Slashdot Mirror
Weather Balloons as Wireless Telephone Technology
Under the plan described in this article submitted by reader RoscoHead, "Space Data would use un-tethered weather balloons launched daily by the National Weather Service to carry lightweight wireless communications equipment to an altitude of 100,000 feet. There, at the 'SkySite,' they would relay voice and data signals to remote areas at a fraction of the cost of installing cell towers or launching satellites, company officials say."
Sending up weather balloons to cover large rural areas rather than putting up towers?
To answer this question, we have to look deeply into the psychie of the average rural-area yokel. Does he prefer shooting up towers with buckshot or shooting down balloons with a high-caliber rifle. Which is more economic for the redneck? Will ammunition sales at WalMart effect this decision.
Is it cheaper for the phone companies to patch holes in balloons or replate a tower.
I didn't see any mention of this in their story. One can only hope that they took this into account.
Keeping
They float around, usually about rural areas. They usually dont draw much attention, and would be perfect for something like this. Besides unlike ballons they wont explode, burn up, or any other unpredictable situation which can happen with a balloon.
Saucers could work
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
I realize both the weather balloons and Helios are just means to an end, but using these things for broadband internet would be way cooler than the US's second-rate cell technology, which is what they want to use the weather balloons for.
Clearly using free-floating weather balloons has a number of limitations and disadvantages.
Now we know that NASA has great plans for its solar-powered airplane -- including acting as a semi-permanent flying repeater-station, but I wonder if smaller, cheaper options might not be available.
For example... what about a much smaller (say 20-30 foot span) autonomous craft designed to soar thermals during the day (while charging its batteries and gaining as much altitude as it can) -- then revert to battery power and/or gradually descend during the hours of darkness.
If the energy required to keep these craft airborn in the longer nights of winter was greater than that availble to be stored during the day then they could carry a fuel-load to power a high-efficiency internal combustion engine (probably a very small diesel engine). Every week or so the craft would have to land for refueling and maintenance -- but that's not a big deal.
Just like the US military's Predator RPV, they could be programmed to land on a runway set aside specially for the purpose.
The cost of a smaller craft, particularly one that wasn't totally reliant on solar-cells, would likely be much less than NASA's efforts -- thus allowing more of them to be built for a given budget.
By using more craft, they could cruise at a much lower altititude than either the weather balloon or the NASA craft.
Using modern composites, low cost GPS, and other "affordable" technologies, such a craft could likely be built for less than US$10K.
Assuming a 50% duty cycle, a fleet of 10 craft could cover a huge area at a much lower cost than towers, and with the ability to dynamically vary the coverage area if required -- simply by repositioning the craft.
Over the summer (in the southern hemisphere), I worked to help launch ozone measuring balloons, (same idea, more equipment), and we launched them only in fairly calm conditions. A balloon full of hydrogen is a fairly scary prospect when it's getting blown around. Does this also mean a commercial company will be putting extra pressure on the NWS to launch in potentially unsafe conditions? Scary thought!
I have worked as balloon operator at the Danish Meteorological Institute, so I can tell you how this works: The winds at higher altitudes (10km+) is rather violent, often forcing the balloon to travel 100-200 kilometers eastwards (west is the prevailing direction of the wind in Denmark) during its ascent to an altitude of 30-35km. Then, at the top, the balloon tears (at that time it has expanded to a volume of 100 cubic metres from a starting volume of 1½ cubic meter) and drops gently to the ground, the torn balloon acting as a parachute. The kit is use-and-throw-away, so there is no need to chase the descending balloons (a good thing, because 90% of the balloons I launched landed somewhere in the Baltic Sea).
78% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
I was wondering that, so I looked it up. It turns out that after reaching a certain height, the weather balloon explodes from (internal pressure) and drops its payload. Usually this is a "radiosonde", a device which radios the weather conditions back to the weather station. The radiosonde weights about .3kg and is usually packaged in styrofoam to cushion the landing. Sometimes it has a parachute too.
Inside the radiosonde package there is also a self-addressed prepaid envelope so anyone who finds it can mail it back to the weather service. No kidding!
of our "disposable" society.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
What about a kite? I remember getting my nice Into The Wind kite up to the clouds (or what seemed like it) when I was younger, and leaving it there all afternoon, or overnight to find it still there in the morning. Storms often brought it down, most likely breaking the string and not the kite itself.
However, that is really interesting. I assume a very high strength kite coupled with high strength string and a coax up the side with VERY good lightning and surge protection, and you would have a very good line of sight to 10's of miles away (limited by the curvature of the earth and your altitude?). All I would be concerned about would be lightning protection, kite stability, and signal loss from long length cable.
Other than that, it's an interesting idea. Anyone else care to comment?
"I'll just chip in a bit for RedHat: I actually have that installed on my university machine." - Linus, '95
Tethered Aerostat Radar System does this with teathered balloons at 15,00 ft or so.
They have 12 and tend to operate about 50% of the time. They can carry up to 3400 pounds and are costing about 2.8 million per site per year.
One of these is sending signals TV to Cuba.
I have launched numerous weather balloons, and I don't believe they stay aloft for 24 hours. They only take ~2-3 hours to ascend to 30-35 Km. I doubt they take 21 hours to descend...even when slowed by a parachute, which they all carry. Also, in response to the numerous posts about aircraft safety, pilots all over the world know that weather balloons are launched by weather agencies in most countries at 1100 and 2300 GMT. It's a big sky up there. The odds of an airplane hitting one of these relatively tiny objects are extremely small.
I'm angry, and I Meta Moderate!
It's amazing how little press these systems have received so far, since it would take hundreds of well-placed terrestrial towers or thousands of miles of buried fiber to provide similar coverage and capacity.
Blue skies, Barthy Burgers, girls...