Aye, jolly good luck to them.
PARIS has spent enough time on top, after all.
It's come to our attention that a crack squad of US students is poised to make an attempt on El Reg's Guinness World Record for the highest launch of a paper plane. On 28 October 2010, our Paper Aircraft Released Into Space (PARIS) Vulture 1 spaceplane glided into the history books from a dizzying 89,591ft* (27,310m). Well, …
I should imagine they will be running a linkage from a servo to the trigger of the release aid. I don’t think that is such a good idea, compound release aids are very smooth at releasing bow strings and can hold 80 lbs + of draw weight without issue but even with something like a Tru Ball – which uses ball bearings on the end of the jaws – I don’t think they will survive the environment without locking solid, I’d be very worried about the cold. Plus, for obvious reasons the pull of most release aids tends to be fairly light and the sear quite sensitive to knocks and buffeting. I may be wrong, I’ve never shot a bow at that sort of altitude before but I would hope they would give it some serious testing (I’m half tempted to put a release aid in the freezer myself and see what happens).
Good luck to them, surely their next step is going to be a rocket powered beastie.
Given how confused they are about the terminology of the release aid, I don't have much confidence that it will work - premature release seems quite likely, but also it seems unlikely that they will have enough weight on their 'string' for it to work as expected, if vibration on the way up hasn't shaken it loose (no pun intended)
On 28 October 2010, our Paper Aircraft Released Into Space (PARIS) Vulture 1 spaceplane glided into the history books from a dizzying 89,591ft* (27,310m).
Now didn't we have a poll not so long ago with regards to measurements?
Metric only, with exception to aircraft altitude in feet, and a pint of beer.
Which begs two questions. Does Paris actually classify as an aircraft? If so then by El Reg rullings, you shouldn't have included the metric conversion. And if not, then you shouldn't have used feet. Disgraceful.
And if you're going to convert it, then why not into a unit we all understand.and tell is it soared from the height of 2962.1849 double decker buses. Or 197.4788 Brontosaurus.
"And if you're going to convert it, then why not into a unit we all understand.and tell is it soared from the height of 2962.1849 double decker buses. Or 197.4788 Brontosaurus."
I don't think you can use double decker buses or dinosaurs for height only length. I think for height you need to use Nelson's Column so 525x the height of nelson's column.
I noticed that in their coverage of the PARIS project they offer 3 links, one to the BBC, one to the Daily Mail and one to the Telegraph. "The Register" doesn't get a mention, you're just a team of "space enthusiasts".
For that affront I think you should consider shooting the plane down with LOHAN.
Have a good weekend everyone.
I can see the headlines now:
"British plane shoots down US experimental aircraft over US soil."
"US president Barack Obama authorises US Navy Seal assoult on 10 Downing Street"
"The bodies of David Cameron and Nick Clegg buried at sea from the deck of the aircraft carrier USS George HW Bush"
"Lester Haines wins sweeping landslide victory at the general election"
Can I be churlish and suggest that Mr Baumgartner, although obviously a tough cookie, had rather a lot of planned advantages, compared to Aleksander Konovalev who had to eject unexpectedly at Mach 2.6 / 59,000ft in 1981.... and did so properly with his ejector seat, despite fire, spinning and disintegration, and then got back to work the next month. At the time this was assumed to be the world record, as no-one knew for sure about the
SR-71 breakup and unassisted bailout.
In fact it looks like he might still be working at the Sokol (Eagle) aircraft plant in Nizhny Novgorod (Gorky) maybe still testing stuff, but pretty close to retirement if he is. I have no idea if he is chatty or not, maybe I should email or text him ;)
From the picture it looks like their glider will have a very poor glide slope, with such thin wings and a fat fuselage it will have high drag and low lift. Of course with the extra weight of that electronics payload it should reach a pretty good forward speed, perhaps sufficient to rip off those flimsy little wings. Not sour grapes, honest, just making an observation. I look forward to seeing it plummet.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019