Slashdot Mirror


Brooklyn Father And Son Launch Homemade Spacecraft

Adair writes "A father and son team from Brooklyn successfully launched a homemade spacecraft nearly 19 miles (around 100,000 feet) above the Earth's surface. The craft was a 19-inch helium-filled weather balloon attached to a Styrofoam capsule that housed an HD video camera and an iPhone. The camera recorded video of its ascent into the stratosphere, its apogee where the balloon reached its breaking point, and its descent back to earth. They rigged a parachute to the capsule to aid in its return to Earth, and the iPhone broadcast its GPS coordinates so they could track it down. The craft landed a mere 30 miles from its launch point in Newburgh, NY, due to a quick ascent and two differing wind patterns. The pair spent eight months researching and test-flying the craft before launching it in August. Columbia University Professor of Astronomy Marcel Aguera said, 'They were very good but also very lucky.'"

48 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Cool! by raddan · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is a very clever use of an iPhone. I would love to see this one used as a yearlong high school science project. The ROI on materials is incredible here.

    1. Re:Cool! by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even better is you can use a $30 Boost phone to do the same thing.

      Way better than risking a $1000+ iPhone that may not be recovered.

      This is cool, but not original, The Register has something a little cooler in the works.

      Still, major kudos to this Father/Son team.

      _

  2. 19 miles isn't "space" by stjobe · · Score: 5, Informative

    19 miles is still in the stratosphere.

    --
    "Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
    1. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not even a matter of trying to draw a fuzzy boundary. This was a balloon, with no propulsion. By its very nature there's no way it can go above the atmosphere regardless of how you define the boundary of space.

    2. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by mcornelius · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, there is. It's called the Kármán line, and it's 62 miles or 100 kilometers.

    3. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by mapkinase · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, my childhood definition of "reaching space" was reaching escape velocity.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    4. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by arth1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      19 miles (30 km, 100000 ft) is not in the upper atmosphere. It's in the stratosphere, which is considered part of the lower atmosphere along with the troposphere.
      For comparison, the SR-71 cruised at 85000 ft, and the International Space Station is at ~350 km, and that's still considered well inside the atmosphere.

      While it's impossible to say where space begins, I think a minimum criterion is to reach low earth orbit, or at least 160 km. This wasn't even a fifth of the way.

      Yes, it's impressive to get a home made balloon up to more than three times the height of Chomolungma, but you do these guys a disservice by comparing it to space.

    5. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by Auto_Lykos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To be fair, atmospheric pressure at 19 miles is just a little under 1% of what is at sea level and about equivalent to the atmosphere of Mars.

      But we've seen these kinds of cheap high altitude balloons cover by Slashdot for about a year now and every time it happens, it seems to be picked up as a "new" event.

      The thing that is really annoying though is that they all are doing the same thing without any improvement. Next time I have to read this story, please say someone floated a model rocket with an M engine up to 20 miles and got it the golden suborbital height.

    6. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by u17 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's entirely possible to go to space without reaching escape velocity. You will get there as long as you're moving up and your thrust is greater or equal to the force of gravity. Escape velocity only concerns something moving up without any thrust at all. Of course, we can't build anything that will maintain thrust equal to the force of gravity for long enough, but if we could, we could go to space... at a snail's pace!

    7. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is essentially a bureaurcratic definition. 100 km serves as a convenient line for dividing air travelers from astronauts, but there is no physical change in the atmosphere at that point. It is just an arbitrary line in the sky.

      It's not arbitrary, it's a practical definition. At 100km in an aircraft, you need to fly at orbital velocities just to stay aloft, so effectively you need a spacecraft instead.

    8. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by mcornelius · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's not the bureaucratic definition. That's a practical definition. (The bureaucratic definition is either 50 miles or 76 miles , depending on whether you're coming or going. (No, I'm not kidding; NASA calls it spaceflight once you get above 50 miles, but reëntry (end of spaceflight) occurs when descending to 76 miles.) You seriously misunderestimate the stupidity and omnipresence of the bureaucratic mentality if you think they could adopt anything so practical a definition as the approximate boundary where ends most atmospheric drag.)

    9. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But its 19 mile ascent showed the plucky determination of the American family unit, and as such it may as well have reached the moon! That's what really counts here, and it's important that people are told about this feat so they feel better about things.

      Meanwhile, the Chinese are sending an actual spacecraft to the moon. But, whatever... .

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    10. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by Lobachevsky · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Karman line is the defined boundary for space. Your claim that "there is no clear 'line' ..." can applied to most anything, including boundaries between land and sea.

      There is no clear line, or particular grain of sand, that divides land from sea. There is a wetness gradient, where you go from completely dry, to moist sand, to ever more moist sand, to fairly wet sand, to very wet sand, to sand with frothy puddles, to turbid water, ankle high water, knee high water... you get the drift.

      Everything in nature lacks a clear boundary - due to planck's constant and such. All you can say is, with error bars, what the boundary is. We know the coastal boundaries of nations, within +/- 25m error. Similarly, the Kamran line is a decent boundary for when space stars from the Earth's surface. Is it exact to the millimeter? No, doesn't have to be. But the property is that buoyant crafts (bouyant due to density or due to propulsion with wings) cannot exist at the Kamran line. Just as the coastal boundaries of nations, while not defining the exact grain of sand land stops and sea begins, generally define the point at which you're dry or wet, within +/- 25m.

    11. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by Neoprofin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apples to Apples, cynic.

      Why can't people ever be happy when enterprising amateurs do something cool?

    12. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's about 65000 penises. Well, for me it's 65000, probably a lot more for you.

    13. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let me know when China's society has enough disposable income that an average family can send a camera 19 miles into the atmosphere as a family science project - "for fun".

    14. Re:19 miles isn't "space" by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm happy for the enterprising amateurs. I'm not happy for the guy that stuck a blatantly false headline on this.

  3. This is not a spacecraft by selven · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, it only goes up 30km. And there is no improvement that can possibly be made to a helium balloon that can make it actually go any higher than Earth's atmosphere. It's a good accomplishment but calling it a spacecraft is a bit disingenuous.

    1. Re:This is not a spacecraft by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 2

      And there is no improvement that can possibly be made to a helium balloon that can make it actually go any higher than Earth's atmosphere.

      Yes there is. Attach rockets.

    2. Re:This is not a spacecraft by Teancum · · Score: 5, Informative

      And there is no improvement that can possibly be made to a helium balloon that can make it actually go any higher than Earth's atmosphere.

      Yes there is. Attach rockets.

      What is so sad is that joke of a "spacecraft" this gets a strong mention in the press (and on Slashdot) while a real spacecraft... using a helium balloons as a 1st stage to get altitude is being used in a genuinely innovative fashion for something new with rocketry. See:

      http://www.arcaspace.com/en/home.htm

      ARCA was successful with their last launch attempt.... which was launched yesterday. No video links yet, but the official page says that the launch attempt was successful. Yeah, attaching rockets to a balloon is something being considered.

      FYI, ARCA (Aeronautics and Cosmonautics Romanian Association) is using this flight as a part of the testing regime in order to get TO THE MOON! They are a Google Lunar X-Prize team who is making some real progress and sending stuff up. They are also doing it on a budget of a mostly volunteer team in Eastern Europe. The main reason for using the balloons is not really the altitude issue, but that does simplify the rocket nozzle designs as it can be tuned to a near vacuum rather than having to deal with atmospheric flight (it makes a difference). Also, if something goes "boom", that explosion happens high up in the sky and over the Black Sea instead of over a populated area, making the issues of a launch pad much less of a problem.

    3. Re:This is not a spacecraft by andy1307 · · Score: 4, Funny

      This isn't news at all.

      Now if only the father had put the boy in the balloon....

    4. Re:This is not a spacecraft by cloricus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/

      These guys are doing some thing almost as cool though sticking to purely amateur ideals. Luckily for science loving people they've gotten a lot of press coverage. Unfortunately their latest launch failed on the pad, due to an issue with power, and they wont be able to attempt another test for six months odd. Still it is great to see people attempting to move past the generic rocket club stuff people have been doing pre-fab for 40 years.

      They definitely, along with some other examples, inspired me to push my friends to start doing serious engineering projects for fun. So far our list of things to attempt comes from any thing cool on TV that come with the stupid warning 'don't try this at home!'.

      --
      I ate your fish.
  4. Re:One reason why it won't be in the press... by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The other reasons it won't be in the press: It didn't make it to space and it seems like everyone else is doing it too. Yeah, its a nice accomplishment, yeah, they should be proud of it but its not unique in the least, it seems like the past year everyone has been doing essentially what they have done.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  5. This is news how? by Onomang · · Score: 3, Informative

    Nearly the same exact thing was done over a year ago for a budget of only $150 by college students from MIT.
    http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/

    1. Re:This is news how? by bornclimber · · Score: 4, Informative

      Better than MIT is the Florida attempt... Florida students transmitted some science data, and not just download from a phone after landing... http://www.news-journalonline.com/news/florida/space/2010/04/14/experiment-off-the-ground-for-erau-students.html

  6. How is this different from... by garompeta · · Score: 3, Informative
  7. Re:Tape in a Big Model Rocket by Spy+Handler · · Score: 2, Interesting

    that 19 inch helium ballon doesn't have much of a payload, so you can't stick a big model rocket in there.

    You *could* possibly stick a small model rocket, and have the iPhone fire it when they reach high enough an altitude. A small rocket with 5 seconds of thrust maybe.

    You could even modify the shape of the exhaust nozzle for optimum vacuum performance since there's almost air there .

    while that would be cool, it's still nowhere near enough to actually get it in space....

  8. Feeling of déjà vu... by Nemyst · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I remember many similar stories already making the headlines here. I don't want to downplay their achievement, it's cool, but it's not really new or exciting anymore for anyone but them. I was hoping a real heavier-than-air craft, not another weather balloon.

  9. Isn't this by JustOK · · Score: 2, Funny

    Isn't this some sort of aid to terrorists? Combined with the Plane Finder AR app, oooooo spooky. They should ban helium.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  10. Another reason you won't see this in the press by shoehornjob · · Score: 2, Funny

    Because the craft made it so high and the fact that they put an Iphone inside it now becomes a threat to our spy staelites (read"we may not be able to spy on our own citizens")and the NSA has deemed it a security threat and removed the story from most major news outlets. Sheesh this country's gone to hell.

    --
    "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
  11. Re:Is there an app for that? by AigariusDebian · · Score: 3, Funny

    There is one on n900 - it measures how high can you throw you n900 and how high is the drop, using the timer and accelerometer.

  12. If slashdot ever allows article moderation by gmhowell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If slashdot ever allows real article moderation (and not that firehose abortion), in addition to 'flamebait' and 'troll', can we have a '-1, pedant bait' article? Seriously, at the time of this comment, of 35 articles, at least half are arguing over whether or not this is truly a spacecraft. It's really easy to shit on others from the safety of your parents' basement. Whether it has been done before is also irrelevant. This father and son is doing something. There's too many complainers to call someone else out specifically, but what have you people done lately? I don't claim to have done anything interesting of late, but I also am not shitting on what others have done.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    1. Re:If slashdot ever allows article moderation by BitHive · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People are mostly objecting to the headline, not 'shitting on what others have done', unless you're referring to sensationalizing this story.

    2. Re:If slashdot ever allows article moderation by gmhowell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are plenty of comments that are filled with contempt "this joke of a 'spacecraft'". I think a lot of it is jealousy.

      This. Jealous of jocks for getting the hot chicks, jealous of musicians for being able to tap out a beat, jealous of MBAs for making lots of money, jealous for real nerds for getting out and doing something.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    3. Re:If slashdot ever allows article moderation by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it is one thing to accomplish an interesting, even astonishing deed, it's a very thing to misrepresent the accomplishment as something greater than what it is. We have definitions of where space begins, and they didn't reach that. Balloons are also useless vehicles in space, so that should be another indication.

    4. Re:If slashdot ever allows article moderation by SteveWoz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not only that, but think of what it's doing to inspire his kids.

      --
      OK a new size TV
  13. Re:This again? by nomadic · · Score: 5, Funny

    You sure told that 8 year old. Kudos.

  14. !Spacecraft by DynaSoar · · Score: 2, Informative

    1. It is a balloon. Not even the people who fly these for a living call them spacecraft. Says WikiP: "A spacecraft is a craft or machine designed for spaceflight." This thing popped when it rose above too much atmosphere. It was not designed for space. It was still in the stratosphere when it failed according to design.

    2. The Karman line is the generally accepted edge of space at 100 km (62.5 mi). This is where an aircraft would have to fly so fast to get lift from the thin air that it would achieve orbital velocity in the attempt and so wings would be superfluous. The US has awarded astronaut wings to pilots flying above 50 miles. This doesn't change the objective criteria of the Karman line.

    3. The CSXT GoFast achieved space altitude (72 miles) on May 17 2004 and is the only unmanned civilian craft to do so to date. It was designed for a flight profile carrying it into space and so was a spacecraft. As was SpaceShip One, the only civilian manned spacecraft to date.

    4. Reaction Research Society hit 50 miles in 1996. Hunstville L5 passed this 19 mile mark, but was ballooned launched and so not entirely spacecraft.

    5. No amateur spacecraft made from off the shelf or home made components has achieved even a 50K ft altitude according to Tripoli records. With Tripoli and the National Association of Rocketry's recent facing down ATFE over the definition of 'explosives', the FAA et al. is redefining amateur rocketry to include power up to 200,000 lb-ft sec and a concominant (and easily achieved with this power) 93 mile altitude. Most motors in this range are "experimental" ie. home made, but there are a few commercially available motors that can be staged and/or clustered for this power, the 152mm dia + 96" Loki Research P motor at 80kN-sec each being the largest you can currently put on your credit card. 11 of these will put you just under the FAA's proposed limit. 12, and you have to apply to NASA's office of space transportation for a permit. Expect an amateur spacecraft to make the flight, because now it's a matter of qualifying for the license and buying the parts.
     

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
  15. Need More Science by Somegeek · · Score: 2, Informative

    At 100km in an aircraft, you need to fly at orbital velocities just to stay aloft, so effectively you need a spacecraft instead.

    What??? Sorry, you need to go back and rethink that statement; it's not even close to true. Can you explain how SpaceShipOne, flying at 'only' Mach 3, was able to go higher than 100km? Thus, not only staying aloft at at 100km, but climbing? Or the X-15, which also flew higher than 100km, and also at significantly less than orbital velocity?

    I like how a good authoritative sounding statement, (which happens to be false), got modded +4 informative.

    --
    And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
    1. Re:Need More Science by wesley96 · · Score: 5, Informative

      What the grandparent probably meant by 'stay afloat' is maintaining altitude for a considerate amount of time. SSO and X-15 reached the 100km point, but had to come down relatively quickly because, once fuel runs out, you just fall to the gravity well.

      If you're in the atmosphere, you can glide without using all that much fuel. You can't do that in space - certainly not at 100km altitude. In order to 'stay afloat', you need to do orbital velocity.

      Of course, since it's not like atmosphere abruptly ends somewhere, the 'where to draw the line' can be a bit arbitrary, but the currently chosen one isn't impractical.

      --
      Serving time in Aristotelean prison for violating laws of physics
  16. IT AIN'T SPACE, AND IT AIN'T NEWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I agree, I don't know why slashdot (and other "news" outlets) keep running stories of this kind. 100,000 feet ain't space. It ain't even CLOSE to space (Usually defined as above 100,000 meters-- over three times as high), and it sure as hell ain't orbit, which is the kind of space people usually *think* of as being spaceflight.

    And it isn't even unusual-- basically, this is nice, but the bottom line is that these guys flew a weather balloon, which reached the kind of altitudes that such balloons usually reach. High school students do this routinely-- hundreds of them do it every year.

    Congrats, guys, good work, and all that, but it's not news.

  17. Rockoons are over 60 years old by Somegeek · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have to disagree with your statement that ARCA is doing something 'genuinely innovative' by using a balloon for the first stage. The concept is called a 'Rockoon' and was pioneered in the US in 1949 and has been used extensivly by JP Areospace, (among others), a small US company that has been working with balloons and rockets for over 30 years.

    http://jpaerospace.com/rockoons.html

    --
    And as you tread the halls of sanity, You feel so glad to be, Unable to go beyond. I have a message, From another time..
  18. 5 bars! by binarybum · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Brooklyn man was quoted as saying "it all started as a way to find out if there was really any place at all where I could get good reception on the iphone". When the phone landed there were 7 voicemail messages, 13 text messages, and 16 emails that were all sent several days prior but had managed to download at about 5 vertical miles.

    --
    ôó
  19. wide angle lens / curvature of earth by FunkyELF · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Its hard to tell how high the craft actually is because of the use of the wide angle.
    When its tumbling around up high and the camera goes upside down you can see the curvature of the earth inverted. Pretty weird looking.
    In fact, on its way down where you can still make out trees and stuff, there seems to be a curvature.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't have used wide-angle, indeed they should have for something like this. Its just a little misleading.

  20. Nice try. by Twinbee · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nice try, I'll give it that.

    But there are about 10 dozen reasons why this can be considered fake, and that the real motive behind the video is to try and brainwash the public into thinking the Earth is round.

    Like as if. For those who are still in denial, this is what would happen if the Earth was round:
    http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/flat/rounwrld.jpg

    Well, this PROUD flat-earther will NOT BUDGE.

    Thanks for playing.

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  21. Re:One reason why it won't be in the press... by tehcyder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What exactly is newsworthy about this?

    It contained the magic phrase "iPhone" and is therefore automatically cool and stuff.

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  22. aid? by evilviper · · Score: 2, Funny

    They rigged a parachute to the capsule to aid in its return to Earth,

    Actually, I think the parachute HINDERED and delayed it's return to earth, if anything. It would have been perfectly capable of returning to earth without help, as NASA scientists discovered some time ago...

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant