind it, that line or rope bridges the fragment
>> to the cloud layer below visually, to make it appear as though they're
>> connected.   If you look at the next frame, however, you can see the 'vapor
>> trail' is still there (this time clearly attached the the marine layer
>> below), even after the balloon fragement has fallen well out of frame.
>>
>> One hell of a lucky capture though, in any case.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> That would be... odd.  I imagine correction for the fisheye is in order
>>> to get a better understanding of the geometry.
>>>
>>> The reason I concluded it was an aircraft is it has a rather visible
>>> vapor trail.  I imagine the balloon very well could leave a trail, but not
>>> the shard of the balloon.  The trail seems to be completely aligned with the
>>> object, not above as you'd expect for something that is in free fall.
>>>
>>> Do you think the trail could be powder from the interior of the balloon
>>> or condensation on the rapidly expanded helium?  It would have to be
>>> something generated or released rather slowly after the burst, due to the
>>> alignment and trail that appears to be just over the clouds.
>>>
>>> But you're right, it does kind of neatly follow the line that our balloon
>>> took.  Curious.
>>>
>>> Did anyone happen to take any calibration images so the fisheye could be
>>> corrected?  I'd really love to see that image cleaned up and enhanced.
>>>
>>> Christie
>>> _______
>>> "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." -- W. Blake.
>>>
>>> The outer bounds is only the beginning.
>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Mikolaj Habryn <dichro at rcpt.to> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think we just got even more remarkably lucky.
>>>>
>>>> Our best guess for the burst time of the balloon, based on
>>>> accelerometer data, is 17:02:05. This picture is time-stamped
>>>> 17:02:54, however I set the clock on the camera by hand the day
>>>> before, and only to the nearest minute. I think we managed to capture
>>>> a shard of the balloon flying off into the distance seconds after the
>>>> burst.
>>>>
>>>> m.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Christie Dudley <longobord at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > What kind of aircraft do you think that is?  It's so small to make
>>>> out.
>>>> > Christie
>>>> > _______
>>>> > "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom." -- W. Blake.
>>>> >
>>>> > The outer bounds is only the beginning.
>>>> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/genriel/sets/72157623376093724/
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Mikolaj Habryn <dichro at rcpt.to>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I just uploaded the complete photoset to
>>>> >> http://picasaweb.google.com/syncretin/SpacebridgeAlpha02#
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Have a look at picture 131:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> http://picasaweb.google.com/syncretin/SpacebridgeAlpha02#5436722689403374338
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What do you see?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> m.
>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> Space mailing list
>>>> >> Space at lists.noisebridge.net
>>>> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/space
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20100210/1125dab8/attachment-0003.html>