Red Bull Stratos: A Mission to the Edge of Space. 08th Oct

Red Bull Stratos: A Mission to the Edge of Space. 08th Oct

Author
Discussion

Switch

3,455 posts

175 months

Sunday 14th October 2012
quotequote all
onyx39 said:
Oh dear... Red Bull are (quite rightly going to get a lot of advertising from this) they need to proof read though...

Tut tut... but I'll let it pass. Epic effort wink

AnotherClarkey

3,596 posts

189 months

Sunday 14th October 2012
quotequote all
mrmr96 said:
Mach 1.24 unofficially achieved. (From live press conference)
Absolutely amazing. I wonder what it felt like (if it felt like anything at all)? Makes you wonder what a high altitude emergency bail-out from a spacecraft might be like.

hornet

6,333 posts

250 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
Had no idea Joe Kittinger was so heavily involved in the project. Brings a new meaning to "getting high with your friends"!

Eric Mc

122,032 posts

265 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
AnotherClarkey said:
mrmr96 said:
Mach 1.24 unofficially achieved. (From live press conference)
Absolutely amazing. I wonder what it felt like (if it felt like anything at all)? Makes you wonder what a high altitude emergency bail-out from a spacecraft might be like.
Would be a VERY different proposition. The atmospheric entry speed would be in the order of 17,500 mph for a start (not Zero as it was for Baumgartner).

Protection from the heat would be the main problem. A couple of years ago, I spoke to a representative of an Italian company that was developing a personal "re-entry bag" to allow escape from a crashing re-entering spaceship. It was essentially a cloth, zip-up sphere, which was impregnated with ceramic fibres to prevent it from buring up.

The problem with bailing out of a spcecraft is that the spacecraft has to have initiated re-entry first before the astronauts can jump out to make their own separate re-entry. If the spacecraft is in orbit and somebody "bails out" - all they do is continue in orbit floating alongside the spacecraft. They may re-enter naturally - but that could take weeks - and by then they would have long run out of air.

mrmr96

13,736 posts

204 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
AnotherClarkey said:
mrmr96 said:
Mach 1.24 unofficially achieved. (From live press conference)
Absolutely amazing. I wonder what it felt like (if it felt like anything at all)? Makes you wonder what a high altitude emergency bail-out from a spacecraft might be like.
Would be a VERY different proposition. The atmospheric entry speed would be in the order of 17,500 mph for a start (not Zero as it was for Baumgartner).

Protection from the heat would be the main problem. A couple of years ago, I spoke to a representative of an Italian company that was developing a personal "re-entry bag" to allow escape from a crashing re-entering spaceship. It was essentially a cloth, zip-up sphere, which was impregnated with ceramic fibres to prevent it from buring up.

The problem with bailing out of a spcecraft is that the spacecraft has to have initiated re-entry first before the astronauts can jump out to make their own separate re-entry. If the spacecraft is in orbit and somebody "bails out" - all they do is continue in orbit floating alongside the spacecraft. They may re-enter naturally - but that could take weeks - and by then they would have long run out of air.
Eric, what if the person bailing out had their own propulsion system? That would presumably enable a bail out from an orbiting craft to be transitioned to a re-entry trajectory?

Eric Mc

122,032 posts

265 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
They would need to have some sort of rocket (and the related fuel system) to enable them to slow enough to start re-entry. The space shuttle knocked off about 200 mph from its orbital velocity of 17,500 mph - which allowed its trajectory to change and for the shuttle to intercept the upper layers of the atmosphere - which then initiated rentry. However, the gap between firing the rockets and re-entry begining was about 30 to 45 minutes.
A human would need to slow down a bit more rapidly as their air supply would probably not be able to last that long - unless thay had the equivalent of an EVA backpack in each re-entry sphere.

I'm sure it's not an insurmountable problem - but a lot of work would need to go into such devices before they become viable - if ever.

stuartmmcfc

8,662 posts

192 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
missed it last night but i watched it this morning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MT1DhcQg0Os

stuartmmcfc

8,662 posts

192 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
missed it last night but i watched it this morning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MT1DhcQg0Os

AnotherClarkey

3,596 posts

189 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Would be a VERY different proposition. The atmospheric entry speed would be in the order of 17,500 mph for a start (not Zero as it was for Baumgartner).

Protection from the heat would be the main problem. A couple of years ago, I spoke to a representative of an Italian company that was developing a personal "re-entry bag" to allow escape from a crashing re-entering spaceship. It was essentially a cloth, zip-up sphere, which was impregnated with ceramic fibres to prevent it from buring up.

The problem with bailing out of a spcecraft is that the spacecraft has to have initiated re-entry first before the astronauts can jump out to make their own separate re-entry. If the spacecraft is in orbit and somebody "bails out" - all they do is continue in orbit floating alongside the spacecraft. They may re-enter naturally - but that could take weeks - and by then they would have long run out of air.
Certainly a re-entry bailout would be a complex proposition but what about during ascent? I wonder whether this jump has added or taken away credibility from the pole they fitted to Shuttles after Challenger that was meant to poke out through the hatch and facilitate the crew getting out at high speed?

Regiment

2,799 posts

159 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
AnotherClarkey said:
Certainly a re-entry bailout would be a complex proposition but what about during ascent? I wonder whether this jump has added or taken away credibility from the pole they fitted to Shuttles after Challenger that was meant to poke out through the hatch and facilitate the crew getting out at high speed?
Why would it have taken away, the only problem would have been the process of getting unstrapped, opening the door and jumping, the descent shouldn't have been a problem as they'll be in pressurised space suits during launch?

Eric Mc

122,032 posts

265 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
AnotherClarkey said:
Eric Mc said:
Would be a VERY different proposition. The atmospheric entry speed would be in the order of 17,500 mph for a start (not Zero as it was for Baumgartner).

Protection from the heat would be the main problem. A couple of years ago, I spoke to a representative of an Italian company that was developing a personal "re-entry bag" to allow escape from a crashing re-entering spaceship. It was essentially a cloth, zip-up sphere, which was impregnated with ceramic fibres to prevent it from buring up.

The problem with bailing out of a spcecraft is that the spacecraft has to have initiated re-entry first before the astronauts can jump out to make their own separate re-entry. If the spacecraft is in orbit and somebody "bails out" - all they do is continue in orbit floating alongside the spacecraft. They may re-enter naturally - but that could take weeks - and by then they would have long run out of air.
Certainly a re-entry bailout would be a complex proposition but what about during ascent? I wonder whether this jump has added or taken away credibility from the pole they fitted to Shuttles after Challenger that was meant to poke out through the hatch and facilitate the crew getting out at high speed?
The pole escape system could not be used during ascent and it could not be used during descent until the speed had dropped to about 300 mph or so. In other words, its only "window of use" was in the last ten minutes before landing.

There was no escape at all from a Shuttle during ascent.

AnotherClarkey

3,596 posts

189 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
The pole escape system could not be used during ascent and it could not be used during descent until the speed had dropped to about 300 mph or so. In other words, its only "window of use" was in the last ten minutes before landing.

There was no escape at all from a Shuttle during ascent.
Yes, I had just scuttled away and read up on it. Seemed a lot of trouble to go to for something that could only be used from controlled flight at low altitude and speed.

MartG

20,679 posts

204 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
They would need to have some sort of rocket (and the related fuel system) to enable them to slow enough to start re-entry. The space shuttle knocked off about 200 mph from its orbital velocity of 17,500 mph - which allowed its trajectory to change and for the shuttle to intercept the upper layers of the atmosphere - which then initiated rentry. However, the gap between firing the rockets and re-entry begining was about 30 to 45 minutes.
A human would need to slow down a bit more rapidly as their air supply would probably not be able to last that long - unless thay had the equivalent of an EVA backpack in each re-entry sphere.

I'm sure it's not an insurmountable problem - but a lot of work would need to go into such devices before they become viable - if ever.
A small solid rocket motor would probably do the job, though you'd also need an attitude control system to make sure you were pointing the right way when it fired. You'd also need to make sure whatever propulsion system was used gave the correct delta V to avoid either skipping off the atmosphere or coming in too steep and burning up/suffering excessive deceleration g forces


Eric Mc

122,032 posts

265 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
I all gets a bit complicated. I suppose the sphere could be ballasted (like a Vostok capsule) so that it automatically orients itself to the right atitude.

dr_gn

16,166 posts

184 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
MartG said:
Eric Mc said:
They would need to have some sort of rocket (and the related fuel system) to enable them to slow enough to start re-entry. The space shuttle knocked off about 200 mph from its orbital velocity of 17,500 mph - which allowed its trajectory to change and for the shuttle to intercept the upper layers of the atmosphere - which then initiated rentry. However, the gap between firing the rockets and re-entry begining was about 30 to 45 minutes.
A human would need to slow down a bit more rapidly as their air supply would probably not be able to last that long - unless thay had the equivalent of an EVA backpack in each re-entry sphere.

I'm sure it's not an insurmountable problem - but a lot of work would need to go into such devices before they become viable - if ever.
A small solid rocket motor would probably do the job, though you'd also need an attitude control system to make sure you were pointing the right way when it fired. You'd also need to make sure whatever propulsion system was used gave the correct delta V to avoid either skipping off the atmosphere or coming in too steep and burning up/suffering excessive deceleration g forces
You're effectively talking about making another spacecraft, and with every added layer of complexity you introduce more potential failures within the escape system itself. Far better to concentrate resources on making the main spacecraft less likely to fail in the first place.

Eric Mc

122,032 posts

265 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
Which is more or less what was decided on in the end. Powerful ejector seats were fitted for the first three Shuttle missions but even they only offered a very limited amount of added safety. They couldn't really be used during ascent. If they were fired at low altitude, the astronauts would have entered the SRB plumes and killed. If they ejected after the SRBs were spent, they were two high for use.

I well remember the call "Columbia, you are negative seats".

Tony2or4

1,283 posts

165 months

Monday 15th October 2012
quotequote all
Does anyone know what has (or is expected to) become of Felix's capsule? It's a hefty bit of kit to just be allowed to plummet to earth once the balloon has leaked out its helium.yikes

crmcatee

5,694 posts

227 months

Tuesday 16th October 2012
quotequote all
It's came to earth under it's own parachute which they sorted out once he had left the capsule.

I hope so anyway; because some nice shiny BBC cameras were onboard.

MartG

20,679 posts

204 months

Tuesday 16th October 2012
quotequote all
There was some coverage shown of it descending under its own parachute, but I've not seen anything about its landing. Would have been ironic if it had landed on his head :-)

With these feet

5,728 posts

215 months

Tuesday 16th October 2012
quotequote all
Thats the reason for him not getting the record for highest balloon flight as he didnt bring it down with him.