Slashdot Mirror


Skydiver Leaps From 18 Miles Up In 'Space Jump' Practice

wooferhound writes "A daredevil leapt from a balloon more than 18 miles above the Earth today, moving one step closer to a so-called 'space jump' that would set the record for the world's highest skydive. Austrian adventurer Felix Baumgartner stepped out of his custom-built capsule at an altitude of 96,640 feet (29,456 meters) above southeastern New Mexico, officials with Red Bull Stratos — the name of Baumgartner's mission — announced today. In today's jump, Baumgartner experienced freefall for three minutes and 48 seconds, reaching a top speed of 536 mph (863 kph), project officials said. Baumgartner then opened his parachute and glided to Earth safely about 10 minutes and 30 seconds after stepping into the void."

59 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. First words by EricScott · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's one small step for a man, One giant leap for me.

  2. Pretty Cool by jomama717 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Makes me wish I'd been alive to watch live coverage of people LANDING ON THE FREAKING MOON.

    --
    while [ 1 ]; do echo -n -e "\xe2\x95\xb$((($RANDOM&1)+1))"; done
    1. Re:Pretty Cool by camperdave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If NASA took all the trouble to fake the moon landing, then why haven't they, in the past 40 years, faked another milestone, like landing on Mars?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:Pretty Cool by digitig · · Score: 2

      Meh. The picture wasn't all that clear. The Pink Floyd improvisation that we got as soundtrack here in the UK was pretty cool, though.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    3. Re:Pretty Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      you didn't miss much since it never happened.

      http://www.google.com/#hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=stanley+kubrick+moon+landing

      We really, truly did land on the moon.

      That's why Armstrong punched out that reporter who asked if they really did it. Y'know, because the Neanderthal who responds to an honest question with unprovoked violence is definitely the more rational, superior man. No, he really landed but had something to hide, something so enormous that it shook his very own idea of how the world worked, that made him so irrational to the point of violence.

      The videos were faked because they didn't want us to see what was actually there. Evidence of extraterrestrial life actually near Earth doesn't jive well with keeping the population fat and stupid and dependent on gov't/media (same thing really) and the older influences of religion to define the meaning of their lives. The moon is hollow because it rang like a gong when one of the Apollo spacecraft was crashed into it. The moon perfectly obscures the sun during an eclipse, the dark side never faces the earth, the orbit is not elliptical, it is large compared to the Earth, and therefore generally it could not be a captured body. It's artificial. Whoever built the pyramids at Giza built the moon too. The Bhagivad Gita describes nuclear fucking warfare thousands of years ago, perfectly to the letter the effects of radioactive fallout, then archaeologists found residual radiation in the areas it describes.

      See if something is too different from what you were taught to believe by vested interest who want your thinking to be limited to nation-state affairs, then you automatically reject it, just like a good conditioned subject. Facts are facts. Dare to find your own.

    4. Re:Pretty Cool by tragedy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The "reporter" lured Aldrin to a hotel under false pretenses, wasting his whole day. Then he ambushed him, making ridiculous demands. I found a brief snippet from the video, immediately before the punch and I've transcribed what I heard below:
      "...you're the one who said you walked on the moon when you didn't. Calling the kettle black, if I ever thought I would say that"
      "Would you get it away from me!"
      "You're a coward, and a liar, and a thief..."
      Then comes the punch. That doesn't really seem like responding to and honest question with unprovoked violence to me. Heck, even Sibrel himself sent a letter of apology (according to Sibrel, anyway) to Aldrin.

      I have no idea what to say to the rest of your post. Hollow, artificial moon, built by the same people who built the (extremely small and unimpressive compared to their work on the moon) pyramids at Giza? You just never know quite what to say to that kind of thing. Backing away slowly while smiling reassuringly seems to be the only way to go.

    5. Re:Pretty Cool by Tastecicles · · Score: 2

      Condensed version:

      That's no moon... it's a space station.

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    6. Re:Pretty Cool by flimflammer · · Score: 2

      The truly funny and also incredibly sad thing about this post is that some people out there truly feel exactly this way, even so much as to eating up that bit about Aldrin becoming violent "unprovoked" proving the conspiracy is true. I'm sure this particular post is just is all in jest (I hope), but I've actually spoken to people who act just like this, and it truly makes me sad.

    7. Re:Pretty Cool by c · · Score: 3, Funny

      They've tried. No luck.

      Lucas' script has Mars completely populated with cutesy aliens who speak broken English with a (for reasons he refuses to explain) Cockney accent.

      Michael Bay's script has the Mars lander crashing in a symphony of explosions.

      Kevin Smith's script is entirely about the dysfunctional relationships between the crew during the trip out.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    8. Re:Pretty Cool by netwarerip · · Score: 2

      Well, I guess it kinda makes sense that an ancient Hindu document describes nuclear war and aliens building the moon, since you know the aliens would have outsourced the IT parts of the project to India.

    9. Re:Pretty Cool by sjames · · Score: 2

      "You're a coward, and a liar, and a thief..."

      Those were certainly fighting words and Aldrin was absolutely right to throw a punch. If more people understood that today, we might have a little less crime, a little more polite society, and possibly even a bit less corporate nonsense.

      As far as the hollow moon, I guess that's where the bats in his belfry live in the winter.

  3. Dyslexic much? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 2

    From the article:

    Red Bull Stratos is a mission to the edge of space to an altitude of 37.000 meters to break several records including the sound of speed in freefall

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    1. Re:Dyslexic much? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, the faster you fall, the soundier your speed becomes. The goal is to make a proper *kaboom* instead of the ordinary *swiiish*.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Dyslexic much? by c0lo · · Score: 2

      From the article:

      Red Bull Stratos is a mission to the edge of space to an altitude of 37.000 meters to break several records including the sound of speed in freefall

      Somebody should tell them that breaking this record may lend them into troubles with RIAA (label: Rhino/Warner Bros)

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    3. Re:Dyslexic much? by Tastecicles · · Score: 4, Funny

      if you want a "kaboom" try an illudium Pu-36 explosive space modulator.

      --
      Operation Guillotine is in effect.
    4. Re:Dyslexic much? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 2

      Or just don't open the chute.

    5. Re:Dyslexic much? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      the sound of speed

      vroom, vroom.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  4. Not exactly space as many know it by pegasustonans · · Score: 2

    While these things are somewhat debatable, Baumgartner's future "space jump" is not due to take place in what most consider "space."

    FTFA:

    Baumgartner has his eyes on an even bigger leap, a "space jump" from 125,000 feet (38,100 m) in the next month or so. (Space, however, is generally considered to begin at an altitude of 62 miles, or 327,000 feet.)

    It's still a great feat and laudable they went ahead with it despite ridiculous legal challenges:

    Baumgartner and his team had hoped to attempt his record jump in 2010, but they were delayed by a legal challenge that claimed the idea of the dive was earlier suggested to Red Bull by California promoter Daniel Hogan.

    --
    And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
    1. Re:Not exactly space as many know it by Teresita · · Score: 3, Funny

      So you're saying we have patent trolls asserting their exclusive right to the "look and feel" of a balloon jump.

  5. Fastest Human? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Did he also attain distinction of being fastest non-propelled human?

  6. air resistance by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Air resistance up to typical skydiving altitude provides sufficient drag to keep the person from accelerating to the point where deceleration would result in so much friction as to vaporize the person. If this guy's really dead-set on jumping from the actual threshold of space...

    1. He'll need thermal insulation until he's in the earth atmosphere properly. I hear it's pretty cold up there.

    2. I think it's safe to assume he has the oxygen problem licked, because at 12 miles, he'd have suffocated.

    3. I understand objects falling from that altitude tend to encounter very little air resistance, which means they pick up a lot of speed. The kind of speed that causes brilliant fireballs to appear in place of anything falling from that height, like asteroids, satellites, and space shuttles.

    ... I don't see how anyone could survive those kinds of physical stresses while maintaining any level of mobility, or having a silhouette even vaguely resembling a person. The low mass of a person (even one encased in inches-thick ceramic heat shielding, would mean the bow wave shocks would turn anyone inside into goo. Perhaps someone with a better understanding of physics clear up for me why this isn't the case, since I'm pretty sure Red Bull doesn't want their energy drink to be associated with what in my eyes is essentially suicide by thermodynamics?

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:air resistance by Telvin_3d · · Score: 2

      The air pressure increases gradually on the way down. Perhaps terminal velocity goes down gradually enough to provide a smooth transition. After all, the objects that typically end up as fireballs entered with quite a bit of extra velocity to start with.

    2. Re:air resistance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you have very little air resistance, you're not going to be generating any heat (you get hot from the friction caused by the air resistance).

      Asteroids, satellites, and space shuttles don't just fall out of the sky, they were already moving fast enough to stay in orbit. Their massive speed helps make them hot. The jumper will not be traveling at orbital speeds, thus the increasing air resistance will be enough to slow him down before the speed+air friction gets high enough to burn him.

    3. Re:air resistance by aapold · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Kittinger's story is amazing. He used to call into a florida talk show I listened to when I lived there from time to time to talk about some of the stuff involved with his jump. He is consulting on this attempt, so while this attempt might seem a stunt, at least Kittinger is apparently getting paid for it.

      --
      "Waste not one watt!" - CZ
    4. Re:air resistance by tragedy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Asteroids, Satellites, and space shuttles don't just "fall" from that height. They're already going very, very fast (at least 25,000 km/h) before they hit the atmosphere. There's no way this guy would ever manage to go that fast even if he were dropping from the height of LEO (to be clear, I just mean dropping from the height of, not actually being in LEO). For an idea of what kind of heating he could experience, the Concorde apparently got up to around 120 degrees celcius at its nose travelling at Mach 2. That's clearly too hot for bare skin, but it's not much of a problem for an insulated pressure suit for just a few minutes (and it probably wouldn't even be that long), and his goal of Mach 1 will be pretty hard to reach, let alone Mach 2.

    5. Re:air resistance by PPH · · Score: 5, Informative

      3. I understand objects falling from that altitude tend to encounter very little air resistance, which means they pick up a lot of speed. The kind of speed that causes brilliant fireballs to appear in place of anything falling from that height, like asteroids, satellites, and space shuttles.

      Not really. Most things that cause brilliant fireballs have a very high initial velocity (and kinetic energy) which must be dissipated when they first reach the atmosphere. This skydiver started with a vertical velocity of zero.

      And since the density gradient of the atmosphere is low, a skydiver's air resistance will build up slowly bleeding off this energy gradually.

      All that must be done is to bleed off the skydiver's potential energy. For a 115kg (person + gear. I'm pulling figures out of my *ss here) at 29,500m altitude, this is aprox. 32,700 Joules. Dissipated in 630 seconds, this is an average rate of 51 Watts. Warm, but not out of line with being wrapped in an electric blanket.

      That same individual hitting the atmosphere at 7750 m/sec (Shuttle re-entry velocity) would have kinetic energy of 3.45E9 Joules. Over 630 seconds this would be 5.5 megawatts, although the 630 second figure does not represent the re-entry time anymore. That time would be less, giving a higher average dissipation rate. And nothing but a few ashes reaching the ground.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:air resistance by camperdave · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually, you don't get hot from the friction; you get hot from compressing the air in front of you.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    7. Re:air resistance by Megane · · Score: 2

      FWIW, the reason re-entry from orbit produces so much heat is that you have to get rid of the horizontal orbital velocity. You could probably retro rocket thrust to get rid of the orbital velocity if you took up enough fuel, but that would be a luxury for anything launched from Earth into orbit on a rocket. This guy is going up in a balloon, so there is no horizontal velocity involved beyond Earth's rotation.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    8. Re:air resistance by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, you don't get hot from the friction; you get hot from compressing the air in front of you.

      Kind of like this: Relativistic Baseball

      Q: What would happen if you tried to hit a baseball pitched at 90% the speed of light?
      A: The answer turns out to be “a lot of things”, and they all happen very quickly, and it doesn’t end well for the batter (or the pitcher).
      ... [ more w/illustrations ]

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    9. Re:air resistance by retchdog · · Score: 2

      this particular thing you can learn just by using a bicycle pump (and if you're still not convinced, compare it to rubbing a piece of rubber against an aluminum pipe).

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    10. Re:air resistance by wvmarle · · Score: 2

      For a geostationary satellite, ground velocity is zero. So roughly the same as the speed of the balloon this person jumped from (not taking wind speeds into account). Jumping off a geostationary would involve pushing oneself down towards earth, slowly picking up vertical speed (now I have heard before that it doesn't work exactly like that but I'm not a rocket scientist and it's not important for the sake of the argument). And you would also start to pick up horizontal speed compared to the Earth's surface during your descent down. Basically to go in a straight line down from geostationary to the surface, one would have to lose a lot of angular velocity in the process. Calculating entry speeds is getting more tricky now.

      Now such a balloon is only a tiny way up to geostationary orbit, so this won't have much of an effect.

      And another point that I start to wonder: how high above the surface would one have to go before reaching sufficient speeds to become a human torch during free-fall? Terminal velocity will increase rapidly with higher altitude due to lower air resistance.

    11. Re:air resistance by metacell · · Score: 2

      Jumping off a geostationary would involve pushing oneself down towards earth, slowly picking up vertical speed (now I have heard before that it doesn't work exactly like that but I'm not a rocket scientist and it's not important for the sake of the argument).

      If we discount friction (wind resistance), this is not enough to reach the surface of the Earth. The momentum gained when pushing down from the space station, will only move the jumper very slowly towards the Earth, and once he has orbited half a revolution and is on the other side of the Earth, the same momentum will take him *away* from Earth again. The net effect is that the orbit will become slighty elliptical.

      I doubt he will reach the surface in a reasonable amount of time even if we take friction into account.

    12. Re:air resistance by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 2

      If you were to jump from geostationary orbit you would need to jump towards the "rear" of the craft (ie the trailing edge) with nearly as much force as it takes to get you from the edge of the atmosphere to geostationary orbit, i.e. a LOT. You'd hit the atmosphere at a hell of a speed and burn up without some pretty funky thermal shielding. If you simply "jumped toward the Earth" then all you'll do is put yourself in a slightly more eccentric orbit. Geostationary orbits are only geostationary because the Earth happens to rotate at a certain speed, there's still a hell of a big delta-v between geostationary and earthbound. The big point to remember here is that he's jumping from near zero velocity, not orbital velocities (geostationary or otherwise, it doesn't make much difference once you're past mach 5 or so)

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    13. Re:air resistance by camperdave · · Score: 4, Informative

      As an object approaches the speed of sound, it creates a shock wave. Along the shock wave the pressure and temperature increase dramatically. At hypersonic speeds, the shock wave becomes detached from the object, and the energy in the shock wave is enough to break the molecules in the atmosphere into ion. Behind the shock wave, the air is relatively stagnant. Since the air behind the shock wave is not moving, the heat cannot be caused by friction. The heat comes from compression, and is transferred to the object by radiation, much like a toaster. The heat from the elements is transferred to the bread primarily by radiation.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  7. Fail by rossdee · · Score: 4, Funny

    The secret of flying is to throw oneself at the ground - and miss.

    1. Re:Fail by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      I heard it prior to the publication of the HGTTG book, so who's to say the first published version was the first version?

  8. Upon landing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Upon landing Mr. Baumgartner simply requested a cigar and fresh undies.

  9. New Extreme Sport by sanman2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you could run this as a business operation, I wonder how much you could charge people for "space jumps"?

    1. Re:New Extreme Sport by TheSpoom · · Score: 2

      Call me when we get the screw attack.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    2. Re:New Extreme Sport by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wonder how much you could charge people for "space jumps"?

      I'm not sure what the price level would be, but I can tell you that I have pretty much no interest in jumping out of an airplane, but I would do it multiple times if it were required to train for this kind of jump.

      I'm pretty sure I could be 117, dying on a bed and, remembering my space jump, say, "fuck yeah" and die happy.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:New Extreme Sport by ch-chuck · · Score: 2

      I can't wait until we see an Ares V rocket launch with Nike etc logos emblazoned on it and the astronauts, like a nascar vehicle and driver.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    4. Re:New Extreme Sport by Paezley · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you could run this as a business operation, I wonder how much you could charge people for "space jumps"?

      I am a licensed skydiver, and I can tell you that the way "normal" jumps are priced is there is a boarding fee generally $10-13 USD and then you pay $1 per thousand feet of altitude. This is whether you get out at 3,000 feet or 13,000 feet. But this is out of an aircraft without needing supplemental oxygen or equipment.

      Specialized jumps cost more:

      Hot air balloon jumps are usually around $45 and you get out anywhere between 4-6k feet.

      Anything above 15,000 feet requires supplemental oxygen, so these jumps can be more expensive.

      A civilian HALO jump from 30,000 feet costs around $375.

      However none of that applies in this case because of all the specialized equipment for the stratos mission.

      For example, the bottom of the capsule is one-use-only. Upon landing, the capsule's bottom absorbs the force of impact and "crumples", so every flight requires a replacement. There is a pressure suit which needs to fit the jumper. There is a custom parachute rig made by Velocity.

      Also, the time to altitude takes a very long time, and the winds need to be just right. So it is not uncommon for them to wait days or weeks to have a window to try. They also have a large ground team. So this whole production would need to spin up for each "jumper" meaning at best you could do one or two jumpers every few weeks, at worst, one every month or two.

      Not to mention each jumper would need to have a base line skydiving skill set that exceeds what most sport jumpers possess. Figure you would need to have several thousands normal skydives, including HALO jumps, before you could even begin to train for a stratos jump. Training for stratos jump would include many jumps wearing the space suit and custom velocity rig, which is not a standard rig so it has different deployment and emergency procedures. This training would need to include wind tunnel time to work on falling in a stable belly to earth orientation. It would also need to include jumps from an aircraft.

      As a business operation you would likely need to charge hundreds of thousands of dollars per jumper, if not millions, and only allow "customers" who meet the qualifications.

      So really, you'd have to invest several years in skydiving and have a scrooge mcduck money pond waiting for you at the end of it.

      OR, you use the red bull money from all the idiots who drink red bull and you have an awesome adventure on their dime ;)

      USPA C-39657

  10. Going for the record by Grayhand · · Score: 5, Funny

    Committees from both the Darwin Awards and Guinness will be on hand for the final jump. The Guinness people are hoping for multiple awards at the jump. Highest jump, longest free fall, highest velocity in free fall, longest scream in free fall, highest speed a human ever impacted the ground and greatest distance human remains were spread after impact.

    1. Re:Going for the record by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 2

      longest scream in free fall

      Clearly this is why he's not actually going into space.

      In Space No-One Can hear You Scream.

      Although, to be really picky, his scream will be really short. Given that he'll be wearing a fully-enclosed helmet I'd guestimate something approximating a couple of inches.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
  11. Citius, Altius, Fortius? Not quite. by arth1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Did he also attain distinction of being fastest non-propelled human?

    No, I'm pretty sure that record was set by the Apollo 10 re-entry, at close to 40,000 km/h (almost 25,000 mph).

    He's not even the fastest skydiver - that record has held for 52 years now - Joseph Kittinger did a free fall in 1960 that lasted 21% longer and reached a top speed 15% faster than what Baumgartner just did.

  12. Not Really Freefall (Physics Lesson) by jaa101 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Freefall strictly speaking means 9.8m/s/s which, after 228 seconds, multiplies out to 5000mph. That's an order of magnitude more than Baumgartner's speed. Wikipedia explains:

    "The example of a falling skydiver who has not yet deployed a parachute is not considered free fall from a physics perspective, since they experience a drag force which equals their weight once they have achieved terminal velocity (see below). However, the term "free fall skydiving" is commonly used to describe this case in everyday speech, and in the skydiving community."

    Still, terminal velocity for a human at sea level is about 120mph which is 4.5 times slower than the quoted 536mph. Taking the square root gives an atmospheric pressure 2.1 times less than normal which translates to him popping the 'chute at about 25,000. Actually he had a pressure suit which would probably slow him down so it could have been higher than that.

    1. Re:Not Really Freefall (Physics Lesson) by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is really free fall, as this is a parachuting act, and the parachuting terminology would trump the physics terminology. Or do you go ape shit every time someone calls a cash register a "register" in a store and you pontificate about CPU architecture?

  13. We are catching up to the 1960s... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    On Aug. 16, 1960, US military Col. Kittinger stepped from a balloon-supported gondola at the altitude of 102,800 feet to test the use of a parachute for escape from a space capsule or high-altitude aircraft. In free-fall for 4.5 minutes at speeds up to 614 mph and temperatures as low as -94 degrees Fahrenheit, Col. Kittinger opened his parachute at 18,000 feet.

    The jump set records that still stand today: the highest ascent in a balloon, the highest parachute jump, the longest free-fall, and the fastest speed by a man through the atmosphere.

    Video of the story

    1. Re:We are catching up to the 1960s... by AbRASiON · · Score: 2

      One of the 2 favourite things I have about that jump (if I recall, and no I didn't re-watch the video was)

      1. he had a hole in his glove but didn't tell anyone because he really wanted to jump and I think it was the last chance or some such.

      2. when he lands and the rescue team come to grab him - in one of the videos, his buddy walks up to him says something (there's a voice over) and he flips his pal the bird with a big smile.

      What a badass.

  14. Re:Cold, but not as you know it... by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

    It's been postulated more than once that a helmet and tight spandex-like suit (well, more like neoprene than spandex, but those discussing it usually say spandex because of the recognizability of it) could be all that's needed to survive hard vacuum, but little money has been spent on verification. The full NASA suits are insulators, along with so many other functions. It would be interesting to see what would happen with $1,000,000,000 being spent on finding the minimum safe space suit for brief exposure to hard vacuum (brief being 1 hour, no more than once a month).

    The billion dollars would be money well spent if it reduced space suits to a $1000 specialized track suit that could be sold as a (semi) functional space suit to the geeks and nerds, simplifying travel in the future.

  15. The "Moon": A Ridiculous Liberal Myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Aliens, nothing! Here, read this before They brainwash you with more disinformation!

    The "Moon": A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

    It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)

    Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.

    Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!

    Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.

  16. Re:Citius, Altius, Fortius? Not quite. by billstewart · · Score: 2

    The Apollo 10 astronauts were in a capsule, not skydiving, but that hadn't happened when Kittinger set the record in 1960. Even Yuri Gagarin's flight wasn't until 1961, and the U-2 planes only went up to about 70,000 feet.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  17. Re:Almost Craig Breedlove Speed! by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Informative

    Breedlove set world land speed records of 500 and 600 mph, and one of his cars got up to about 675 before crashing.

    Its still short of the current land speed record which is 763.035 mph, and slower than the current free fall speed record of 614 mph, which was set in 1960 by Joseph Kittinger.

  18. Re:Almost Craig Breedlove Speed! by Builder · · Score: 3, Informative

    Kittinger is a consultant on this project, so I guess he's ok with losing his record :)

  19. Who ever needs to land a spacecraft now by Lord+Lode · · Score: 2

    Astronauts returning home from ISS could just jump, all that's needed is a parachute.

    1. Re:Who ever needs to land a spacecraft now by gblackwo · · Score: 2

      The ISS orbit height is 230 miles, we aren't quite there yet.

    2. Re:Who ever needs to land a spacecraft now by Fnord666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The ISS orbit height is 230 miles, we aren't quite there yet.

      I wouldn't worry about that nearly as much as the 17,227 miles per hour of lateral velocity that you will need to shed along the way down.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
  20. Re:Almost Craig Breedlove Speed! by jafiwam · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes.

    However, the reentry heat one normally thinks of comes from one of two additional vectors (sometimes both!) that make the effect larger than it would be from a simple drop from a balloon.

    First, most objects fall from orbit. Depending on how high of an orbit they were in, they were deliberately put at a high lateral orbit speed somewhere below escape velocity.Which as it turns out is pretty damn fast when compared to the atmosphere, so objects returning from orbit "skid in" at high speed compared to the surface.

    Some objects from from faster than escape velocity (space rocks, stuff coming back from orbiting the sun or to the moon) and have an additional "get there" velocity.

    While a super-atmosphere sky diver might have to contend with speed related friction heat, it's not a large given like it is with other scenarios. With proper propulsion breaking it is possible to step out of a "stopped" capsule after coming in from a moon mission (for example) and drop to the earth in just a specialized suit.

    It's not PRACTICAL to do so if you are running a space mission, but it's possible. Kittinger's missions were for investigating other things than reentry from orbit of humans though.

  21. Re:Opening parachute at 863km/h by Ogive17 · · Score: 2

    As the atmosphere increased, it would work as a natural break and slow the descent. Eventually you'd be going slow enough (120mph or so) to fall within a parachute's normal operating parameters.

    --
    "Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."