Mar 5, 2005, 1:12 PM
Post #1 of 32
(4069 views)
Shortcut
Joe Kittinger
Can't Post
found a website on Joe Kittinger and i read that he jump from 70,000 feet. I also read that he broke the sound barrier. I didn't know that this was possible. I thought that everyone had a terminal velocity. can someone explain. thanks.
Sounds pritty unlikely to me, but who knows there are all kinds of insane people out there you know!
I guess if you jumped from that high terminal would be much higher due to the thin atmosphere (less drag). But i doubt very much the sound barrier is within the realms of reality, surely that sort of speed would pull a the human body apart without any protection
(This post was edited by FFAddict on Mar 5, 2005, 1:24 PM)
There has been a more recent one than that. I saw it on a science magazine about 2 - 3 years ago. Some guy called Rodd Milner. Jumped from 130,000ft from an platform suspended from a balloon. He reached up to 800 - 900mph or so. HE was the first person to break the sound barrier without the use of a jet engine. The speed of sound decreases with height as air particles become more sparse. Plus, the temperature can also effect the speed of sound. About 363mps in air at 30C. The colder the air, the slower the speed of sound, as the particles lose energy and struggle to vibrate. So the speed of sound on the surface of the earth is much faster than it is the higher you go, therefore easier to break .
(This post was edited by Smeger on Mar 5, 2005, 1:46 PM)
Never heard of that one....when was that???....I know some guy was planning to beat Kitting record recently, but never heard he did it.....had problems getting to altitude.....Kittinger definitly went over 600 mph.....
Another guy, Nick Piatenada (I think) did try in the 60's to beat Kittingers record, but died when his pressure suit failed at 80 grand on his way to altitude........
Incredibly difficult, dangerous and expensive to do.......
I'd be surprised if anyones beaten Kittinger yet...
I apologies, the article I remember reading involved the preparation, not the actual jump . I never bothered to find out whether he did it or not, not heard or seen anything post that article, so I have know idea whether he did it or not. Probably not! "yes, I'm now officially the wanker of the week lol."
There has been a more recent one than that. I saw it on a science magazine about 2 - 3 years ago. Some guy called Rodd Milner. Jumped from 130,000ft from an platform suspended from a balloon. He reached up to 800 - 900mph or so. HE was the first person to break the sound barrier without the use of a jet engine.
IIRC Joseph Kittinger still holds the record at 102,800ft set in 1960 as part of Project Excelsior. There has been plenty debate about the freefall vs droguefall aspect but no-one has even come close regardless. There have been a few attempts in recent years but none seem to have got off the ground (pun intended), including Cheryl Stearns, Rodd Milner and "Tom Read" (Nish). Mostly lack of funding I guess.
IIRC Joseph Kittinger still holds the record at 102,800ft set in 1960 as part of Project Excelsior. There has been plenty debate about the freefall vs droguefall aspect but no-one has even come close regardless.
Quote:
Actually...
There was a Russian that DID beat that record. If memory serves he went to 121,000 without a drogue chute.
It was shortly after Kittinger made his jump, and went higher without the drogue to test not only the 'Space Suit' but the feasibility of high altitude bailout survivability.
Not many Russian 'records' were filed back then and the jumper wasn't around after the cold war ended...
I believe the story as it was Col. Kittinger that told it!
There was a Russian that DID beat that record. If memory serves he went to 121,000 without a drogue chute.
That figure might be incorrect. From Guinness World Records book: "Eugene Andreev (USSR) hold the official FAI record for the longest free-fall parachute jump after falling for 80,380 ft (24,500 m) from an altitude of 83,523 ft (24,458 m) near the city of Saratov, Russsia on November 1, 1962".
So, he jumped from 80,380 ft (24,500 m) without a drogue and opened at 3,143 ft (958 m).
Kittinger's record (in terms of exit altitude) still stands... unless the jumper you are talking abot did not file for the record.
(This post was edited by skydiverek on Mar 5, 2005, 2:54 PM)
There was a Russian that DID beat that record. If memory serves he went to 121,000 without a drogue chute.
That figure might be incorrect. From Guinness World Records book: "Eugene Andreev (USSR) hold the official FAI record for the longest free-fall parachute jump after falling for 80,380 ft (24,500 m) from an altitude of 83,523 ft (24,458 m) near the city of Saratov, Russsia on November 1, 1962".
So, he jumped from 80,380 ft (24,500 m) without a drogue and opened at 3,143 ft (958 m).
Kittinger's record (in terms of exit altitude) still stands... unless the jumper you are talking abot did not file for the record.
As he said it was Kittinger that said his record was broken so I would guess that it is true. He also mentioned that they didn't file many records then.
I also read that he broke the sound barrier. I didn't know that this was possible. I thought that everyone had a terminal velocity. can someone explain. thanks.
I researched this a while back...here is what I found. Hope this helps...
As he said it was Kittinger that said his record was broken so I would guess that it is true. He also mentioned that they didn't file many records then.
Quote:
My figures could be wrong... It was about 8-10 years ago I was talking with Col. K. But he did say it was a Russian and not he that went highest.
Cool guy...acted like it was no big deal people jump from that high everyday!
One thing I DO remember from our conversation was him telling about how when he first jumped...He thought for a moment he'd gone TO HIGH and wasn't falling away..but 'drifting' along side the gondola.
The speed of sound decreases with height as air particles become more sparse. Plus, the temperature can also effect the speed of sound. About 363mps in air at 30C. The colder the air, the slower the speed of sound, as the particles lose energy and struggle to vibrate. So the speed of sound on the surface of the earth is much faster than it is the higher you go, therefore easier to break .
The "sparse"ness of the particles (molecules) really has nothing to do with it. Temperature is the only relevant variable.
a = sqrt(gamma*R*T) where a = speed of sound, gamma = ratio of specific heats (Cp/Cv), R = gas constant, T = temperature (absolute).
It does dude. Thats why sound travels faster and longer though solids and liquids than it does through air. This is because the particles are tighter together . The higher in the atmosphere you go, the less affect gravity has on air molecules so they become more widespread, thats why there is less air up there. As the air is thinner up there, it causes less drag, as well as sound traveling slower.
(This post was edited by Smeger on Mar 5, 2005, 4:46 PM)
It does dude. Thats why sound travels faster and longer though solids and liquids than it does through air. This is because the particles are tighter together . The higher in the atmosphere you go, the less affect gravity has on air molecules so they become more widespread, thats why theres less air up there.
Penniless is right - in a gas, Mach is a strict function of temperature (it varies by the square root of Tabs).
IIRC, the relation for incompressible media is M=sqr(k/rho) where M = speed of sound, k = compressiblilty and rho = density. In water the speed of sound is something like 30 times that in air.
ok, ok. I undersatnd that the speed of sound in a gas is not affected by pressure. Instead, the speed of sound is strongly affected by the absolute tempreture and the molecular weight of the gas. So we would expect the speed of sound in a light gas, such as helium, to be faster than that of a heavy gas, such as carbon dioxide, and air to be somewhere in between. As long as the weight of the gas remains constant that is.
Sound must have a material through which to travel. Prove this by placing an alarm clock inside a bell jar or a large jar. Set the alarm clock to ring. As it rings, slowly pull the air from the jar using a vacuum pump. Observe what happens to the sound as the air is sucked out.
Sound is a physical wave that requires a medium to travel through. There is no sound in space.
The speed of sound at sea level is often used as a reference point. Kittinger exceeded that speed. He could do this because their was no air friction at 102,000 ft. He later slowed down once the air increased in density at lower altitudes.
Many skydivers have jumped at heights greater than 18K (myself included). They fall faster at the higher altitudes because of the decreased air friction.
on August 16, 1960, from 102,800 feet, the highest altitude from which man has jumped. In freefall for 4.5 minutes at speeds up to 714 mph and temperatures as low as -94 degrees Fahrenheit, Kittinger opened his parachute at 18,000 feet.
Kittinger was a test pilot for the Air Force. He also volunteered for 3 tours in VN, was shot down, and was a POW.
In 1984, he did a solo crossing of the Atlantic and set a record for the longest solo balloon flight as well as a distance record for this class of balloon.
There is a ton of stuff on the internet about him. It is worth reading. He did some amazing things.
The "sparse"ness of the particles (molecules) really has nothing to do with it.
you're wrong. the density of molecules has everything to do with this topic. air is the medium for the propagation of the sound waves in question so, the density of the air is paramount to finding the speed of sound at any given altitude.
as a side note, i'm no physicist but, specific heats are descriptors of a given material. you have the ratio of specific heat at a certain pressure over the specific heat at that certain volume...is that equation that you dug up to be used for the change in the speed of sound when sound waves travel through a boundry in different materials or what? not to mention that if you do a unit analysis here, you won't end up with a velocity as is required for any speed. i.e., the specific heat units cancel and what you're left with is the gas constant multiplied by a temperature which gives you energy/moles, not distance/time. please explain.
where m = the mass of the gas (in kg) M = the molecular mass of the gas (in kg mole-1) R = the gas constant (8.31 J K-1 mole -1) and T = the absolute tempreture in K.
The you can determine the strength of the air spring (the bonding between each molecule). Given by:
E(gas) = yp
Where P = the pressure of the gas (in N m-2) V = the volume of the gas (in m3) and y = is a constnat whcih depends on the gas (1.4 for air).
The speed of sound in the air can then be calculated though the apparent gas by
V(gas) = square root of E(gas)/P(gas) = square root of yp/(PM/RT) = suare root of yRT/M
The "sparse"ness of the particles (molecules) really has nothing to do with it.
you're wrong. the density of molecules has everything to do with this topic. air is the medium for the propagation of the sound waves in question so, the density of the air is paramount to finding the speed of sound at any given altitude.
as a side note, i'm no physicist but
.
I am a physicist. You are wrong. I doubt you'll believe me so here it is from NASA...
bitter? I think it's just frustrating for a man with some serious education and authority in his field to have people on some internet forum srguing physics with him... I personally think it's funny, bu then, I'm not in his position :P
I met Joe Kittinger in June 1998 in Dallas / Ft. Worth Texas where he gave a lecture on his jump, and had movies, photos of it. real cool guy, he even signed my jump log book for me..
. 
. I never bothered to find out whether he did it or not, not heard or seen anything post that article, so I have know idea whether he did it or not. Probably not! 
. The higher in the atmosphere you go, the less affect gravity has on air molecules so they become more widespread, thats why there is less air up there. As the air is thinner up there, it causes less drag, as well as sound traveling slower. 
that is. 
. 
1
