NASA Launches Largest Single-Cell Balloon 53
hohosforbreakfast writes "According to CNN, NASA launched the largest single-cell, fully-sealed balloon ever from Australia. This thing is supposed to be as large as a football (American) stadium once it's fully inflated, and flies 20 miles high. It'll circumnavigate the globe and then be landed by remote control in Australia. It looks like this flight is a proof-of-concept, but more flights, lasting 100 days each, are planned. Looks like an interesting alternative to satellites for certain observations. The official site is here."
Environmental Effects (Score:1)
Already, many forms of animal life in the ocean suffer from contact with man-made non-biodegradable membranes (e.g. baloons). Can we in good conscience send even more of these deadly devices into the wild? I'm concerned that the sheer size of these balloons has the potential to negatively impact many many animals - especially if they are deployed in number.
I don't wish to give more importance to this issue than it warrants, but I a believe that consequences to marine life should've been more carefully considered.
- qpt
Where do you get that much helium from? (Score:1)
That's a lot of helium (Score:2)
Remote control? (Score:1)
Seriously if it's remote control, could they actually get in touch with it anywhere on it's global trip if it happens to go wrong? I know they could keep track of it using the existing radar network and fit a standard aviation transdator and even GPS system on it, but I don't see how they could actually transmit signals from the ground to the thing to control it...
Dave
I'd like to see it piggy back launch... (Score:1)
I wonder what the lift capacity wiuld be? Cost per baloon? Its gotta be less than a Proton!
flight terminated (Score:1)
Re:Number 1 (Score:3)
SYDNEY, Australia (AP) -- A giant balloon, which scientists hope will usher in a new age of near space research by riding on the edge of the Earth's atmosphere, took off Sunday after a two-month delay.
"Everybody's a bit relieved," said Garry Woods, the acting launch station director.
Especially relieved was the crew of technicians, 400 strong, who could finally relax.
"We had quite a time of it," said Binky, the team director. "There was a lot of controversy at first, as to what shape the giant balloon would be in. Garry was originally inclined to go with a weiner dog, because he thought it would be most aerodynamic. But we managed to talk him out of. He just didn't understand at first that that particular balloon animal simply didn't scale well. Giggles was the one that had the bright idea of suggesting the ellipse shape, which everyone seemed to like."
Before the clowns finally hopped into their tiny car the launch site, the were nice enough to stop to answer a few questions. Asked what was the hardest part of the process, a short, green wigged clown smoking a cigarette stated simply: "blowing the goddamn thing up. I need a beer."
Re:Environmental Effects (Score:5)
As an example, have you ever seen a scientific balloon up? Not unless you live in a few select areas of the country - ones with immense wide open spaces where a balloon's descent can be controlled accurately (New Mexico is one of them - Fort Sumner, to be specific). The instrument has to be recovered (you want it to fly again, after all) and so you recover both it and the balloon.
There's no danger to wildlife in this case. That factor has already been considered.
so (Score:1)
This is the biggest UFO ever??
Re:I'd like to see it piggy back launch... (Score:1)
As well as having so much altitude that the atmosphere provides negligible drag (which is so high that hydrogen wouldn't get you there anyway... the hydrogen in the balloon would be heavier than the near-vacuous atmosphere around it at orbiter-type-altitudes) you also need considerable transverse velocity -- many thousands of miles per hour -- to orbit, and I don't see how a balloon could ever provide that.
With a shuttle it's easy -- you just roll the shuttle over to it's going at an angle away from the earth when it launches, to give it appropriate amounts of both radial (up away from the earth) and tangential momentum.
So it's a nice idea, but what you describe it going to have to wait until the space elevator (mentioned previously on slashdot)
Dave
Re:Remote control? (Score:2)
After all, it's a balloon. It's not like a plane or anything - it just floats. That's beneficial - you don't need any control systems. All you need is a GPS system and a radio. If it starts to head near anything manmade, you cut it. No big loss - just a few hours at float. That's why you wait forever to launch the thing - you wait till the winds are ideal.
Re:The question is... (Score:1)
The last thing we need is some punk aliens popping our US-football-field-sized balloons and allowing them to fall to Earth.
Of course, you know what would happen then. All the huge balloons from all the other galaxies would fly to us in mourning of the death of ours. Hmm, a scary thought indeed.
kickin' science like no one else can,
my dick is twice as long as my attention span.
Re:I'd like to see it piggy back launch... (Score:1)
As big as a stadium? (Score:1)
Hmmm, that would make its diameter more than 100 feet shorter than an American football field. Not exactly the "size of a domed football stadium." Arena football perhaps?
Re:Environmental Effects (Score:2)
Not to offend any Australians. The only main concern is population density.
The ballooners actually have quite a bit of control over the balloon, actually. On the balloon campaign I was on, there was a problem with the first launch - the balloon actually had a leak in it, and so it was rapidly losing helium. Of course, it never could reach float altitude and the only concern then was getting the payload and balloon down without any risk or danger to people/livestock/environment.
It was rather impressive. The NSBF (National Scientific Ballooning Foundation) people are very impressive - very good at their jobs. They cut the payload at 40,000 feet, which was actually quite below what we were hoping to reach before cutting it down, but apparently the estimates for the necessary height for a safe landing were a bit conservative. On its descent, the payload missed power lines by a few feet, missed telephone wires by fewer, and landed about two feet away from a fence, on the only flat spot in the surrounding areas.
Needless to say, we were very, very impressed.
Anyway, the main reason I'm stating this is just to get out of a jam I got in arguing with someone last time - this isn't to say there's anything wrong with Australia - it's just that in this case, you have a large area where you can bring the balloon down safely without having any reasonable risk of danger.
Re:Number 1 (Score:1)
Re:Where do you get that much helium from? (Score:2)
single cell? ohh... (Score:1)
Who goes up... (Score:3)
Whoops! (Score:1)
Yup. (Score:3)
Best of luck to the team - I hope their rapid "up-down" flight goes as good as ours did! Hope the payload's okay - and good luck on the next flight.
(Oh, and don't doubt that some of the members might be reading Slashdot even as this happens. Considering all you can really do sometimes is wait for approval, etc., there really isn't anything else to do.)
Re:Environmental Effects -NOT! (Score:2)
As for them coming down on your house, that isn't an issue for these ULDB flights which will go around the polar regions. But for shorter flights, which go out of the southwest (and Canada), it is a real concern during cutdown. Generally it comes down to a fight between NASA voting for safety and the scientists who built the instruments voting to risk it for more data.
Another tidbit: there was a malfunction with a payload called ISOMAX last year. Generally, the payload is cut away from the balloon and it has a parachute to bring it down. The parachute is cut away once the payload is on the ground to prevent it from being dragged, etc... Unfortunately, there was a vessel failure and loss of GPS tracking, and the parachute was cut while the payload was still X thousand feet in the air and the whole thing went splat out in Manitoba. In NASA's book this qualified as a the same level incident as the shuttle explosion. With the splat went many tens of man-years of work and several million dollars.
How big is the Nucleus? (Score:1)
Better than a satellite? (Score:1)
This balloon is a pretty poor alternative for most applications that satellites can do.
Weather Observation Firstly to view a wide area the vechicle needs to be high. This balloon would not travel high enough to view a decent area
SpyingWhat good is a balloon that goes where ever it pleases and has a radar signature the size of a concrete building
Communications Again no point- The balloon's direction can't be controled, so its no good for a relay node.
Space observationThe platform is too unstable, since it still flies in the albeit thin atmosphere. You would need some pretty snazy gyroscopes to stabilise any sort of space monitoring equipment.
Perhaps the one thing this device is good for is environmental monitoring in the stratosphere
Re:Environmental Effects -NOT! (Score:2)
"Science..", you know, the S in NSBF. (Score:4)
It's cheap and effectively gets you out of the atmosphere. That's all you need for scientific experiments.
Plenty of science has actually already been done on balloons, and plenty of traditional science is migrating to balloons because of the cost advantage. Telescopes, for instance, are excellent candidates for balloon flights, if you can work out a few kinks here and there (pointing). The main disadvantage had been the float time - measured in hours previously. The ULDB will eliminate that disadvantage, and hopefully, ULDBs will start replacing many satellite missions which could have functioned fine on balloons.
didn't anyone watch that fox special? (Score:1)
---
Re:circumnavigate the globe? (Score:1)
Flight Terminated (Score:3)
I sure would hate to be... (Score:1)
Someone had to say it! (Score:1)
All Your Balloons Are Belong To Us!
Great Jumpin' Jehosephat! (Score:2)
Gotta stop reading Slashdot while drunk at three in the morning... Brain to body.... Come in body... Only read Slashdot at work so you can get paid for doing it... Brain out...
Re:Where do you get that much helium from? (Score:1)
Re:Where do you get that much helium from? (Score:1)
Excuuuuuuse meeeeee.
What happened... (Score:2)
It may have failed, but it looked quite spectacular on the news. They say it doesn't mean and end to the project.
Not quite... (Score:1)
It crashed (Score:1)
Dave
Only went 200Km (Score:1)
It came down 200Km later
failure due to confusion over measurement units? (Score:3)
Was the failure due to a NASA mixup over US football stadium units of measurement vs. Aussie rules football stadium units? ;-)
Re:Where do you get that much helium from? (Score:2)
It's only a drop in the bucket of annual helium production of (1997) some 100,000,000 cubic meters (3.5 billion cubic feet) in the US alone (the US produces the bulk of the world's helium).
See:
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodit
Off Topic: ...the size of a football stadium... (Score:2)
what ever happened to feet (or meters for that matter)? not sensationalist enough...
--
So what ARE they using this thing for? (Score:1)
Re:Great Jumpin' Jehosephat! (Score:1)
They need to make Slashdot easier to read for those whose brains are not yet functioning... :)
_________________________________________________
Re:Better than a satellite? (Score:1)
Try monitoring the weather with an enormous balloon above you. ("Why is it that our weather forecasts always call for 'partly cloudy', and there's always this area the size of a football field with no precipitation?" ;)
_________________________________________________
BBC LINK (Score:2)
Re:Off Topic: ...the size of a football stadium... (Score:2)
Get the worlds... (Score:1)
Re:Where do you get that much helium from? (Score:1)
"Helium is extracted from natural gas deposits. Only a few sources in the world contain a significant proportion of helium and justify its separation. These are in the US, Poland, Algeria and Russia. Because of its high value, helium is the only major industrial gas to be traded internationally."
From: BOC Gases - The Industrial Gases Company [boc.com]
Re:Remote control? (Score:1)
Bah! (Score:1)
i guess (Score:1)
Re:I sure would hate to be... (Score:1)
Seriously, the problem of keeping these things out of the way of aircraft should be solvable. It certainly isn't harder than stopping high school training ships from sneaking up on and surprising gigabuck nuclear attack submarines. Often, safety is a matter of ensuring that a repeatable process is in fact being repeated.
Re:Better than a satellite for space observations (Score:1)