Your boffinette is sporting a pipe, I see
Good show, carry on.
We're pleased to report that the intrepid Playmonaut who last weekend soared to 34,571m (113,421ft) during the test flight of our Special Project Electronic Altitude Release System (SPEARS) control board is, although somewhat shaken, otherwise none the worse for suffering a dramatic stratodangle. Our intrepid miniature pilot …
I'm not sure I understand exactly what happened to CHAV. Did it did detach, but hung nose-down from the payload box (tangled up in one of the hanging lines)? When I first read this, I was thinking that it stayed in launch position the entire time, but a nose-down dangle makes the video make much more sense.
Is this considered a successful igniter test? In the full mission, it has to light off rocket propellant, which will probably happen just fine if it burns at all, even if it can't burn through a nylon line.
I'm surprised there's no video of the white-knuckle stratodangle moment itself --- surely that's one of the primary reasons to have the camera aboard the mothership at all? Was there a camera failure, or is this just yet another Tory/Labour/Green/Reptilian coverup of Things They Do Not Want Us To Know?
Ask the makers of the HD Hero 3. Camera shut itself down at 60,000ft. May have been the cold, but other people have reported similar problems with this model. We're looking into it, and getting more cameras (not all 3s), and more insulation, to make sure we're covered in future.
This is what you get when you don't involve your beloved commentards in your construction process.
100 other sets of eyes could have seen that particular potential flaw in your plan and assisted in correcting it.
Your PRISM-like secrecy surrounding this project (I certainly saw nothing regarding it prior to launch in the SPB section) has caused science itself to suffer and deprived us all of an opportunity to ogle some CHAV-tastic footage of the glide and descent.
Shame on you! Shame on you ALL!
Actually, I saw the flaw coming a mile off. The flaw started with the requirement to have a parachute at all. It's this kind of thing which has strangled British science initiatives, Now, when I was a lad, etc, etc.
Regarding secrecy, the "Covert" bit kind of gives a clue. Didn't want our American cousins getting wind of it, did we?
It's hilarious how wonderfully structurally solid paper straws, bulkhead, and laminated shell construction looks. The removable nose reminds me of a photo I saw years ago of a ridiculously large 747-based cargo jet prototype where the whole front of the aircraft came open.
It's a shame CHAV didn't fly. Did it get any wind tunnel tests?
If you need to have another go with this config, put an arm on the main box sticking out backwards, at least one linguini past the CHAV's tail. Then attach the chute pullout line to the end of that arm, so that it is more or less taut. This will keep the chute from tangling.
So soon after our hero hit the drink you send another one up in a dangerous craft?
My parachuting friends used to call it a "bottle jump". If the main canopy failed, and you had to deploy the reserve, you needed to get back up straight away before you lost your nerve...
They guys must have steel balls etc
As long as they're not brass, it's nippy at 100K ft.
...The parachute is a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) requirement, ...
...that the CAA won't allow an aircraft to make a descent under autonomous control or radio control? and that all descents have to be ballistic, retarded by a parachute?
Other countries don't seem to have made that ruling... :(
Believe me, I've tried to work out how to make a paper paraglider. I believe it is possible, but I can't see how we qualify the bits of string as paper... also, while a solid wing section is not too difficult, doing it with a flexible paper pressurised by airspeed ain't quite so easy!
(But if it helps, I got some paraglider airtime at Long Mynd the day after the attempt!)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019