Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Gliding Into the Stratosphere 170

Posted by michael from the beverage-service-suspended dept.
iAlex writes "Apparently flying around the world in a balloon isn't enough for Steve Fossett. Currently he is attempting to exceed the sailplane altitude record of 49,000 feet. The intention is to fly a two seat glider into the stratosphere on a mountain wave while wearing a pressure suit. Later on the intention is to exceed 100,000 feet in a pressurized glider. There is also a Wired article." Here's a nutshell description of the plan and a primer on mountain waves.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gliding Into the Stratosphere More

Gliding Into the Stratosphere

Comments Filter:

  • Minor typo in article (Score:3, Funny)

    by JUSTONEMORELATTE ( 584508 ) on Wednesday July 31, 2002 @01:41PM (#3987752) Homepage
    That last line should read:
    Here's a description of the nutcase's plan
    • Why in the world was this posted under 'science' ? I see nothing related to research, scientific advancement or academia in this story.
      • "Today's flight objectives are mostly NASA/data collection equipment-related - testing both the precision high rate data system ,plut UV sensors designed to take ozone hold releated measurements in the polar vortex"

        Sounds legitimate to me.
    • If we can send one rich nutcase into the stratosphere, why can't we send them all there?

  • I'm a rich bastard! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Bonker ( 243350 )
    I'm so rich that I think I'm going to blow my money on breaking records for my personal glory rather than trying to help people in need or advancing technology to help everyone.

    Seriously, I can't help but think that Mister Fosset could get significantly more head-rush for his money by doing something like sky-diving than building vast, record-breaking projects that have very little effect on advancing technology. Imagine for a second that, rather than attempting to circle the globe in a baloon eight or nine times, he had held back a few years, used the money to improve his balloon technology, and tried again with better technology than the same technology over and over again.

    I'm a very firm beleiver that throwing money at problems doesn't make them go away, but if he had spent *half* the funds from his balloon venture on something like inner-city literacy campaigns or AIDS research, I can't help but feel like the world would be a better place.

    • Re:I'm a rich bastard! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by nucal ( 561664 )
      From: A Question of Fairness Millionaire Indulges in Pricey Adventures -- Could It Be Better Used? [go.com]

      That's because each one of these round-the-world balloon trips, according to press reports, is estimated to have cost at least $300,000 a pop. Fossett representative Stuart Radnofsky told ABCNEWS, "We don't discuss costs."

      ...

      Charities like the Red Cross, World Vision and UNICEF declined to comment on what they thought about Fossett's spending habits -- but $300,000 could certainly do plenty to help them.

      For $300,000, UNICEF said it could immunize nearly 20,000 children for life against the top six childhood killer diseases, or provide 120,000 children with basic school supplies.

      The World Vision Web site says $30 can send a child in Uganda to school for a year, or help a family in the Dominican Republic plant 10 fruit trees. So that's 10,000 Ugandan children or Dominican families who are going without for a balloon flight.

      The Red Cross says $350 can cover the costs of providing food and shelter for 50 disaster victims for one day. So $300,000 could cover the cost of providing food and shelter for that same group for more than two years.

      ....

      "You can find people who criticize people about anything," said Radnofsky -- but some Australians think they have a case for their vitriol toward Fossett, especially after the 1998 trip that nearly killed him.

      That's because after Fossett went down, he was saved by Australian search-and-rescue teams at an estimated cost of nearly $300,000, according to AusSAR official Ben Mitchell (no relation to Jim Mitchell). And despite his considerable fortune, Fossett has never paid them back, Mitchell said.

      • -- flame on --

        For all those that talk of the wasted money: If NASA did it for research it would be a worthy scientific endeavor using US tax dollars, but If a man wants to spend his own money he is "wasting it"? I don't get it. I agree that this money could be used to feed needy children, to improve the ecology, etc ,etc. BUT the same could be said of all the tax dollars given to NASA. Why are we sending people into space when there are poor children starving all over the world?

        I bet most of you talking about wasted money are sitting in front of your computer(s) in your home with two cars out front. You could have not bought that computer and instead helped someone eat. But you didn't did you? Take a good look at all the money you've spent on pure crap and tell me it couldn't have been used to help others. Get a grip.
    • It's not like he's setting the money on fire. It's going to go *somewhere* and thus stimulate some part of the economy.
      Would you rather he sit on his ass and hoard his money?
      • Would you rather he sit on his ass and hoard his money?

        If by "hoard", you mean invest, then that money is still in the economy. When you buy a stock or a bond, you buy it from someone. That someone then either buys another stock or bond, or they spend the money.

        Even if he were to keep all his money in a big pile and roll around in it like Scrooge McDuck, he'd be taking the money out of circulation so the Federal Reserve could print the same amount of money and lend it out into the economy.
        • Where do you think the money he spends goes. I don't think his balloon runs by burning greenbacks.
        • Somehow I don't see your problem. I mean, if what you say is true (it isn't), then there is no difference whether he spends his money to do this, or hoards it. The net effect is to put the money back into the economy...

          An individual hoarding money doesn't allow the federal reserve to start printing more...

    • Who are you to tell him how to spend the money he earned? I'm sure that if he had spent half of his balloon funds on inner-city literacy campaigns or AIDS research inner-city children still wouldn't give a shit about reading and everyone that has AIDS now would still have it.

      At least he is spending HIS money to do something that nobody has ever done before and that may serve to inspire someone somewhere.

    • While some problems can be solved by funding the development of new technology, an awful lot of problems could also be solved if people would quit beating on each other.

      For example, in most cases where people are starving, the problem is less that there isn't the technology to produce enough food and more that someone else (eg. a country that's at war with them) wants them to starve. At least with Fosset's effort someone else isn't spending a lot of money trying to shoot him down.

      On the other hand, I take that view that if Bill Gates really wanted to do something useful with his money, he would promote Free Software rather than mucking about with trying to shape policy in less developed countries.

    • I'm so rich that I think I'm going to blow my money on breaking records for my personal glory rather than trying to help people

      Yeah well, when I get rich I'm going to spend a lot of the money on loose women and wild parties, and the rest I'm just going to blow.

    • Have you ever bought a car? A house? An overpriced coffee from Starbucks? You jerk, that money could have gone to help someone else! If you spent half of what you did for dinner tonight you could have fed three needy.

      What kind of value do you put on proving something can be done or chasing a dream? Often it's those actions that do more for humanity than feeding the hungry.
    • Ok this is probably going to get me flamed to hell so I'll try to be as untroll-like as possible: I think it is wrong to think ill of someone who is rich and not automatically a humanitarian.

      The key difference between democracy and socialism is that the first asks what to do with your money, the second commands you. In the democracy Money is Free as in free to do with it what ever the hell you want.

      Ok, so he didn't give it to Third World Debt relief or Cancer research. Fine, then I guess he won't be on your Christmas card list. But then I know guys who look down at you if you don't give money to their religous charities or missionary funds to convert the backwoods of some country to Religon X by telling them how ungodly they are. Just as it is their (and your) choice to give to the funds you so wish, it is anyone else's to decline.

      That is the beauty and blemish of Democracy.
      • And if "they" can tell one of the richest men in the world what to do with his money, "they" sure as hell can do it to any one of us.
    • > I'm so rich that I think I'm going to blow my money on breaking records for my personal glory rather than trying to help people in need or advancing technology to help everyone.

      "I'm a greedy l33ch! I'm so greedy that I'm not only content to spend my money on inner-city literacy and AIDS research and other things I think are important, I want to spend Steve's money too!"

      > I can't help but think that Mister Fosset could get significantly more head-rush for his money by doing something like sky-diving than building vast, record-breaking projects that have very little effect on advancing technology. Imagine for a second that, rather than attempting to circle the globe in a baloon eight or nine times, he had held back a few years, used the money to improve his balloon technology, and tried again with better technology than the same technology over and over again. [ ... ] if he had spent *half* the funds from his balloon venture on something like inner-city literacy campaigns or AIDS research, I can't help but feel like the world would be a better place

      If Steve could get "more headrush for his money" by indulging in the inexpensive sport of sky-diving, building a cheaper balloon, and funding your pet social causes with the balance of his funds, I suspect he would do so.

      Which leaves me curious - how is it that you know Steve so well that you know (even better than he knows!) how he can get more bang for his hard-earned head-rush budget? Are you, like, his psychiatrist or something? Can you get me his autograph?

    • While I understand your passion, think about this: there are 1000s of "rich bastards" wasting a ton of money on self-gratification each and every day.
      For example: consider Mark Cuban (the Broadcast.com guy). He spent millions on buying the Dallas Mavericks, and a private jet for himself. I'm sure the cost of Fossett's adventures pales in comparison to that. But at least Fossett's adventures have some scientific value (he's pushing the boundaries of endurance, or helping develop new technology to achieve his goals).

      Consider horse racing (Kentucky Derby, Preakness, Belmont). I'm sure the owners spends way more than $300K on their prized horses.

      You can probably spend days listing how the overly-rich waste^H^H^H^H^Hspend their money. But who am I to tell them what to do with it? Isn't that the point of making money: freedom to do as you please with it?

    • I've seen far worse uses of large quantities of money.

      Daikatana, for one.

      Seriously, I actually envy the guy, unlike the majority of idle wealthy who use their wealth to confirm their status, make themselves feel better than everyone else, jack up prices for land, and do far worse. Fosset is having fun, in a way that hurts no one and may benefit some. More power to him - and I say this as someone who doesn't really like the wealthy.

  • I wish (Score:3, Funny)

    by tcd004 ( 134130 ) on Wednesday July 31, 2002 @01:46PM (#3987792) Homepage
    "Mountain Waves" had something to do with mountains attending sporting events. That would be sweet.

    Read Justin Timberlake's "I banged Britney" homepage [lostbrain.com]

    tcd004
    • I picture a bunch of Thek riding the waves in on Ballybran. Nice wind, large sea, nearly immortal hunks of rock...

      Alternatly, a Brikar on Akkalla... although, I don't know if they checked out the surf there.

      (2pts to anybody who can name all references, 200 if you don't use Google).

      --
      Evan

      • How about 100 points for half of the references without using google? :)
        Thek: Anne McCaffrey (sp?) Sassinak/Death of Sleep immortal rock creatures that grow to the size of M-class planets
        Ballybran: Anne McCaffrey Crystal Singer series
        (I'm ashamed I can't remember for sure how to spell "McCaffrey"... but I haven't read any of those fine books since I learned html in 96. Waitaminute... this is slashdot; nobody can spell :P)
  • I think that this is a reasonably good demonstration of how money can't really buy you real sense of satisfaction or common sense for that matter. I'm astounded that anyone can have either that much time on their hands, money to waste or lack of a sense of self-preservation.

    Death is a Bad Thing, umkay?
    • I wonder how many people said that about the Queen of Spain when Chris asked her for money?
      • There's a slight difference between Chris and this guy. Chris was looking for a new route for Spain to get to China so they could get filthy, stinking rich. Contrary to popular belief, people didn't think the world was flat in his time.

        Something tells me that there's no immediate profit in some random rich guy blowing money for thrills.

        Unless you're betting on or against him, of course.
        • > [Columbus went around the world 'cuz he thought he could get rich by finding a way to China, not because he wanted to explore for the hell of it].
          >
          > Something tells me that there's no immediate profit in some random rich guy blowing money for thrills.

          Depends on how rich and what the thrill is.

          If I had the wealth of Bill Gates, I'd fund a Zubrinesque Mars Direct mission leading to a semi-permanent manned Martian outpost, with the condition that I be on the first flight. Out of technical necessity, I'd have to start that project by funding the development of a cheap heavy-lift vehicle.

          And if I had Bill's wealth, and I started today, I might even live long enough to set foot on Mars.

          No profit for me at all (beyond one very expensive "cheap thrill") in doing that. But there'd probably be one hell of a long-term benefit for in technological progress for the rest of the species.

          I wouldn't be doing it for the good of the species. I just wanna go to Mars. The benefit to the rest of the species is just a lucky accident.

    • I'm astounded that anyone can have either that much time on their hands, money to waste or lack of a sense of self-preservation.

      True. That rich asshole should be posting to slashdot at 3 in the morning, rather than trying to fly a fucking glider. Or, maybe he should be sitting in a bar someplace, drinking $4 glasses of booze and trying to mac on the ladies. At least then he wouldn't be wasting his life, like he is now.
  • According to:

    http://www.avpress.com/n/frsty2.hts

    One of the companies providing components for him has been indicted for fraud. Turns out they were giving the Air Force some parts that were supposed to be clean room O2 grade components, eg, no waste that could react w/ pure Oxygen.

    It seems they gave the parts an alcohol bath before delivery, then tried to fib their way out of it.

    Whoops....

    Hope his glider doesn't explode. That'd be ironic.
  • This guy reminds me of a comment I heard a long time ago, "He has more money then brains." Ever hear of collecting art or cars?
  • Some record breaking events are wonderful for the human race (first to fly across the ocean, first in space, first on the moon, breaking the sound barrier, etc...). These records open up science to a new realm that all of society will eventually benefit from.

    Ballooning across the world (quick rant: honestly, it wasn't "across the world", because he did it on a very southern part of the globe. I can go to the south pole, walk in a circle, and claim I walked around the world!)? Having the highest flying glider?

    Surely there's better things that can be done with that money...

  • Here's an idea. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Wednesday July 31, 2002 @01:47PM (#3987803)
    I bet that we could setup a laser array that could heat the air (what little of it there is) under this things wings so he would go up high enough to be unable to get back down. Then he'd stop doing this kind of pointless crap.

    I know its not doable due to basic physics. Still, a geek can dream.

  • NASA, being hesitant to waste any of their very very expensive space & upper atmosphere craft have secretly brought on a contractor to test what would happen if an aircraft made of very expensive materials lost pressure in the stratosphere and plummeted to the earth.

    The competeing schools of thought have theorized many possibilites, but there remains only one way to test it... to crash such an aircraft

    In unrelated news, NASA's experiment dropping a pressurized balloon cabin from high altitudes failed when a $5 blow-bolt froze, and would not release the heated cabin. No sources have yet come forth to find out what manner of monitoring NASA will have onboard these "crash tests"

    - Jones

  • 2-for-1? (Score:2, Informative)

    by buzzdecafe ( 583889 )
    Maybe he'll run into Rocketguy Brian Walker [rocketguy.com], and it'll be a 2-for-1 Darwin Award [darwinawards.com].
  • What else do we expect from wealthy people seeking meaning and excitement nowadays?

    Haven't all the great philanthropic quests been completed by Bill Gates?
  • And of course the marketing geniuses at Wash U [wustl.edu] keep thinking they are tailing on to something great by providing this bozo assistance for these stunts. Whereas they just make the university look bozo'ish as well.

    sPh

    • And of course the marketing geniuses at Wash U [wustl.edu] keep thinking they are tailing on to something great by providing this bozo assistance for these stunts. Whereas they just make the university look bozo'ish as well.
      You know, re-reading my post I realize that it is unfair. Having grown up in Chicago, I should have remembered that the real Bozo the Clown had both entertainment and educational value for young children. Mr. "Too Much Money" Fosset has neither.

      Bob Bell - I apologize.

      sPh

  • Real men don't wear pressure suits. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by maeka ( 518272 ) on Wednesday July 31, 2002 @01:53PM (#3987846) Journal
    I love the speculation in the last paragraphs of the Wired article "The Omarama attempt may also yield new scientific information. . . " Reminds me a great deal of the stories about John Glenn's "mission" on the space shuttle, and all the "science" they would gather from sending an older man into space.
    I think it'd be a blast to ride the glider, and if I had the money and the skill I'd try it too, but to sell one man's stratospheric ego trip as an important mission of science is just silly.
    • Reminds...John Glenn's "mission" on the space shuttle, and all the "science" they would gather from sending an older man into space....I think it'd be a blast to ride.....but to sell one man's stratospheric ego trip as an important mission of science is just silly.

      Not exactly true. If John Glenn had a heart attack, it would be the first heart attack ever monitored in space. It is the things that go *wrong* that often give the best science.

      BTW, do dentures stay in at zero G? :-)
    • Reminds me a great deal of the stories about John Glenn's "mission" on the space shuttle, and all the "science" they would gather from sending an older man into space.
      Following John Glenn's successful orbital flight, he was deemed by NASA to be a "national treasure" too valuable to risk on later flights. Sorry buddy - no moon ride for you. Which was a bit of a nasty way to repay all that training and risk. The shuttle flight was an attempt to make up for how they treated him in the 60s.

      And it actually didn't hurt to get some data on how old people react to space flight. There is nothing that says that all space travellers will forever be 30-something athletes.

      sPh

      • > And it actually didn't hurt to get some data on how old people react to space flight. There is nothing that says that all space travellers will forever be 30-something athletes.

        Oh yeah? Whaddya think NASA's dedicated to ensuring? ;-)

      • Reminds me a great deal of the stories about John Glenn's "mission" on the space shuttle, and all the "science" they would gather from sending an older man into space. Following John Glenn's successful orbital flight, he was deemed by NASA to be a "national treasure" too valuable to risk on later flights. Sorry buddy - no moon ride for you. Which was a bit of a nasty way to repay all that training and risk. The shuttle flight was an attempt to make up for how they treated him in the 60s.
        But NASA let Alan Shepard connive his way into a walk on the moon. All he did take the first manned ride into space on a U.S. rocket.

        John Glenn was hailed as great hero at the time. but I think a lot of that was the due to the great P.R. asset that was "Mr. Clean Marine."

        See/read "The Right Stuff" for the story. One thing that's in the book but subtle in the movie was that Glenn was a shoo-in to make the frist ride. Then NASA let the astronauts themselves vote. They resented "Mr. Clean" so they voted for Al.

  • Some should tell Steve Fosset (Score:3, Funny)

    by teetam ( 584150 ) on Wednesday July 31, 2002 @01:54PM (#3987855) Homepage
    Someone should tell Steve Fosset about an invention called the "aeroplane". For a fraction of the cost he is incurring now, he can fly around the world as many times as he wants. And what's more, he will get complimentary peanuts too!!!
  • Man falls from highest recorded height wearing a blue pressurized jumpsuit.
  • See kids? When you do not get enough oxygen to your brain it destroys living cells and makes it difficult to think normally. It's much cheaper to huff a can of spray paint then to float at the edge of the atmosphere.
    (Note to mods this is a joke not a troll).
  • I've figured it out:

    He's trying to commit suicide, but in a way that will get him noticed.

    The balloon attempt failed when the original charted course over hostile SAM sites was foiled by adverse winds.

    However, this time he's got some control.
    And even if -this- fails, he's got plans to take a satellite with him.
  • Check out a map of his balloon route "around the world" [yahoo.com].

    Personally, I don't think this should qualify as circumnavigating the globe. Magellan's route almost 1500 years ago [mariner.org] is a heck of a lot more impressive.

  • I think this glory-seeking, self-congratulatory stunting is really inappropriate.

    If he had a societal concience he would take the zillions of dollars he is spending on this show-boating and give back to his community, in the form of a scholarship trust fund, or a new health care clinic, etc.

    When I see this guy on the front page of the newspaper, it makes me really angry. I mean, who really cares if some rich guy goes high up into the atmosphere?
  • Why is the media so on about this millionaire and his 'adventures'? I think the real record he's going for is the highest newspaper column inches to importance ratio.

    • Re:The Real Record (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Stonehand ( 71085 )
      Because he's a rich celebrity, that's why. Rich people are, apparently, so important that some people even read or listen to commentaries on whoever provided their suits and dresses at whatever parties they attended. If you want vapid and "unimportant", go watch the Oscars / Emmys / People's Choice / other awards ceremony de-jour -- hours and hours of self-congratulations for being "entertainers".

      I reckon that more people recognize, say, the name of Robert Blake and what he's alleged to have done, versus, say, Hun Sen versus the UN on the subject of trials for the (surviving) Khmer Rouge leaders a few years ago. Hell, Torricelli seems to get far less coverage than Trafficant, while arguably the former's case is much more severe due to Torricelli's standing and influence among his peers and the Democratic Party -- it's just that Trafficant habitually plays the Village Idiot and thus provides sillier quotes.

      Celebrity attracts coverage, because vapid, superficial viewers like that sort of thing, and there are an /awful/ lot of them around.
  • I can't believe people take this stuff seriously. For those who flunked physics (apparently the entire Slashdot readership), I'll spell it out for you.

    Gliders cannot fly. Airplanes only go up because their jet engines push off the atmosphere. The wings allow them to glide to conserve fuel. In a pure glider (i.e., a plane with no engines), you can pretty much just slow down your descent, and maneuver a little bit on the way down. Trying to get a sailplane into the stratosphere is going to be about as successful as trying to throw a paper airplane into orbit.

    It's basic conservation of energy. The higher you go, the more gravitational potential energy you have. The difference has to come from somewhere, and gliding ain't it.
    • This is a troll, right? You are aware of thermal lift, jet streams, mountain waves, and other atmospheric phenomena which a good glider pilot can use to gain energy and go higher?

      sPh

    • I have flown a glider gaining altitude with out redusing speed, which in your over simplified view is imposible.

      The air you mentioned passing over his wings moves (wind) at many altitudes, sometimes up and down. The way you fly a sailplane up, is to circle in air that is rising faster than you are falling relative to the air.

      BTW the best (clear) days for glider flight, are the worst for powered flight. All that rising air generates that choppy ride that all those wimps who need engines hate.
    • Wow. Your post gave me a flashback to an old New York Times editorial [top-biography.com]. (See bottom of linked article.) The difference, in the case of a glider, can come from rising air currents. Hence, using the "mountain wave".
    • Gliders cannot fly. ... In a pure glider (i.e., a plane with no engines), you can pretty much just slow down your descent, and maneuver a little bit on the way down.
      Funny. Glider pilots (including me) just hallucinate, I suppose? They've stopped counting max endurance among glider records because in good wave conditions there is no limit to how long you can stay up.

      Simple explanation: there are vertical currents in the atmosphere, just like there are horizontal ones (we call those winds). All a glider pilot has to do is to stay out of sink, and find lift. The lift can be thermal (warm air rises), slope (wind blowing against a ridge goes up) or wave (stronger winds across long mountain ranges generate standing waves on their lee side extending upwards to many times the height of the mountain).

      How do you think the current glider altitude record of 50,000 feet was achieved?

  • Sigh. You just had to give the wave tutorial link showing the single-engine aircraft thrashing about in the nasty turbulence of a rotor cloud. Try this link [demon.co.uk] from a soaring perspective instead. Wave is the best type of lift and can only really be appreciated in a sailplane.

    An issue for Fossett will be the aircraft's stall speed increasing as his altitude increases (thin air up high). I don't know the specs on his DG505 sailplane, but I'd guess at >50K' the stall speed gets darn close to Vne (max. not to exceed true airspeed).
  • In the spirit of Marvel comics, let's hope that Mr. Fosset finally succeeds in going "up, up, and away..."
    • I'm going to nitpick...! Superman is a DC comic ;)

      I love to read about people exploring new frontiers; be they above or below sea level. More power to Mr. Fossett and let us only hope that his projects *DO* further advance high-altitude and space travel.

      I hope NASA is keeping an eye on this guy with all the sub-orbital airplane things I've hear/read about.
  • Steve Fossett is an example of what happens when rich people aren't smart enough to create their own (evil?) empire with their resources cou(GATES)gh!! but have an ego that requires them to put their name on something (e.g. record books) that will last longer than their meager existence.

    That said, it is his money. Who am I to complain?

  • Human spirit (Score:2, Interesting)

    by saphena ( 322272 )
    Reading the posts so far, I notice a lot of what I can only describe as 'sour grapes'. (see Aesop's fables)

    Most of us spend drab, dreary, lives merely trying to put food on the table and keep a roof over our heads. If we had double our income we'd go on holiday more, buy a better car, move to a nicer neighbourhood, etc.

    If we had ten times our income, we'd do pretty much the same, perhaps with a little empire building or nut squirrelling on the side.

    If we had a thousand times our income then of course we'd be made but we'd have to start finding imaginative uses for the cash.

    We could address world poverty, couldn't actually achieve very much in that area but we could make ourselves feel better by donating a couple of million each year.

    Steve Fosset is in a position nowhere near good enough to fix world poverty but plenty good enough to achieve ambitions that many of us would have if only we weren't so busy merely staying alive.

    He gives us something to look forward to, something to admire, something that will probably still be being commented on in a thousand years.

    Don't knock it, how do you know that you wouldn't do the same thing in his shoes.

  • There are many good reasons to do this (Score:3, Interesting)

    by AB3A ( 192265 ) on Wednesday July 31, 2002 @02:25PM (#3988031) Homepage Journal
    First, it's unusual to get anything to fly above Flight Level 600 (barometric altitude of 60,000 feet), powered or not.

    Second, this is as good a reason as any to develop new light weight space suits for space travel.

    Third, there is still a hell of a lot of meterology that remains unknown at those altitudes. Sailplanes have made it up to roughly Flight level 450, but they had to stop climbing because the pilots weren't equipped to go much higher. Nobody really knows how high mountain waves can take us.

    This is a better exploration for Steve Fossett than his balloon stunts. If he's successful not only will he have made new discoveries, but he may also have found a way to get humans in to orbit very inexpensively.

    When you think about all the stupid things people waste their money on, I think one can excuse Steve Fossett for actually planning and executing an aviation Nerd's fantasy trip.

  • A long time ago, the spirit of adventure pushed man to attempt the seemingly impossible. Surfing to the freakin stratosphere without an engine isn't exactly what I'd call an easy task.

    I guess all we care about these days is ROI.
    All work and...???
    • Soaring isn't really that hard, it just takes a while to get higher, and you have to know where to find lift. The 6,000 foot tow is unnecssary, but it'll make his job a bit easier ( 1000' > 6000' off a mountain is a fairly easy task )
  • Perhaps this one will do him in and the Oracle Big Brother he's developing for the government will never see the light of day.
  • Most of the comments seem to be rehashing the social consciousness / libertarian arguments. But who cares. Yes, surely, he's free to spend the money he earned (or acquired or what-have-you) and yes, surely, there are an almost infinite number of ways that the money could be better spent. I myself come down on the "pressurized-gliders-indicate-insufficient-taxatio n" side of the equation. But again, who cares?

    What I want to know is why is it news when somebody rich does something? I remember all those stupid balloon stunts by Richard Branson and his ilk. Finally somebody soloed around the world and I thought the madness would stop. But no. Now we are treated to the escapades of millionaire morons in gliders or space capsules. If they want to flush their money, let 'em. But stop giving them airtime for pointless records. Let them set new speed or new fuel efficiency records in a commercially useful aircraft, or new cargo dirigible records or something that is of use to the world. Then give them press. But these "accomplishments" don't need to be celebrated. Or even noted.

    And can somebody tell me why there's a space between the "o" and the "n" in "taxation" in the first paragraph? At least it shows up that way in the preview and I don't get it.

    --

    Ceci n'est pas un sig.

    • I was very happy when he finally made it around the world. I yelled, "We don't have to hear about this jerk again!" Then Slashdot covers his next planned attempt. He hasn't even done anything yet. Too bad kill files don't work for TV, radio, and Slashdot.

      The "taxatio n" problem is cause by an attempt to fix an annoying problem. Some people type really long phrases without spaces. These phrases can't be word wrapped on IE. Some friends of the first posters post words 500 characters long. It can make reading comments almost impossible.

    • > But again, who cares?

      Thanks. I was starting to think I'm the only person bored 5417less with the incessant media coverage of how some rich fart pisses off his money.

      I eagerly awaited the completion of his balloon trip, but only because I thought that would be the last I heard of him.

  • It never ceases to amaze me at the things the /. collective can come up with.

    Here's a guy who is risking his life doing something no one has ever done before, being busted on because he isn't sending 10,000 children in Africa to school, or because he gets all sort of publicity hyped up about his attemps.

    And yet, people on here will praise the next dork who comes along and cuts a hole in his computer's case. Oooo, maybe he's got a neon light in it. Thats really innovative, nothing like the boring, redundant attempt to fly an unpowered machine higher than virtually any human alive will ever go.

    Maybe I should repent because I burned through $300 worth of brake pads and $200 worth of gas a couple weeks ago driving my car around on a race track. Thats, God, twelve or thirteen children I could've sent to school. Shame on me.

  • Similar technology... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TheLocustNMI ( 159898 ) on Wednesday July 31, 2002 @03:22PM (#3988352) Homepage
    I fly RC aircraft, mainly small sailplanes, etc. This talk of mountain waves reminds me of dynamic soaring [wfu.edu], which is a technique birds (and sailplaners) use to increase speed -- without flapping wings.

    In fact, sailplanes can often reach 150 MPH using this technique. And thats with no propellor. Needless to say, it's fast and exciting. Also, for those of us who like it when things go "boom", a critical failure at 150 MPH is always fun :)

    big 'ol realplayer dynamic soaring video [tool42.com]

  • He should be really careful about hitting a wormhole up there. It happened to a guy named Crichton, and he got shot into a strange place with aliens.

    What? Farscape ISN'T real? Bummer...

  • Those greedy SOB's. They could help hundreds of people, but instead they wasted their time and money trying to fly. Humans aren't supposed fly, if we were we've have wings!

  • I received my license flying at Minden, Nevada... which is, I think, the home of the current altitude record. The 49,000 foot record was flown without a pressure suit but with oxygen; anything above about 13,000 feet MSL is done on oxygen.

    Flying a sailplane (glider) is one of the most intense things I've ever done. Few /. posters have any idea of the concentration required just to keep a glider aloft for longer than it would normally take to glide back to earth. It's not at all unusual to get a sailplane above 13,000 feet (which is why virtually all sailplanes come equipped with an oxygen system... unlike most powered planes).

    Glider pilots fly for the personal satisfaction of pitting their skills against gravity and nature. It's non-polluting except for the ten minutes or so it takes to get the glider to 3,000 feet above ground level, it's relatively inexpensive (my sailplane - with a 39:1 glide ratio cost me $12,000 including trailer and instrumentation).

    But an altitude record which now requires pressure suits and/or pressurized aircraft takes more money than most of us have available. This guy is truly risking his life for a project that, in my mind, is valuable if only for the fact that its challenging. The collection of data on using the atmosphere to perhaps save fuel on future airliners is even more incentive.

    So hell, I say "bravo" to anyone willing to go try it.

    PS: My other hobby is white water kayaking... and I'll be 60 years old next March.

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close