Welcome
Username or Email:

Password:


Missing Code




[ ]
[ ]
Online
  • Guests: 80
  • Members: 0
  • Newest Member: omjtest
  • Most ever online: 396
    Guests: 396, Members: 0 on 12 Jan : 12:51
Members Birthdays:
All today's birthdays', congrats!
Download (31)
ScottH (37)


Next birthdays
11/03 Electroguy (94)
11/04 nitromarsjipan (2024)
11/04 mb (31)
Contact
If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.


Special Thanks To:
  • Aaron Holmes
  • Aaron Wheeler
  • Adam Horden
  • Alan Scrimgeour
  • Andre
  • Andrew Haynes
  • Anonymous000
  • asabase
  • Austin Weil
  • barney
  • Barry
  • Bert Hickman
  • Bill Kukowski
  • Blitzorn
  • Brandon Paradelas
  • Bruce Bowling
  • BubeeMike
  • Byong Park
  • Cesiumsponge
  • Chris F.
  • Chris Hooper
  • Corey Worthington
  • Derek Woodroffe
  • Dalus
  • Dan Strother
  • Daniel Davis
  • Daniel Uhrenholt
  • datasheetarchive
  • Dave Billington
  • Dave Marshall
  • David F.
  • Dennis Rogers
  • drelectrix
  • Dr. John Gudenas
  • Dr. Spark
  • E.TexasTesla
  • eastvoltresearch
  • Eirik Taylor
  • Erik Dyakov
  • Erlend^SE
  • Finn Hammer
  • Firebug24k
  • GalliumMan
  • Gary Peterson
  • George Slade
  • GhostNull
  • Gordon Mcknight
  • Graham Armitage
  • Grant
  • GreySoul
  • Henry H
  • IamSmooth
  • In memory of Leo Powning
  • Jacob Cash
  • James Howells
  • James Pawson
  • Jeff Greenfield
  • Jeff Thomas
  • Jesse Frost
  • Jim Mitchell
  • jlr134
  • Joe Mastroianni
  • John Forcina
  • John Oberg
  • John Willcutt
  • Jon Newcomb
  • klugesmith
  • Leslie Wright
  • Lutz Hoffman
  • Mads Barnkob
  • Martin King
  • Mats Karlsson
  • Matt Gibson
  • Matthew Guidry
  • mbd
  • Michael D'Angelo
  • Mikkel
  • mileswaldron
  • mister_rf
  • Neil Foster
  • Nick de Smith
  • Nick Soroka
  • nicklenorp
  • Nik
  • Norman Stanley
  • Patrick Coleman
  • Paul Brodie
  • Paul Jordan
  • Paul Montgomery
  • Ped
  • Peter Krogen
  • Peter Terren
  • PhilGood
  • Richard Feldman
  • Robert Bush
  • Royce Bailey
  • Scott Fusare
  • Scott Newman
  • smiffy
  • Stella
  • Steven Busic
  • Steve Conner
  • Steve Jones
  • Steve Ward
  • Sulaiman
  • Thomas Coyle
  • Thomas A. Wallace
  • Thomas W
  • Timo
  • Torch
  • Ulf Jonsson
  • vasil
  • Vaxian
  • vladi mazzilli
  • wastehl
  • Weston
  • William Kim
  • William N.
  • William Stehl
  • Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Forums
4hv.org :: Forums :: General Science and Electronics
« Previous topic | Next topic »   

Cheap high altitude photography.

Move Thread LAN_403
Coronafix
Sun Mar 28 2010, 05:19AM Print
Coronafix Registered Member #160 Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 02:07AM
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 938
How easy is this!!
Link2
Back to top
klugesmith
Sun Mar 28 2010, 06:01AM
klugesmith Registered Member #2099 Joined: Wed Apr 29 2009, 12:22AM
Location: Los Altos, California
Posts: 1716
Cool! The same story was reported in the local paper here in California.
Here is a similar project with similar technology:
Link2
Link2

But let's put this in perspective, when casually using the word Space, and comparing the cost of weather balloons with satellite technology.

These amateur balloon-cam pictures show a relatively dark sky and curved horizon (using wide-angle lens) from 20 or 30 km up. Reconnaissance airplanes have cruised that high. Re-entering satellites burn up at air densities 100x or 1000x lower.

To win the $10M Ansari X Prize, a one-man rocket twice coasted up to an altitude above 100 km. THAT could fairly be called "space" -- [edit] but the air is still too thick for a satellite to orbit the earth.

But reaching low-Earth orbital velocity requires 25 times as much energy per kg
as merely climbing to 100 km altitude.
Back to top
Patrick
Sun Mar 28 2010, 06:30AM
Patrick Registered Member #2431 Joined: Tue Oct 13 2009, 09:47PM
Location: Chico, CA. USA
Posts: 5639
klugesmith i am intrigued by your math can you explain briefly or include links to the math that descibes the kinetic energy reqiured at different alts like what Rutan achieved versus a satilite? plz ty,.

-Patrick
Back to top
klugesmith
Sun Mar 28 2010, 06:46AM
klugesmith Registered Member #2099 Joined: Wed Apr 29 2009, 12:22AM
Location: Los Altos, California
Posts: 1716
Patrick wrote ...

klugesmith i am intrigued by your math can you explain briefly or include links to the math that descibes the kinetic energy reqiured at different alts like what Rutan achieved versus a satilite? plz ty,.
-Patrick

simple.
Sitting still at 100 km, about to fall back into the atmosphere, your potential energy is m * g * h -- about 1 megajoule per kilogram.
The record altitude for a shell fired from a gun on the ground is 180 km (HARP / Gerry Bull).

Flying at 7800 meters per second, your kinetic energy is m * v^2 / 2 -- about 30 megajoules per kg. And you really should be at least 200 km above the ground, so there's another 2 MJ/kg.

[edit] I just figured the orbital energy of International Space Station to be about 1.14e13 joules (2.7 "kilotons"). Given the inefficiency of multi-stage rockets, the energy of rocket fuel burned to put it there must have been triple-digit kilotons.
Back to top
Coronafix
Sun Mar 28 2010, 07:02AM
Coronafix Registered Member #160 Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 02:07AM
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 938
By no means is it "space" photography, but it does get it high enough to get the same feel from the photos.
Tracking it would be a lot harder if you could get it up into low earth orbit, not to mention the fact that it would need heat shielding to come back down.
This technology alone would need a specific weather to launch it so that you don't have to drive a thousand kms to retrieve it.
Back to top
Patrick
Sun Mar 28 2010, 07:04AM
Patrick Registered Member #2431 Joined: Tue Oct 13 2009, 09:47PM
Location: Chico, CA. USA
Posts: 5639
whoa! crap ur right i need to look at my physics text book again, energy is relative to your position in a gravity field is what you describe.
Back to top
wylie
Mon Mar 29 2010, 02:18AM
wylie Registered Member #882 Joined: Sat Jul 07 2007, 04:32AM
Location:
Posts: 103
All i know is, thanks to that link we have probably less than a year until someone on this board uses a disc launcher to send up a camera.

I can't wait smile

EDIT: or a rail/gauss gun maybe.

RE-EDIT: just splitting hairs i guess. a linear accelerator by any other name would smell as sweet, and all that jazz.
Back to top

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob

Go to:

Powered by e107 Forum System
 
Legal Information
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.