Forums: Skydiving: Skydiving History & Trivia:
DB Cooper

 

First page Previous page 1 ... 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 ... 2184 Next page Last page  View All

georger

Oct 15, 2012, 1:20 AM
Post #36851 of 54582 (30438 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RobertMBlevins] Maths And Stuff [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
From Juan Carlos Riorca's article for the Associated Press:

Quote:
'ROSWELL — Officials say that Felix Baumgartner has become the first skydiver to break the speed of sound.

At a news conference, Brian Utley of the International Federation of Sports Aviation said Baumgartner reached a maximum speed of 833.9 mph during his jump Sunday over the New Mexico desert.

That amounts to Mach 1.24, which is faster than the speed of sound. No one has ever reached that speed wearing only a high-tech suit...'

If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere..."

Marilyn Monroe

Alleged news conference. Probably never happened.
You have provided no proof. Without proof its just
your word. Got a link?

PirateSlyLaugh


(This post was edited by georger on Oct 15, 2012, 1:22 AM)


RobertMBlevins

Oct 15, 2012, 6:46 AM
Post #36852 of 54582 (30414 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MeyerLouie] Weber Review [In reply to] Can't Post

MeyerLouie says in part:

Quote:
'Blevins, I think Jo has pretty much shot down all of your arguments against her theory and premises. When I look at your KC=DBC theory, I have to ask, "where's the beef?" What proof have you offered? Zip. Don't think you have any room to criticize anybody else's lack of proof. That's pretty arrogant, Grand Miestro Peepee. Go practice your guitar now...'

Already did my practicing for the day...yesterday.

Most of those 'arguments' you cite don't address the issues I raised, but either play word games with them or somehow try to compare them to Christiansen.

There is a difference between offering evidence and actual proof of a crime. I think regarding the former we did quite well. There is a lot of evidence and witness testimony out there against Christiansen. Some of it has to do with Bernie Geestman's lies at key moments. Comparing the case between KC and Weber is actually pretty simple.

The only real evidence, if any, against Weber is the word of one woman. When I said 'physical evidence' I didn't mean fingerprints or DNA. I meant for example, a missing airline ticket stub, which cannot be produced. In the case of Weber, there ARE no witnesses. Just Jo. Even Gossett, if you believe his son(s) has a better case, since there is their testimony about certain quotes and incidents.

There are things which have been proven in the case of Christiansen. For example, we can prove he lent the alleged accomplice's sister five thousand in cash less than six months after the hijacking. We can prove he spent 16k in cash on a house less than eight months after the hijacking. And we can prove that Bernie Geestman, despite his denials, was involved in both these transactions. We can also prove that KC and Bernie were together, and missing, over the week of the hijacking. We can prove Kenny had parachute experience, although he hadn't jumped in some years. We can prove that without any visible means of how he acquired it, that Kenny died with a much larger estate than someone in his position could be expected to have. We can prove that Geestman told lies that directly relate to an effort to distance himself from any possible involvement in the hijacking. For example, when he said he couldn't have been involved because he was gone to sea with Foss Tugs ten to eleven months of the year in 1971. Foss says that is not true. Or when he said he didn't know the details on how his own sister got the loan from Kenny...but it was HE who delivered the money. Or when he said he didn't know how Kenny got his house for cash...when Kenny bought it from a couple where Bernie served as their Best Man at their wedding only three years previously.

None of that is proof Christiansen hijacked Flight 305, of course. But it IS evidence. And there is a lot more of that in KC's case than anything you'll find regarding Weber...Smile

My official stand on all of this is also very simple. I think we've presented enough evidence that the Seattle FBI should question the witnesses. This means Helen Jones, her daughter, Bernie Geestman, and Margaret Ann Miller-Geestman. Does anyone here have a problem with that? If so, I would like to know why.

I've started receiving responses from the Decoded cast on my question to them. I asked them to expand on the Geestman interview. Now, you should understand that at the time of filming, they did not know about Helen Jones' testimony, and AB had not yet discovered the tax document showing that KC bought his house from that couple in Puyallup that Geestman knew. Also...Decoded had to go on what evidence Porteous and I had at that time, plus the ORIGINAL edition of the book, which had actually been pulled by the time of filming. That said, here is what one of the cast members said this week. (I'm not revealing their name to you because frankly, I don't trust some of you)

Quote:
'Geestman was very cagey, even shifty during the interview. My personal suspicion was that he was actually drunk. But in the end he was pretty convincing--probably having spent years answering questions and even convincing himself that what he was saying was the truth. I have very little doubt that Kenny is guilty, and I went away from the interview with Geestman confused and uncertain about his involvement as an accomplice.

You have to remember that we were given very little time to process the interview and think about all he had said--they filmed us coming out the door, and those were our initial, on the spot responses. Then we filmed about an hour later in the diner and still, not much processing time and we'd been running around filming for weeks, months even.

Having had more time to think about it it would not surprise me in the least if Geestman was an accomplice, or at the very least knew about it and aided Kenny in some ways before or after...'

After I received this message, I updated this cast member with some of the additional evidence we had gathered since filming. This filming would be two years ago this month.


(This post was edited by RobertMBlevins on Oct 15, 2012, 7:03 AM)


georger

Oct 15, 2012, 12:45 PM
Post #36853 of 54582 (30377 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RobertMBlevins] Weber Review [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
MeyerLouie says in part:

Quote:
'Blevins, I think Jo has pretty much shot down all of your arguments against her theory and premises. When I look at your KC=DBC theory, I have to ask, "where's the beef?" What proof have you offered? Zip. Don't think you have any room to criticize anybody else's lack of proof. That's pretty arrogant, Grand Miestro Peepee. Go practice your guitar now...'

Already did my practicing for the day...yesterday.

Most of those 'arguments' you cite don't address the issues I raised, but either play word games with them or somehow try to compare them to Christiansen.

There is a difference between offering evidence and actual proof of a crime. I think regarding the former we did quite well. There is a lot of evidence and witness testimony out there against Christiansen. Some of it has to do with Bernie Geestman's lies at key moments. Comparing the case between KC and Weber is actually pretty simple.

The only real evidence, if any, against Weber is the word of one woman. When I said 'physical evidence' I didn't mean fingerprints or DNA. I meant for example, a missing airline ticket stub, which cannot be produced. In the case of Weber, there ARE no witnesses. Just Jo. Even Gossett, if you believe his son(s) has a better case, since there is their testimony about certain quotes and incidents.

There are things which have been proven in the case of Christiansen. For example, we can prove he lent the alleged accomplice's sister five thousand in cash less than six months after the hijacking. We can prove he spent 16k in cash on a house less than eight months after the hijacking. And we can prove that Bernie Geestman, despite his denials, was involved in both these transactions. We can also prove that KC and Bernie were together, and missing, over the week of the hijacking. We can prove Kenny had parachute experience, although he hadn't jumped in some years. We can prove that without any visible means of how he acquired it, that Kenny died with a much larger estate than someone in his position could be expected to have. We can prove that Geestman told lies that directly relate to an effort to distance himself from any possible involvement in the hijacking. For example, when he said he couldn't have been involved because he was gone to sea with Foss Tugs ten to eleven months of the year in 1971. Foss says that is not true. Or when he said he didn't know the details on how his own sister got the loan from Kenny...but it was HE who delivered the money. Or when he said he didn't know how Kenny got his house for cash...when Kenny bought it from a couple where Bernie served as their Best Man at their wedding only three years previously.

None of that is proof Christiansen hijacked Flight 305, of course. But it IS evidence. And there is a lot more of that in KC's case than anything you'll find regarding Weber...Smile

My official stand on all of this is also very simple. I think we've presented enough evidence that the Seattle FBI should question the witnesses. This means Helen Jones, her daughter, Bernie Geestman, and Margaret Ann Miller-Geestman. Does anyone here have a problem with that? If so, I would like to know why.

I've started receiving responses from the Decoded cast on my question to them. I asked them to expand on the Geestman interview. Now, you should understand that at the time of filming, they did not know about Helen Jones' testimony, and AB had not yet discovered the tax document showing that KC bought his house from that couple in Puyallup that Geestman knew. Also...Decoded had to go on what evidence Porteous and I had at that time, plus the ORIGINAL edition of the book, which had actually been pulled by the time of filming. That said, here is what one of the cast members said this week. (I'm not revealing their name to you because frankly, I don't trust some of you)

Quote:
'Geestman was very cagey, even shifty during the interview. My personal suspicion was that he was actually drunk. But in the end he was pretty convincing--probably having spent years answering questions and even convincing himself that what he was saying was the truth. I have very little doubt that Kenny is guilty, and I went away from the interview with Geestman confused and uncertain about his involvement as an accomplice.

You have to remember that we were given very little time to process the interview and think about all he had said--they filmed us coming out the door, and those were our initial, on the spot responses. Then we filmed about an hour later in the diner and still, not much processing time and we'd been running around filming for weeks, months even.

Having had more time to think about it it would not surprise me in the least if Geestman was an accomplice, or at the very least knew about it and aided Kenny in some ways before or after...'

After I received this message, I updated this cast member with some of the additional evidence we had gathered since filming. This filming would be two years ago this month.

Repetitive casting of the same script, expecting
different results, implies ......

One possibility is: ADD.

Example: my post here! (talking at a machine)

Crazy


(This post was edited by georger on Oct 15, 2012, 12:48 PM)




377  (F 666)

Oct 15, 2012, 1:19 PM
Post #36855 of 54582 (30366 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Farflung] Tweet: Ask Mr. Science! [In reply to] Can't Post

Farflung wrote:
In reply to:
Couldn’t agree more smokin99; having some caffeine and taurine (read: speed) laced soft drink, pimp slap NASA is astonishing. Being able to watch an aerospace record being broken, live, in my boxer shorts, only adds to the irony of how far the pendulum must swing in the other direction. Like twitter, Lisa Nowak and the DBC thread.

Gotta love Red Bull. Space X too. Private bucks, huge risks, huge accomplishments.

Felix is da man. I hope this widely viewed event will drive newbies to the DZs, just like the movie Point Break did.

Jumped on Saturday. There was a friggin McLaren!!! parked in the DZ lot. You just don't see those kinds of rides at DZs. I think they cost over $300,000. Rumor was that some Facebook guy was there for a tandem.

I hope someone gets to interview Sheridan Peterson soon. He probably won't be alive much longer due to his age and progressing cancer. I have no proof that he is DBC and if he were he'd be unlikely to confess it. I'd just like to hear what he has to say about Norjack and jumping in 1971. Who knew back then that a 727 could be jumped? I still think Cooper knew that it could. The pilots and flight engineer didn't know, neither did NWA ops. They had to contact Boeing. The 727 mfr confirmed that safe flight with the stairs deployed was possible, having been proven in earlier flight tests.

377


(This post was edited by 377 on Oct 15, 2012, 1:19 PM)


377  (F 666)

Oct 15, 2012, 1:26 PM
Post #36856 of 54582 (30361 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Weber Review [In reply to] Can't Post

Jo wrote
Quote:
What would you do or say if we are able to DOCUMENT Duane's familiarity of chutes and the NW by picture and/or film?

Familairity with the NW doesnt prove anything, but if you can prove that Duane had parachuting knowledge and experience then you will find a brand new attitude in yours truly.

Gievn Duane's bungling criminal career (more than two dozen arrests) I cant imagine that he could plan and execute the crime of the century and remain unidentified and free.

377




377  (F 666)

Oct 15, 2012, 1:51 PM
Post #36858 of 54582 (30353 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Tweet: Ask Mr. Science! [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Well, Weber had contacts with Boeing (more than one) and he was familiar with CHUTES. We have it from a very good source regarding an enquiry I made in the thread.

Remember my asking about airshow in CA and jumping exhibits in CA in the 30's. Well, low and BEHOLD Derry did participate in such and around the time Weber was there as a 10 yr old. Duane's brother who was 22 at that time went into the service and was VERY familiar with Boeing (so familiar he was a consultant for Boeing with the Army).

All I am going to say right now!

Of course, the tease, the promise, the eternal wait for fulfillment=Jo's very predictable MO.

Let us know when you have proof Jo... and it better be more substantive than a ten year old kid seeing something at an airshow and an older sibling who had a Boeing connection. BTW, Boeing's US Army connection was helicopters not fixed wing jet aircraft. The Air National Guard operated C 22s (Boeing 727-100 types) but ANG is Air Force, not Army.

Turning Duane from a zero to hero is a nearly impossible task even for someone as determined as you.
Duane is just a patheticly underqualified candidate. Still, I do admire your determination and think you are sincere in your beliefs.

377


Amazon  (D License)

Oct 15, 2012, 2:46 PM
Post #36859 of 54582 (30346 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] Tweet: Ask Mr. Science! [In reply to] Can't Post

Kitty Corliss can do it


Robert99

Oct 15, 2012, 3:49 PM
Post #36860 of 54582 (30711 views)
Shortcut
Re: [377] Tweet: Ask Mr. Science! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Well, Weber had contacts with Boeing (more than one) and he was familiar with CHUTES. We have it from a very good source regarding an enquiry I made in the thread.

Remember my asking about airshow in CA and jumping exhibits in CA in the 30's. Well, low and BEHOLD Derry did participate in such and around the time Weber was there as a 10 yr old. Duane's brother who was 22 at that time went into the service and was VERY familiar with Boeing (so familiar he was a consultant for Boeing with the Army).

All I am going to say right now!

Of course, the tease, the promise, the eternal wait for fulfillment=Jo's very predictable MO.

Let us know when you have proof Jo... and it better be more substantive than a ten year old kid seeing something at an airshow and an older sibling who had a Boeing connection. BTW, Boeing's US Army connection was helicopters not fixed wing jet aircraft. The Air National Guard operated C 22s (Boeing 727-100 types) but ANG is Air Force, not Army.

Turning Duane from a zero to hero is a nearly impossible task even for someone as determined as you.
Duane is just a patheticly underqualified candidate. Still, I do admire your determination and think you are sincere in your beliefs.

377

Jo, What do you mean by Duane's older brother being in the Army and at the same time being a "consultant" for Boeing with the Army (presumably you are referring to the WW2 era Army Air Corps). This brother could not be working for both of them at the same time.

It was more than 26 years from the end of WW2 until the hijacking. The WW2 era Boeing aircraft had nothing to do with the 727s. And the fact that the 727 rear stairs could be lowered in flight was probably a very closely held piece of information since that capability was developed and used by the CIA.

Robert99


Robert99

Oct 15, 2012, 3:54 PM
Post #36861 of 54582 (30706 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Amazon] Tweet: Ask Mr. Science! [In reply to] Can't Post


Excellent. And I'll bet Kitty landed on all four feet.

Robert99




MeyerLouie

Oct 15, 2012, 5:56 PM
Post #36863 of 54582 (30674 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RobertMBlevins] Weber Review [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
MeyerLouie says in part:

Quote:
'Blevins, I think Jo has pretty much shot down all of your arguments against her theory and premises. When I look at your KC=DBC theory, I have to ask, "where's the beef?" What proof have you offered? Zip. Don't think you have any room to criticize anybody else's lack of proof. That's pretty arrogant, Grand Miestro Peepee. Go practice your guitar now...'

Already did my practicing for the day...yesterday.

Most of those 'arguments' you cite don't address the issues I raised, but either play word games with them or somehow try to compare them to Christiansen.

There is a difference between offering evidence and actual proof of a crime. I think regarding the former we did quite well. There is a lot of evidence and witness testimony out there against Christiansen. Some of it has to do with Bernie Geestman's lies at key moments. Comparing the case between KC and Weber is actually pretty simple.

The only real evidence, if any, against Weber is the word of one woman. When I said 'physical evidence' I didn't mean fingerprints or DNA. I meant for example, a missing airline ticket stub, which cannot be produced. In the case of Weber, there ARE no witnesses. Just Jo. Even Gossett, if you believe his son(s) has a better case, since there is their testimony about certain quotes and incidents.

There are things which have been proven in the case of Christiansen. For example, we can prove he lent the alleged accomplice's sister five thousand in cash less than six months after the hijacking. We can prove he spent 16k in cash on a house less than eight months after the hijacking. And we can prove that Bernie Geestman, despite his denials, was involved in both these transactions. We can also prove that KC and Bernie were together, and missing, over the week of the hijacking. We can prove Kenny had parachute experience, although he hadn't jumped in some years. We can prove that without any visible means of how he acquired it, that Kenny died with a much larger estate than someone in his position could be expected to have. We can prove that Geestman told lies that directly relate to an effort to distance himself from any possible involvement in the hijacking. For example, when he said he couldn't have been involved because he was gone to sea with Foss Tugs ten to eleven months of the year in 1971. Foss says that is not true. Or when he said he didn't know the details on how his own sister got the loan from Kenny...but it was HE who delivered the money. Or when he said he didn't know how Kenny got his house for cash...when Kenny bought it from a couple where Bernie served as their Best Man at their wedding only three years previously.

None of that is proof Christiansen hijacked Flight 305, of course. But it IS evidence. And there is a lot more of that in KC's case than anything you'll find regarding Weber...Smile

My official stand on all of this is also very simple. I think we've presented enough evidence that the Seattle FBI should question the witnesses. This means Helen Jones, her daughter, Bernie Geestman, and Margaret Ann Miller-Geestman. Does anyone here have a problem with that? If so, I would like to know why.

I've started receiving responses from the Decoded cast on my question to them. I asked them to expand on the Geestman interview. Now, you should understand that at the time of filming, they did not know about Helen Jones' testimony, and AB had not yet discovered the tax document showing that KC bought his house from that couple in Puyallup that Geestman knew. Also...Decoded had to go on what evidence Porteous and I had at that time, plus the ORIGINAL edition of the book, which had actually been pulled by the time of filming. That said, here is what one of the cast members said this week. (I'm not revealing their name to you because frankly, I don't trust some of you)

Quote:
'Geestman was very cagey, even shifty during the interview. My personal suspicion was that he was actually drunk. But in the end he was pretty convincing--probably having spent years answering questions and even convincing himself that what he was saying was the truth. I have very little doubt that Kenny is guilty, and I went away from the interview with Geestman confused and uncertain about his involvement as an accomplice.

You have to remember that we were given very little time to process the interview and think about all he had said--they filmed us coming out the door, and those were our initial, on the spot responses. Then we filmed about an hour later in the diner and still, not much processing time and we'd been running around filming for weeks, months even.

Having had more time to think about it it would not surprise me in the least if Geestman was an accomplice, or at the very least knew about it and aided Kenny in some ways before or after...'

After I received this message, I updated this cast member with some of the additional evidence we had gathered since filming. This filming would be two years ago this month.
----------------------------------------------------------
Blevins,
I saw the Decoded episode (you're not what I thought you'd be -- you were pretty laid back, really laid back, in fact). I admit, it was very interesting and entertaining, great questions, great possibilities, great speculation --
but the evidence cited was all circumstantial, it proves nothing, or as you said, it provides no proof that KC hijacked 305. As with a couple of other examples: There's a lot of "circumstantial" evidence that the Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy, but not one shred of evidence has ever been presented to indicate any kind of conspiracy, period. Also lots of circumstantial and anecdotal evidence about the existence of Sasquatch has been presented over many decades, but not one piece of physical or DNA evidence has ever been presented. Without that, it's all just speculation. Your theory is very interesting and very entertaining, I've thought about it a lot, but like all other propositions here, actual physical evidence is just not there. That's what is sorely needed now. We squabble over our pet theories and assumptions, but without new physical evidence, that's all it is, squabbling and speculation. The only way this case is going to move forward or break wide open is with new physical evidence , period. Maybe we find one or some of those 20s, or we find a vital document that provdes proof of identity, or we find the parachute or the briefcase or the money bag, or a skeleton -- something, anything more than what we have now. We all need to keep digging for that one piece of evidence that's going to break the case. This should be our motivation for continuing on. MeyerLouie


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Oct 15, 2012, 7:06 PM
Post #36864 of 54582 (30656 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Boeing Connections [In reply to] Can't Post

It appears to have little to do with "Cooper" and more to do with Duane's History as a petty Criminal, family failure and societal reject.

As an aside: I wouldn't say Duane was Service Connected, and it appears his brother was connected to the Army, not AF, that is a huge distinction.

Matt


mrshutter45

Oct 15, 2012, 7:36 PM
Post #36865 of 54582 (30647 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Boeing Connections [In reply to] Can't Post

"So lets see what some of you SHARPIES can do with this! "

the problem I see is the fact that it really has nothing to do "evidence wise" with the crime 13 years later?
record keeping was never 100% accurate from my understanding.

I understand the point of you pointing out all of the mistakes made
record wise with Duane's past, but this still doesn't put him anywhere near flight 305.

if the mistakes were made back then, who do we blame? we have blame on the FBI from 1960 and on if not mistaken.

seems to me it kind of fits him, Duane was not perfect and neither were his records.




georger

Oct 15, 2012, 8:57 PM
Post #36867 of 54582 (30613 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Robert99] Tweet: Ask Mr. Science! [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

Excellent. And I'll bet Kitty landed on all four feet.


Robert99

Priceless! This is worth sharing. I wonder if
Baumgartner has seen this ?




Robert99

Oct 15, 2012, 9:54 PM
Post #36869 of 54582 (30598 views)
Shortcut
CALLING MR. SCIENCE [In reply to] Can't Post

Red Bull Stratos now has a page on Wikipedia giving more details on the jump. Of course, still more details would have been helpful. But some comments from me follow below.

Red Bull states that Felix reached the speed of sound at 98,000 feet after 40 seconds of free fall. They don't give the exact jump altitude but it was very close to 128,000 feet.

A few days ago, I saw something (which I cannot now find) on the Red Bull web page to the effect that, jumping from the planned 120,000 feet, Felix was expected to go supersonic at about 95,000 feet and would be decelerating before getting to 90,0000 feet.

So the altitude range where Felix was expected to go supersonic is consistent between the two jump altitudes mentioned.

Using the 1976 US Standard Atmosphere and a geometric altitude of 98,000 feet, the temperature is given as 226.4 degrees Kelvin or -46.8 degrees Centigrade. And the speed of sound is given as 301.62 meters/second which is calculated to be 1085.832 kilometers/hour.

Red Bull claims a Mach number of 1.24 so multiplying that by 1085.832 kilometers/hour gives 1346.4 kilometers/hour compared to Red Bull's claim of 1342.0 kilometers/hour. That is close enough for me in view of slight rounding differences.

It is apparent that Red Bull and I were probably both using the 1976 US Standard Atmosphere numbers or their equivalent.

The speed of sound is a function of ambient temperature and increases with temperature. The standard temperatures shown above are significantly lower than the temperatures shown for the higher altitudes during the jump.

From about 35,000 feet above sea level to about 65,000 feet above sea level, the temperatures shown on TV during the ascent were up to 90.0 degrees Fahrenheit below zero and then increased to slightly above zero as the balloon ascended above 100,000 feet.

Measuring temperatures accurately at extreme heights is a real problem. Red Bull needs to use the actual temperatures encountered around 100,000 feet and not the standard values given in the altitude tables. And using the actual temperatures, they need to calculate the actual speed of sound for the altitudes they are discussing. If there is an error in their calculations, it will probably be related to the temperatures used to determine the speed of sound.

As you may have noticed on the TV monitors, the balloon also had a ground speed of about 120 miles per hour for a while as it was going through the jet stream altitudes.

Also, from what I could see of Felix's spinning, it started about 55 or 60 seconds into the free fall. According to Red Bull's estimate, that would be about 15 or 20 seconds after Felix went supersonic.

I hope Red Bull releases all the detailed data about how they determined when Felix went supersonic and how they did their calculations. It is just a case of showing your work.

Robert99


Robert99

Oct 15, 2012, 10:12 PM
Post #36870 of 54582 (30595 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skyjack71] Boeing Connections [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The brother told me about the Schematics to the 727 and other Boeings being all over the house.....because of what John did.

Jo, This is nonsense. If John had those documents, which is very unlikely, then he stole them.

No aircraft manufacturer is going to allow the schematics or any other piece of information about their under-development aircraft to leave their facility except under very controlled circumstances.

Since you have apparently never visited an aircraft manufacturing facility, you apparently don't realize that there are guards at the gate that check all the employees, their brief cases, their lunch boxes, and anything else they have with them.

Your statement about John just won't fly.

Robert99


Farflung

Oct 15, 2012, 10:14 PM
Post #36871 of 54582 (30594 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Robert99] CALLING MR. SCIENCE [In reply to] Can't Post

That jump from the stratosphere yesterday reminded me of some rarefied experiments from my youth which must remain undisclosed due to several non-disclosure agreements and restraining orders. It was when I transferred from aircraft to space vehicles. Woo-hoo! No drag in the vacuum of space, so this should be a breeze where a pineapple is as aerodynamic as an SR-71.

Not so fast Grasshopper, because you have traded concerns about drag and range for impossibly light weight budgets and obscene reliability testing. Man, does everything have to suck?

I’m working with a team on some type of future space junk that was in a low orbit and needed to be stabilized, just like a skydiver. But wings and rudders won’t do Jack Squat in space since there is no atmosphere. So one of the friendless geeks (Code for: wicked smart dudes) designs a spring (world’s simplest tool) which launches the vehicle out of the container with a bit of asymmetric thrust, which allows for spin stabilization with high reliability (just a spring) and a low weight budget. I’m sure everyone recalls Newton’s first law, so I won’t bore anyone, but that vehicle was able to sustain a stabilized (rotational axis perpendicular to Earth) orbit with one input at launch. I know, exciting!

Then Felix is standing on his capsule’s front porch in near space and steps into a virtual vacuum where stabilization is a concern. So here’s what I thought after opening a third beer. Why not leverage Newton’s law while maintaining your ‘Z’ axis via gravity, with a ‘step off’ that induces an intentional rotation around that axis from the platform? Greyout would be less of a risk in relation to a flat spin or tumble and upon sensing the effects of drag, entering a denser altitude, the skydiver would use traditional stabilization (non rotational) techniques for the balance of the journey. After all, wasn’t he in a space suit? Hellooooooo, you must have come from space. I mean the Space Shuttle enters the atmosphere in an inverted attitude just before the tracking beam from Area 51 activates the cloaking device where it touches down in a Los Angeles shopping mall.

http://www.shopfloor.org/...uttle-endeavor/26532

Nothing warms my heart more than the chant of USA! USA! USA! While the finest of America’s technology is towed by a Tundra.


georger

Oct 15, 2012, 10:48 PM
Post #36872 of 54582 (30588 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Robert99] CALLING MR. SCIENCE [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Red Bull Stratos now has a page on Wikipedia giving more details on the jump. Of course, still more details would have been helpful. But some comments from me follow below.

Red Bull states that Felix reached the speed of sound at 98,000 feet after 40 seconds of free fall. They don't give the exact jump altitude but it was very close to 128,000 feet.

A few days ago, I saw something (which I cannot now find) on the Red Bull web page to the effect that, jumping from the planned 120,000 feet, Felix was expected to go supersonic at about 95,000 feet and would be decelerating before getting to 90,0000 feet.

So the altitude range where Felix was expected to go supersonic is consistent between the two jump altitudes mentioned.

Using the 1976 US Standard Atmosphere and a geometric altitude of 98,000 feet, the temperature is given as 226.4 degrees Kelvin or -46.8 degrees Centigrade. And the speed of sound is given as 301.62 meters/second which is calculated to be 1085.832 kilometers/hour.

Red Bull claims a Mach number of 1.24 so multiplying that by 1085.832 kilometers/hour gives 1346.4 kilometers/hour compared to Red Bull's claim of 1342.0 kilometers/hour. That is close enough for me in view of slight rounding differences.

It is apparent that Red Bull and I were probably both using the 1976 US Standard Atmosphere numbers or their equivalent.

The speed of sound is a function of ambient temperature and increases with temperature. The standard temperatures shown above are significantly lower than the temperatures shown for the higher altitudes during the jump.

From about 35,000 feet above sea level to about 65,000 feet above sea level, the temperatures shown on TV during the ascent were up to 90.0 degrees Fahrenheit below zero and then increased to slightly above zero as the balloon ascended above 100,000 feet.

Measuring temperatures accurately at extreme heights is a real problem. Red Bull needs to use the actual temperatures encountered around 100,000 feet and not the standard values given in the altitude tables. And using the actual temperatures, they need to calculate the actual speed of sound for the altitudes they are discussing. If there is an error in their calculations, it will probably be related to the temperatures used to determine the speed of sound.

As you may have noticed on the TV monitors, the balloon also had a ground speed of about 120 miles per hour for a while as it was going through the jet stream altitudes.

Also, from what I could see of Felix's spinning, it started about 55 or 60 seconds into the free fall. According to Red Bull's estimate, that would be about 15 or 20 seconds after Felix went supersonic.

I hope Red Bull releases all the detailed data about how they determined when Felix went supersonic and how they did their calculations. It is just a case of showing your work.

Robert99

Not sure of your link but I found this last night -
the links in the bibli are good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_Stratos


Robert99

Oct 15, 2012, 11:01 PM
Post #36873 of 54582 (30583 views)
Shortcut
Re: [georger] CALLING MR. SCIENCE [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Red Bull Stratos now has a page on Wikipedia giving more details on the jump. Of course, still more details would have been helpful. But some comments from me follow below.

Red Bull states that Felix reached the speed of sound at 98,000 feet after 40 seconds of free fall. They don't give the exact jump altitude but it was very close to 128,000 feet.

A few days ago, I saw something (which I cannot now find) on the Red Bull web page to the effect that, jumping from the planned 120,000 feet, Felix was expected to go supersonic at about 95,000 feet and would be decelerating before getting to 90,0000 feet.

So the altitude range where Felix was expected to go supersonic is consistent between the two jump altitudes mentioned.

Using the 1976 US Standard Atmosphere and a geometric altitude of 98,000 feet, the temperature is given as 226.4 degrees Kelvin or -46.8 degrees Centigrade. And the speed of sound is given as 301.62 meters/second which is calculated to be 1085.832 kilometers/hour.

Red Bull claims a Mach number of 1.24 so multiplying that by 1085.832 kilometers/hour gives 1346.4 kilometers/hour compared to Red Bull's claim of 1342.0 kilometers/hour. That is close enough for me in view of slight rounding differences.

It is apparent that Red Bull and I were probably both using the 1976 US Standard Atmosphere numbers or their equivalent.

The speed of sound is a function of ambient temperature and increases with temperature. The standard temperatures shown above are significantly lower than the temperatures shown for the higher altitudes during the jump.

From about 35,000 feet above sea level to about 65,000 feet above sea level, the temperatures shown on TV during the ascent were up to 90.0 degrees Fahrenheit below zero and then increased to slightly above zero as the balloon ascended above 100,000 feet.

Measuring temperatures accurately at extreme heights is a real problem. Red Bull needs to use the actual temperatures encountered around 100,000 feet and not the standard values given in the altitude tables. And using the actual temperatures, they need to calculate the actual speed of sound for the altitudes they are discussing. If there is an error in their calculations, it will probably be related to the temperatures used to determine the speed of sound.

As you may have noticed on the TV monitors, the balloon also had a ground speed of about 120 miles per hour for a while as it was going through the jet stream altitudes.

Also, from what I could see of Felix's spinning, it started about 55 or 60 seconds into the free fall. According to Red Bull's estimate, that would be about 15 or 20 seconds after Felix went supersonic.

I hope Red Bull releases all the detailed data about how they determined when Felix went supersonic and how they did their calculations. It is just a case of showing your work.

Robert99

Not sure of your link but I found this last night -
the links in the bibli are good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_Stratos

That is the correct link.


georger

Oct 16, 2012, 12:45 AM
Post #36874 of 54582 (30576 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Robert99] CALLING MR. SCIENCE [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Also, from what I could see of Felix's spinning, it started about 55 or 60 seconds into the free fall. According to Red Bull's estimate, that would be about 15 or 20 seconds after Felix went supersonic.

I hope Red Bull releases all the detailed data about how they determined when Felix went supersonic and how they did their calculations. It is just a case of showing your work.

Robert99
Not sure of your link but I found this last night -
the links in the bibli are good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Bull_Stratos
That is the correct link.Was going to post several others but lost isp, now
back - try this: some nice tech links

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/JianHuang.shtml

and another at Wierd Science.com

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/stratos-
space-jump-can-you-fall-faster-than-the-speed-of-
sound/


(This post was edited by georger on Oct 16, 2012, 1:57 AM)


georger

Oct 16, 2012, 2:41 AM
Post #36875 of 54582 (30562 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Farflung] CALLING MR. SCIENCE [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
That jump from the stratosphere yesterday reminded me of some rarefied experiments from my youth which must remain undisclosed due to several non-disclosure agreements and restraining orders. It was when I transferred from aircraft to space vehicles. Woo-hoo! No drag in the vacuum of space, so this should be a breeze where a pineapple is as aerodynamic as an SR-71.

Not so fast Grasshopper, because you have traded concerns about drag and range for impossibly light weight budgets and obscene reliability testing. Man, does everything have to suck?

I’m working with a team on some type of future space junk that was in a low orbit and needed to be stabilized, just like a skydiver. But wings and rudders won’t do Jack Squat in space since there is no atmosphere. So one of the friendless geeks (Code for: wicked smart dudes) designs a spring (world’s simplest tool) which launches the vehicle out of the container with a bit of asymmetric thrust, which allows for spin stabilization with high reliability (just a spring) and a low weight budget. I’m sure everyone recalls Newton’s first law, so I won’t bore anyone, but that vehicle was able to sustain a stabilized (rotational axis perpendicular to Earth) orbit with one input at launch. I know, exciting!

Then Felix is standing on his capsule’s front porch in near space and steps into a virtual vacuum where stabilization is a concern. So here’s what I thought after opening a third beer. Why not leverage Newton’s law while maintaining your ‘Z’ axis via gravity, with a ‘step off’ that induces an intentional rotation around that axis from the platform? .

Thats a good question. My guess is they chose not
to for several reasons, if it even came up, as it might
have with Kittinger's experience.

My guess is they didnt want to introduce any type of
spin as denser air was going to be encountered,
fearing any spin might translate into destructive
forces, vs. as vertical a drop as possible in order to
maximize acceleration and minimize drag
components.

It still is a good question. I wonder if it was
discussed?

At 128k feet you are still in the 20% zone - the
region where roughly 20% of the atmopshere is
between 12-31 miles. Air density at 128k feet is
7.3x10-4 kg/m^3 vs. 1.2 kg/m^3 at sea level.
Any spin at that alititude would produce some drag
vs the vertical gravitational component. Gravity at
128k is virtually the same as on the surface of the
earth - not weightless space where forces can be
rather quickly balanced if need be.


First page Previous page 1 ... 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 ... 2184 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Skydiving History & Trivia

 


Search for (options)