highaltitude.log.20161017

[00:25] Ian_ (4d66af83@gateway/web/freenode/ip.77.102.175.131) left #highaltitude.
[00:25] Ian_ (4d66af83@gateway/web/freenode/ip.77.102.175.131) joined #highaltitude.
[00:46] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) joined #highaltitude.
[00:46] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03SP5RZP-11 after 0319 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=SP5RZP-11
[00:50] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) left irc: Ping timeout: 252 seconds
[00:51] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[00:55] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) joined #highaltitude.
[00:59] DL7AD1 (~sven@p4FD41779.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #highaltitude.
[01:01] DL7AD (~sven@p4FD41598.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[01:26] <SpacenearUS> New vehicle on the map: 03LORA1 - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=LORA1
[01:43] Laurenceb_ (~laurence@host86-179-191-73.range86-179.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[01:51] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[01:54] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) joined #highaltitude.
[02:02] Ojo_2 (pieter@2601:c6:c004:70c1:2832:4cbb:88d8:6c23) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[02:31] F6AIU (51333b8d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.51.59.141) joined #highaltitude.
[02:41] heathkid (~heathkid@unaffiliated/heathkid) joined #highaltitude.
[02:43] F6AIU (51333b8d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.51.59.141) left irc: Quit: Page closed
[02:50] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[02:54] trn (jhj@trnsz.com) left irc: K-Lined
[02:55] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) joined #highaltitude.
[03:47] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[03:55] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) joined #highaltitude.
[04:48] daey_ (~Flutterba@unaffiliated/day) joined #highaltitude.
[04:52] daey (~Flutterba@unaffiliated/day) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[04:52] Nick change: daey_ -> daey
[05:36] es5nhc (~tarmo@57-58-166-83.dyn.estpak.ee) joined #highaltitude.
[05:37] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03S-18 after 0314 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=S-18
[05:43] jcoxon (~jcoxon@36.251.198.146.dyn.plus.net) joined #highaltitude.
[05:52] gtfhercules (~gtfhercul@c-24-5-194-136.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) left irc: Quit: Leaving
[05:54] jcoxon (~jcoxon@36.251.198.146.dyn.plus.net) left irc: Quit: Leaving
[06:28] number10 (d42c14ce@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.44.20.206) joined #highaltitude.
[06:29] Bencls (~Bencls___@host31-51-57-183.range31-51.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[06:34] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03K6RPT-11 after 0314 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=K6RPT-11
[06:35] Bencls (~Bencls___@host31-51-57-183.range31-51.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Remote host closed the connection
[06:48] SA6BSS-Mike (~SA6BSS-Mi@217-208-25-231-no166.bredband.skanova.com) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[06:53] SA6BSS-Mike (~SA6BSS-Mi@217-208-25-231-no166.bredband.skanova.com) joined #highaltitude.
[07:11] LeoBodnar (~LeoBodnar@host86-132-24-144.range86-132.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[07:11] LeoBodnar (~LeoBodnar@host86-132-24-144.range86-132.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Remote host closed the connection
[07:11] LeoBodnar (~LeoBodnar@host86-132-24-144.range86-132.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[07:36] <pb0ahx> gm all
[07:37] <pb0ahx> !payload K6RPT-11
[07:37] <SpacenearUS> 03pb0ahx: Can't find a flight doc matching your query
[07:38] <SA6BSS-Mike> just aprs
[07:38] <pb0ahx> ok tnx info Mike
[07:39] <pb0ahx> last week i had one that did also rtty above europa
[07:49] garymortimer (29a26206@gateway/web/freenode/ip.41.162.98.6) joined #highaltitude.
[07:50] trickv (~trickv@hg.vanstaveren.us) left irc: Ping timeout: 268 seconds
[07:50] trickv (~trickv@hg.vanstaveren.us) joined #highaltitude.
[07:54] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03HIRFW-6 after 0314 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=HIRFW-6
[08:24] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03HIRFW-5 after 0314 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=HIRFW-5
[08:32] <fsphil> https://ssdv.habhub.org/1STBEL
[08:32] <fsphil> weird :)
[08:33] <AndyEsser> nice tour of the neighbourhood
[08:33] <fsphil> just the bit where it switches to a railway
[08:35] <fsphil> I *think* it's still in the car. which is a worry
[08:37] <fsphil> there's a weird quality to the images. like they're old polaroids
[08:37] <fsphil> might still have the little cover still on the camera if it's a picam
[08:39] <gonzo_> image 7... Worrying that the kids cars and tricicle are parked better than the real cars in the street
[08:53] mDjtI_ (~mDjtI@cpc78041-stav21-2-0-cust252.17-3.cable.virginm.net) joined #highaltitude.
[08:53] mDjtI (~mDjtI@cpc78041-stav21-2-0-cust252.17-3.cable.virginm.net) left irc: Ping timeout: 268 seconds
[09:04] andycamb (~Thunderbi@2001:630:212:800:3939:d3a:fbd6:f7fc) joined #highaltitude.
[09:31] <SpacenearUS> New vehicle on the map: 03car_chase - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=car_chase
[09:47] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[09:54] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) joined #highaltitude.
[09:57] SushiKenBrown (~quassel@cmr-208-124-174-194.cr.net.cable.rogers.com) joined #highaltitude.
[09:59] SushiKenBrown_ (~quassel@cmr-208-124-174-194.cr.net.cable.rogers.com) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[10:06] <SpacenearUS> New vehicle on the map: 03BARC4 - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=BARC4
[10:21] <Geoff-G8DHE-Lap> !DIAL BARC4
[10:21] Last message repeated 1 time(s).
[10:21] <SpacenearUS> 03Geoff-G8DHE-Lap: Latest dials for 03BARC4 10(1256): none
[10:22] <daveake> oh, it's up
[10:23] <garymortimer> Not going to get wet either!
[10:24] <daveake> Well they've put in a lot of gas to stop it going too far east
[10:25] <Geoff-G8DHE-Lap> wonder if its on .45 or .65 ??
[10:25] <garymortimer> OK
[10:25] <garymortimer> Its got its eye on the Humber
[10:27] bugzc_ (~1@unaffiliated/bugzc) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[10:30] Laurenceb_ (~laurence@host86-179-191-73.range86-179.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[10:33] <pb0ahx> dial for BARC is 434.450.8
[10:33] <udat> pb0ahx: what i have too
[10:34] <pb0ahx> red red red lines
[10:36] <pb0ahx> green
[10:42] <SA6BSS-Mike> pb0ahx: what balloon was that?
[10:42] <pb0ahx> BARC-4
[10:42] <SA6BSS-Mike> regarding the 09.39
[10:42] <SA6BSS-Mike> [09:39:35] <pb0ahx> last week i had one that did also rtty above europa
[10:43] <pb0ahx> i dont know any more
[10:43] <pb0ahx> als a usa ballon
[10:44] <SA6BSS-Mike> ok, better be prepared when they show then :) was it in the regular span 434 - 434.7 ?
[10:45] <pb0ahx> no was on 2mtr 144.180 or someting
[10:45] <SA6BSS-Mike> ahh, good to know!!
[10:47] <pb0ahx> sorry for my writing in English is not so good here
[10:47] <pb0ahx> as I say I write it
[10:48] <pb0ahx> hihihihi
[10:49] <SA6BSS-Mike> :) I get what you say anyway so no problem :)
[10:49] <pb0ahx> ok tnx
[10:49] <pb0ahx> not many writers for BARC4 mmmmm
[10:50] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[10:50] <SA6BSS-Mike> its a workday for most
[10:52] <gonzo_> seeing signals, but bloody crashy USB sound card. So no decodes today
[10:53] <pb0ahx> the signaal is good here stable abt S8
[10:53] <udat> been hearing it a while now but red lines
[10:54] <pb0ahx> i using on this moment the icom 910H and 2x19 ele yagi on 23 mtr agl
[10:55] <pb0ahx> all vertical
[10:55] happysat (~katpoep@s55970b39.adsl.online.nl) joined #highaltitude.
[10:55] TIBS01 (~tibs01@5751bf7a.skybroadband.com) joined #highaltitude.
[10:57] <AndyEsser> Since this channel is basically the collection of the smartest people I know
[10:57] <AndyEsser> I need someone to either confirm my assumptions, or tell me I'm a f*cking moron
[10:58] <AndyEsser> Have people seen the thing going around social media about if you had a Jet Plane on a conveyor belt the length of a runway - with the conveyor going in the opposite direction of the plane - would it ever take off?
[10:58] garymortimer (29a26206@gateway/web/freenode/ip.41.162.98.6) left irc: Quit: Page closed
[10:59] <pb0ahx> i must now writing FUNCUBE-1 i am back later
[11:01] g8fjg (6d9a9286@gateway/web/freenode/ip.109.154.146.134) joined #highaltitude.
[11:02] <gonzo_> mythbusters did that one didn't they
[11:02] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03IV3SRD-11 after 039 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=IV3SRD-11
[11:02] <gonzo_> but it was yet another that the basic physics tells you it's a waster of time
[11:02] garymortimer (29a26206@gateway/web/freenode/ip.41.162.98.6) joined #highaltitude.
[11:02] <gonzo_> (blowing your own sail was another one)
[11:03] <gonzo_> though i reaall reading/seeing that some jets have vents on the leading edges to force airflow at low speeds (poss vtol?)
[11:03] <mfa298> shirley its the speed of air over the wings that counts (regardless of how that is generated)
[11:03] <AndyEsser> mfa298: that's my interpretation
[11:04] <AndyEsser> it's the forward velocity of the plane that generates lift, via the wings
[11:04] <g8fjg> I've seen it ...cant see how it could take off ,,no forward motion to create lift,,,,but then again rockets can't work in space,,no oxygen :-)
[11:04] <AndyEsser> so if the conveyor counteracts all forward motion perfectly (practically this is impossible) there is no lift generated
[11:04] <gonzo_> if a prop plane could create enough draught, that could possibly create lift? How m,uch is the issue
[11:04] <mfa298> so you could get it to take off without moving with a big fan
[11:04] <AndyEsser> mfa298: or the wind
[11:04] <AndyEsser> as I witnessed the other day
[11:05] <AndyEsser> light aircraft taking over in a very large headwind
[11:05] <AndyEsser> basically just climbed vertically
[11:05] <AndyEsser> taking off*
[11:05] <g8fjg> seen those planes after the hurricane
[11:05] <gonzo_> or in gales, when they are tied down on the hardstanding. They get a bit, frisky
[11:08] <daveake> Not the conveyor one again :/
[11:10] <AndyEsser> It's getting heated with a colleague now
[11:10] <AndyEsser> we've both been told to shut up and do some work
[11:10] <daveake> makes bugger-all difference if he doesn't agree hit him with a hammer
[11:10] <AndyEsser> so my assumption that it won't take off is correct?
[11:10] <daveake> er ....
[11:11] <daveake> There'll be some effect due to friction in the wheels
[11:11] <AndyEsser> if we could make a perfect lossless system of testing this
[11:11] <daveake> tyre losses etc
[11:12] <pb0ahx> i am back
[11:12] <fsphil> the conveyor might produce some air motion but trivial amounts
[11:12] <garymortimer> I'm just sat here slowly banging my head against the wall. I have not taken off yet
[11:13] <daveake> yeah, and without the wings being just above the conveyor, that'll mae next to no difference
[11:13] <AndyEsser> I'm getting told "The wheels don't matter, it's not about that - planes aren't driven by their wheels"
[11:14] <fsphil> yeah
[11:14] <daveake> quite
[11:14] <AndyEsser> o god... this must be what talking to a Trump or Brexit supporter is like
[11:14] <fsphil> it's the pressure difference between the top and bottom of the wings that lift it
[11:15] <fsphil> if you where going down the runway at 100mph and the wind had matched your speed and direction, it ain't taking off either
[11:15] <fsphil> just wait until you've tried talking to someone about the faked moon landing
[11:15] <daveake> Not sure many jet planes can take off at 100mph wind speed anyway :p
[11:16] <fsphil> ah yes, missed the jet part
[11:16] <daveake> :)
[11:16] <fsphil> a very small jet :)
[11:17] <AndyEsser> think any aircraft would struggle :P
[11:17] <daveake> helis are aircraft
[11:17] <AndyEsser> but yes - it's the difference in veloctiy between aircraft and wind that generates lift (due to aforementioned idfference in P above and below the wing)
[11:17] <AndyEsser> daveake: I wouldn't want to attempt to take off in a heli in 100 mph wind...
[11:17] <daveake> hah
[11:17] <garymortimer> that conveyor belt is how they really launched the module back from the moon
[11:17] <fsphil> not so much a take off, as a take sideways into a tree
[11:17] <AndyEsser> ha
[11:18] <g8fjg> thats why they point aircraft carriers into the wind, more lift, fewer planes getting run over
[11:18] <AndyEsser> and why runways work both ways, and many airports have multiple runways - to better match a headwind
[11:18] Ojo (pieter@2601:c6:c004:70c1:ccae:e4ff:4c6d:9e3) joined #highaltitude.
[11:18] <fsphil> cool, didn't know that. makes sense
[11:18] <murb> old airports tend to have crossed runways
[11:18] <murb> and it isn't just so you can have ammusing collusions!
[11:18] <AndyEsser> or a A shape
[11:18] <garymortimer> ive taken off from some that are very short but really wide
[11:19] <garymortimer> Just look at all the old RAF airfields in the UK and you will see that. even Heathrow if you look
[11:19] <AndyEsser> my instructor is off my christmas card list now
[11:20] <AndyEsser> he decided to subject me to an unplanned engine failure test drill on SAturday..
[11:20] <g8fjg> change your underware after?
[11:20] <fsphil> sure it was unplanned?
[11:21] <fsphil> he might have just said that to calm you down :)
[11:21] <AndyEsser> lol - yes - he yanked the throttle closed
[11:21] <AndyEsser> "Your engine has failed, what do you do?"
[11:21] <AndyEsser> g8fjg: very nearly
[11:22] <AndyEsser> "Use the rocket engine I've built that I strapped to the wing?"
[11:22] <garymortimer> EFATO FTW
[11:22] <murb> AndyEsser: good at spotting hidden fences in corn fields?
[11:22] <AndyEsser> thankfully most fields around here are divided by hedges, not fences - so easy to spot a big enough field :P
[11:23] <AndyEsser> garymortimer: ?
[11:23] <garymortimer> engine failure after takeoff
[11:23] <AndyEsser> ah - haven't tested those yet
[11:23] <AndyEsser> this was an engine failure during flight
[11:24] <AndyEsser> I'm only 5 hours in - chatting to another pilot when waiting for my instructor, he was surprised I was already doing circuits
[11:25] <pb0ahx> poof
[11:25] <garymortimer> Thats very good, its all good fun!
[11:26] <AndyEsser> It's awesome fun
[11:26] <AndyEsser> I love being up there
[11:27] <AndyEsser> I have at least 2 hours booked every weekend in November, most weekends are 4 hours booked
[11:27] <pb0ahx> BARC4 team mni tnx for nice flight
[11:27] <AndyEsser> as long as the weather behaves - it's going to be awesome :)
[11:27] <garymortimer> It is, my partner in crime down here, Vic has a small aircraft and runway at his house so any excuse.
[11:27] <AndyEsser> nice
[11:28] <AndyEsser> would love to own my own aircraft someday
[11:28] <fsphil> I have one now. but it's kinda small
[11:28] geoffw (56ba7483@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.186.116.131) joined #highaltitude.
[11:28] <geoffw> !flights
[11:28] <SpacenearUS> 03geoffw: Current flights: 03Barc 10(1256), 03Dixon 10(8f40), 03UBSEDS18 434.612.5 CONTESTIA 16/1000 10(64a5)
[11:29] <geoffw> !dial barc
[11:29] <SpacenearUS> 03geoffw: Can't find a flight doc matching your query
[11:29] <geoffw> !dials barc
[11:29] <daveake> heading for the humber
[11:29] <pb0ahx> 434.450.8
[11:29] <gonzo_> bloody expensive hobby here. apparently in the states it is much cheaper
[11:29] <daveake> yeah I've heard that
[11:29] <AndyEsser> gonzo_: yea - someone suggested going to the states for 2 weeks and just doing a solid 30 hours
[11:29] <gonzo_> lots of little airfoelds
[11:30] <fsphil> cheap fuel I guess
[11:30] <daveake> go for a long hobby
[11:30] <daveake> holiday
[11:30] <daveake> both
[11:30] <AndyEsser> but I think I'd feel like I was cheating on my instructor :P
[11:30] <geoffw> Ta pb
[11:30] <fsphil> bring him with you
[11:30] <daveake> maybe someone there does a crash course?
[11:30] <AndyEsser> bad choice of name...
[11:30] <daveake> oh wait ...
[11:30] <gonzo_> more people use light ac as a form of transport
[11:30] <gonzo_> here it is only hobby
[11:31] <AndyEsser> my instructor has talked about me doing some work for the flight school (some sort of webapp thing) and hinted it about 20 hours worth of lessons
[11:31] <AndyEsser> which would be good
[11:31] <fsphil> the uk isn't big enough to need it for transport
[11:31] <gonzo_> they have the space/distance/lack of eu pettyness
[11:31] <gonzo_> my old landlord did that. went for a hol to us to get an faa licennce
[11:34] <garymortimer> I bet BARC are willing that payload to come down quicker
[11:35] <gonzo_> he told me that lots of unmanned airstrips have the runway lights triggered off the radio. You just key the tower freq a few times and the lights come on. Then go into the clubhouse and drop your money in the box, and make a cuppa whilst you await yoru taxi to wherever you are heading
[11:35] <AndyEsser> sounds about right
[11:35] <gonzo_> sounds very civilised.
[11:36] <AndyEsser> very not US
[11:36] <gonzo_> probably there is more trust out in the sticks
[11:36] <gonzo_> (and more guns)
[11:36] <pb0ahx> i am away laterssssssssssssss
[11:42] <garymortimer> there is a three runway airfield just West of BARC now
[11:42] <garymortimer> Sandtoft
[11:43] <garymortimer> http://www.sandtoft-airfield.com/
[11:46] <garymortimer> That payload seems quite keen on the island http://www.rspb.org.uk/discoverandenjoynature/seenature/reserves/guide/r/readsisland/
[11:47] <gonzo_> no pubs on there then?
[11:47] <garymortimer> Seems not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Read%27s_Island
[11:48] <daveake> When I tried for a wet landing, I missed
[11:48] <daveake> Maybe I should have flown this instead
[11:48] <gonzo_> if the tide is out, there are some huge mud flats there
[11:49] <gonzo_> it could be a slodge landing
[11:49] <gonzo_> splodge
[11:49] <garymortimer> Now its slowing down. Hopefully it will jump the water! I don't know this part of the world at all. Been over the bridge just once when about 10 (so obviously just recently)
[11:49] <garymortimer> turning left longer land track
[11:50] <gonzo_> when I was a student, we would go out to Brough and play in the mud. It was a hose off job before anyone was alowed back in the car to go back
[11:55] geoffw (56ba7483@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.186.116.131) left irc: Quit: Page closed
[11:56] <garymortimer> powerlines now!
[12:00] <garymortimer> Gosh those lines will be a thing currently!
[12:01] <garymortimer> fab tracking from UPU
[12:01] Nick change: mattbrej1a -> mattbrejza
[12:02] <gonzo_> looks like they mau have just fallen short
[12:03] <daveake> Tracked very nearly to the ground
[12:04] <garymortimer> 47m from so far a way thats amazing must be jolly flat
[12:04] <Upu> LoS from my house to the coast
[12:04] <garymortimer> the ground must be 15 or so
[12:04] g8fjg (6d9a9286@gateway/web/freenode/ip.109.154.146.134) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[12:11] Nick change: sumie-dh_ -> sumie-dh
[12:13] petrinm (niemelp1@gateway/shell/tkk.fi/x-hguarulrkzkgrvyn) joined #highaltitude.
[12:20] <SpacenearUS> New vehicle on the map: 03K6RPT-7 - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=K6RPT-7
[12:26] fl_0 (foo@unaffiliated/fl-0/x-7355575) left irc: Quit: STRG + Q
[12:32] <gonzo_> assuming that it was the chase team got the last packet after landing, there is still 100ft or so of height to account for
[12:32] <SIbot> In real units: 100 ft = 30 m
[12:32] <gonzo_> oh sod off sibot
[12:33] <AndyEsser> :P
[12:33] <gonzo_> so wonder how well synced the map/image is to the lat/lon
[12:35] <Vaizki> does sibot take offence with FL100 then..? :)
[12:35] <Vaizki> apparently not
[12:37] <AndyEsser> 100ft would be FL1
[12:37] <SIbot> In real units: 100 ft = 30 m
[12:37] <fsphil> it has not been programmed for offence. yet
[12:39] <gonzo_> angry corrections next?
[12:40] <AndyEsser> "SIbit: Stop using Imperial you muppets"
[12:40] <AndyEsser> s/SIbit/SIbot
[12:41] <fsphil> I love that imperial units are defined in metric
[12:41] <garymortimer> Bt very standard aviation units
[12:42] <gonzo_> did it not realise from the context I had to make the concious decision to convert to imperial, just to be contrary
[12:43] garymortimer (29a26206@gateway/web/freenode/ip.41.162.98.6) left irc: Quit: Page closed
[12:54] MoALTz (~no@78-10-223-145.static.ip.netia.com.pl) joined #highaltitude.
[13:06] kc2uez (~SKA0ut@static-74-42-252-20.br1.glvv.ny.frontiernet.net) left irc: Ping timeout: 248 seconds
[13:07] <Ian_> While we are talking conundrums about conveyor belts, I have to say AndyEsser that I feel unable to confirm your assumption stated circa [11:57] :)
[13:08] <Ian_> as stated
[13:15] <gonzo_> "Jet Plane on a conveyor belt the length of a runway"
[13:15] <gonzo_> would you not need one just as long as the wheelbase of the plane?
[13:16] ChrisMunich (5b167087@gateway/web/freenode/ip.91.22.112.135) joined #highaltitude.
[13:16] <ChrisMunich> Hi
[13:16] <gonzo_> though I expect that adding logic to this argument is not in the spirit of it
[13:18] <nick_> A jet plane doesn't care if it's on a conveyer belt.
[13:18] <nick_> It's pushing against the air, not against the ground.
[13:18] <ChrisMunich> Would anyone please be so kind and tell me what the green and blue circle mean when you watch a balloon with the tracking tool. Thanks :-)
[13:18] <gonzo_> if the req is that the plane stays static on the ground, then just put the brakes on and rev up
[13:19] <gonzo_> (which is sort of what all planes do before take off)
[13:19] <gonzo_> (testing temps and pressures, not actualy as part of the take off itself)
[13:19] <Geoff-G8DHE-Lap> ChrisMunich, The Blue circle is zero degree horizon, whilst Green is five degree horizon
[13:19] <gonzo_> beat me to it
[13:20] <Geoff-G8DHE-Lap> you should get a signal between the two
[13:20] <gonzo_> unless you are like me and live in a valley, so i only tend to get sigs when i get to the green line
[13:20] kc2uez (~SKA0ut@static-74-42-252-20.br1.glvv.ny.frontiernet.net) joined #highaltitude.
[13:21] <adamgreig> omg i missed the discussion about a plane on a runway?
[13:22] <ChrisMunich> Geoff-G8DHE-Lap. Thank you very much!
[13:24] <gonzo_> not sure you missed much
[13:24] <ChrisMunich> Exit
[13:24] <adamgreig> everyone agrees the plane takes off, right?
[13:24] ChrisMunich (5b167087@gateway/web/freenode/ip.91.22.112.135) left irc:
[13:26] <adamgreig> and some misunderstandings of how wings generate lift?
[13:26] <AndyEsser> magic fairy dust
[13:27] <adamgreig> do you learn how wings generate lift as part of pilot training?
[13:27] <gonzo_> it's like about 50% of the mythbusters stuff. Easilly answerable with little thought. But prob fun to try and makes good TV for 80% of the popluation (who who are not wound up by the nee dto test it)
[13:27] <AndyEsser> adamgreig: only the GCSE "low pressure over wing, high pressure under wing - thus lift"
[13:28] <adamgreig> yea gonzo_, though I think the problem is people who are convinced of something are often not swayed by the mythbusters experiment (or indeed by anything at all)
[13:28] <adamgreig> "but they didn't use a real conveyor belt!" "but it didn't match the wheel speed of the plane, just the takeoff speed!" "but the plane took off, so the experiment must be wrong!"
[13:28] <adamgreig> no true plane, indeed
[13:29] <gonzo_> have started rewatching some of them and I'm usually fast forwardinmg to the bit where they state the obvious, but doing so as if it was a shock to them
[13:29] <adamgreig> hah
[13:29] <adamgreig> i wish more people would get taught the redirecting-lots-of-air approach to lift instead of this mysterious pressure thing
[13:29] <adamgreig> but at least it's not "well the air on top has to go faster to cover the same distance"
[13:30] <gonzo_> I mentioned the 'blowing your own sail' one. They put a sail and a fan on a skateboard
[13:30] <adamgreig> fun
[13:30] <adamgreig> how about downwind sailing faster than the wind?
[13:30] <gonzo_> it did work. But that was just the air that didn;t catch the sail. So they proved it
[13:31] <fsphil> wouldn't it go backwards?
[13:31] <gonzo_> but failed to show that without the sail on, it would have gone a damn sight faster
[13:31] <adamgreig> no
[13:31] <AndyEsser> problem is - as we discussed earlier - there's a difference between a pure thought experiment with zero loses
[13:31] <adamgreig> you can sail downwind faster than the wind
[13:31] <AndyEsser> and actually doing it practically
[13:31] <adamgreig> the plane takes off in both the pure thought experiment and in real life, though
[13:32] <gonzo_> (a more important question, is it damn sight, or damn site ??)
[13:32] <adamgreig> for versions of real life that are compatible with a thought experiment and don't involve the conveyor quickly going to infinite velocity
[13:32] <AndyEsser> adamgreig: you're going to have to explain that to me then
[13:32] <gonzo_> think the latter
[13:32] <fsphil> I failed to consider the wheels are not actually being driven at first
[13:32] <AndyEsser> becuase I'd have said it wouldn't take off
[13:32] <adamgreig> sometimes it's easier to imagine a plane on skis
[13:33] <fsphil> it just has to thrust for longer to overcome the negative motion of the conveyer
[13:33] <adamgreig> the engines suck the plane forward
[13:33] <adamgreig> depends on the conveyor set-up exactly, sometimes it's "always moving backwards at takeoff velocity" and other times it's "moves backwards at the plane's forward velocity"
[13:33] <gonzo_> the plane would move forward on the conveyer. But the wheels would spin faster than if on a static runway
[13:33] <adamgreig> or other, less interesting, setups
[13:33] <adamgreig> yes the wheels spin very fast
[13:33] <AndyEsser> I also interpret it as it moves as fast as the forward velocity - to make relative velocity zero
[13:34] <AndyEsser> also, never really thought of jets as sucking a plane forward...
[13:34] <adamgreig> if you have bad wheel bearings you need more thrust to compensate, but in real life that's barely noticable
[13:34] <gonzo_> so the conveyer would have to be accelerating so that wheel friction equalled the engine power
[13:34] <adamgreig> the problem with that AndyEsser is the plane still moves forward
[13:34] <adamgreig> so the conveyor quickly reaches either infinite velocity or
[13:34] <fsphil> explodes
[13:34] <adamgreig> as gonzo_ suggests, goes so fast the friction in the wheels is able to drag the plane back
[13:34] <adamgreig> at which point the wheels explode
[13:35] <adamgreig> for any practical conveyor belt velocity the plane takes off, for anything else you can't build it, so..
[13:35] <gonzo_> and makes really good tv
[13:35] <AndyEsser> Yes - I concede if we were to actually build it - it would take off
[13:35] <adamgreig> the only thought experiments where it doesn't are ones where it quickly goes to a limiting case that explodes or can't happen
[13:35] <fsphil> it's different for a car, which is kinda what I was thinking of at first
[13:36] <adamgreig> if you think of the jets as sucking the plane forward, it's clear that the wheels basically don't matter beyond adding some friction
[13:36] <Laurenceb_> what on earth is the topic of discussion?
[13:36] <adamgreig> or the jets as pushign the plane forward by blowing air out the back, which is easier
[13:36] <adamgreig> Laurenceb_: lol, a plane on a runway
[13:36] <Laurenceb_> conveyor belt airport?
[13:36] <gonzo_> or the tyres explode and the stantions grab the conveyer that was moving at uber speed, be dragged backwards and also explode
[13:36] <adamgreig> i was disappointed to miss it earlier
[13:36] <adamgreig> gonzo_: I think the conveyor's own bearings explode too
[13:36] <adamgreig> and "a damn sight"
[13:37] <fsphil> everything's exploding. we need to try this
[13:37] <adamgreig> sounds a bit fun
[13:37] <adamgreig> wouldn't want to be in the plane
[13:38] <adamgreig> AndyEsser: better to think of wings as generating lift by diverting lots of air downwards (due to angle of attack) and then conservation of momentum means the plane is pushed upwards
[13:38] <adamgreig> otherwise you will really struggle to explain why planes can fly upside down
[13:38] <AndyEsser> adamgreig: but that still requires forward velocity relative to the air, surely?
[13:39] <gonzo_> the pull push sounds more interesting. Wouldn't the pure air mass movement be a pull component. And the extra thrust from the heating of that air, be a push?
[13:39] <adamgreig> gonzo_: jet engines suck a lot of air in from the front and blow it out the back, beyond the air being drawn in for combustion
[13:39] <adamgreig> sucking in gets you very very little net thrust
[13:39] <adamgreig> blowing out gets a lot of thrust
[13:39] <adamgreig> there's a fun experiment you can do with a straw to demonstrate this
[13:40] <gonzo_> when flying upsiide down, isn't the angle of attack of the wing such that there is still lift against gravioty?
[13:40] <adamgreig> when sucking, air comes in from all directions, so a _lot_ of the momentum is sideways
[13:40] <adamgreig> when blowing, almost all the momentum is in the direction of thrust, so you get a lot more momentum in the direction you want
[13:40] <adamgreig> not a symmetric arrangement
[13:40] <gonzo_> far point
[13:40] <AndyEsser> that makes sense
[13:40] <fsphil> neat
[13:40] <gonzo_> fair
[13:40] <adamgreig> AndyEsser: yes you still need forward air velocity to not stall the wings
[13:40] <adamgreig> when flying upside down you still need to point upwards to get upwards lift
[13:41] <adamgreig> but if you believe the wing's shape generates lift, you'd expect flying upside down but pointing up to generate "downwards" lift
[13:41] <adamgreig> (ie if you believe that the assymetric shape generates high pressure below and low pressure above)
[13:41] <AndyEsser> adamgreig: no no - I appreciate it's not a case of the GCSE style high/low pressure thing
[13:41] <fsphil> I thought it as the angle of the wing
[13:41] <adamgreig> yea exactly
[13:41] <Laurenceb_> well it does, thats why coefficient of lift versus angle of attack doesnt intercept the origin
[13:41] <AndyEsser> I figured out that was wrong due to exactly what you say - planes flying upside down
[13:42] <Laurenceb_> for non trivial "airfoils" anyway
[13:42] <AndyEsser> angle of attack is the primary factor?
[13:42] <adamgreig> the angle of the wing against the air causes lots of mass (and therefore momentum) of air to be diverted downwards
[13:42] <gonzo_> I'd assume it's the shape and the angle
[13:42] <adamgreig> not saying the shape isn't very important
[13:43] <adamgreig> but it's a common belief that the shape is entirely responsible for generating high/low pressure regions that lead to lift
[13:43] <gonzo_> but upside down with a silly angle, will give lift, but not efficient
[13:43] <adamgreig> but you can fly with rectangular wings that aren't aerofoils at all
[13:43] <adamgreig> see also paper planes
[13:43] <fsphil> I really want to make an RC plane now
[13:43] <AndyEsser> :)
[13:43] <AndyEsser> fsphil: want a rocket for it?
[13:43] <fsphil> !!!!
[13:43] <fsphil> yes we must do this
[13:44] <fsphil> rocket launched, return to base
[13:44] <gonzo_> I'm folding paper, and someone across the office is going to cop it
[13:44] <AndyEsser> once I'm finally build, and then finish, testing with my rocket engine, we can strap it to a wing and fly it ;)
[13:44] <Laurenceb_> one thing at a time
[13:44] <Laurenceb_> rockoon and return to base seems like its just making your lift too hard
[13:44] <AndyEsser> hehe
[13:44] <AndyEsser> nice slip
[13:45] <fsphil> no -oon involved
[13:45] <fsphil> just rocket launched from the ground
[13:45] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03SP5RZP-11 after 0312 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=SP5RZP-11
[13:45] <adamgreig> I knew someone who was keen on paper planes with rocket assists
[13:45] <fsphil> lol
[13:45] <adamgreig> turns out they're not stable most of the time lol
[13:46] <fsphil> that just seems a bad combination
[13:46] <fsphil> making a plane out of fuel
[13:46] <AndyEsser> fsphil: helps with the mass issue
[13:47] <fsphil> yeah. a solid rocket that was mostly just fuel would be cool
[13:47] <Laurenceb_> actually thats a good idea
[13:47] <Laurenceb_> thats what the Klima things were designed for
[13:47] <Laurenceb_> bbl
[13:47] <fsphil> just something at the bottom to direct thrust
[13:47] <SpeedEvil> fsphil: Sprint. :)
[13:47] <adamgreig> https://agg.io/u/rocketplane.jpg
[13:48] <SpeedEvil> Something special about a rocket that in 5 seconds glows white hot due to aerodynamic friction.
[13:49] <fsphil> yikes
[13:49] <fsphil> 1.5 km > 30km took 15 seconds
[13:50] <SpeedEvil> however, a sprint class rocket may require CAA permission to launch
[13:50] <SpeedEvil> 'oh - that must be a typo, they can't actually mean giganewton seconds'
[13:51] <SpeedEvil> 'approved'
[13:51] <fsphil> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvZGaMt7UgQ
[13:51] <fsphil> they should have called this phoenix
[13:51] fl_0 (foo@unaffiliated/fl-0/x-7355575) joined #highaltitude.
[13:51] <fsphil> you're not wrong about it getting white hot
[13:51] Laurenceb_ (~laurence@host86-179-191-73.range86-179.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[13:53] <gonzo_> a caseless solid fuel rocket would be pretty white hot eventually, without the vfriction
[13:55] <fsphil> not sure it would powerful enough anyway. I think the real ones burn along their entire length inside, outwards. more surface area
[13:55] <SpeedEvil> it depends on rate
[13:56] <adamgreig> most solids burn radially but a few burn axially for lower thrusts for longer times
[13:58] <fsphil> radially. that's the word
[14:03] <gonzo_> could be fun making a fuel that is tough enough to contain it's own force
[14:04] <gonzo_> and to burn unifiormilly enough for it to not waste a good % of energy at the end
[14:06] <fsphil> the thin edges are going to break apart pretty randomly
[14:11] <gonzo_> i've failed misterably even getting a propellant to mould. grinding black powder to dust and trying to reform it, abit of a failure
[14:12] <SpeedEvil> google richard nakka
[14:12] <SpeedEvil> for all your DIY solid fuel needs
[14:13] <gonzo_> think commercial BP has a lot of coatings on the grains
[14:16] <SpeedEvil> yeah - this is sugar(of some sort) + nitrate melt
[14:20] number10 (d42c14ce@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.44.20.206) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[14:21] <gonzo_> I was trying packing agents at random, with no info to go on. So not a great start!
[14:22] <fsphil> how are you still alive?
[14:22] <gonzo_> I'm just not very good at dying
[14:22] <fsphil> lol
[14:22] <AndyEsser> lol
[14:23] <gonzo_> rocket making was one eve's experiments, with whatever was to hand, including beer
[14:23] <gonzo_> conclusion: 'bugger this, it's actuallyu cheaper to by commercial motors, than waste all my BP on this'. And pass me anothert beer
[14:32] Bencls (~Bencls___@host31-51-57-183.range31-51.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[14:44] MoALTz_ (~no@78-10-223-145.static.ip.netia.com.pl) joined #highaltitude.
[14:47] MoALTz (~no@78-10-223-145.static.ip.netia.com.pl) left irc: Ping timeout: 248 seconds
[14:47] SP9UOB-Tom_ (~verox@matrix.verox.pl) joined #highaltitude.
[14:57] trn (jhj@prone.ws) joined #highaltitude.
[14:58] <aadamson> upu - ping PM
[15:01] <aadamson> Upu, that is :)
[15:11] andycamb (~Thunderbi@2001:630:212:800:3939:d3a:fbd6:f7fc) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[15:12] Nick change: MoALTz_ -> MoALTz
[15:17] andycamb (~Thunderbi@2001:630:212:800:5d8f:908:4af6:a480) joined #highaltitude.
[15:19] jan64 (~jan64@bjo33.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl) joined #highaltitude.
[15:27] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03IK8SUT-11 after 0320 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=IK8SUT-11
[15:40] fl_0 (foo@unaffiliated/fl-0/x-7355575) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[15:44] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03UBSEDS18 after 0314 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=UBSEDS18
[15:46] <fsphil> hello
[15:48] <fsphil> 2 months in the air
[16:03] andycamb (~Thunderbi@2001:630:212:800:5d8f:908:4af6:a480) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[16:19] bertrik (~bertrik@rockbox/developer/bertrik) joined #highaltitude.
[16:24] G0ATW (51909922@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.144.153.34) joined #highaltitude.
[16:25] <G0ATW> Has BARC4 been recovered?
[16:29] es5nhc (~tarmo@57-58-166-83.dyn.estpak.ee) left irc: Remote host closed the connection
[16:30] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03S-19 after 03a day silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=S-19
[16:31] G0ATW (51909922@gateway/web/freenode/ip.81.144.153.34) left irc: Quit: Page closed
[16:49] LeoBodnar (~LeoBodnar@host86-132-24-144.range86-132.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Quit: LeoBodnar
[16:55] TIBS01 (~tibs01@5751bf7a.skybroadband.com) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[17:01] Bencls (~Bencls___@host31-51-57-183.range31-51.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Ping timeout: 265 seconds
[17:02] KT5TK (~thomas@172.56.16.10) joined #highaltitude.
[17:07] fl_0 (unknown@unaffiliated/fl-0/x-7355575) joined #highaltitude.
[17:09] rjsnyder (~rjsnyder@p4FCD7544.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #highaltitude.
[17:23] TIBS01 (TIBS01@5751bf7a.skybroadband.com) joined #highaltitude.
[17:27] LeoBodnar (~LeoBodnar@79-76-252-5.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com) joined #highaltitude.
[17:49] Hiena (~boreger@81.93.195.181.datatrans.hu) joined #highaltitude.
[18:12] TIBS02 (~tibs01@5751bf7a.skybroadband.com) joined #highaltitude.
[18:12] TIBS01 (TIBS01@5751bf7a.skybroadband.com) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[18:17] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03SB after 03a day silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=SB
[18:17] andycamb (~Thunderbi@host165-120-207-143.range165-120.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[18:39] <SpacenearUS> New vehicle on the map: 03LTW7QO - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=LTW7QO
[18:53] bugzc (~1@unaffiliated/bugzc) joined #highaltitude.
[19:05] KT5TK (thomas@172.56.16.10) left #highaltitude.
[19:09] Laurenceb_ (~laurence@host86-179-191-73.range86-179.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[20:06] Laurenceb_ (~laurence@host86-179-191-73.range86-179.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Ping timeout: 245 seconds
[20:08] Babs_ (522fe266@gateway/web/freenode/ip.82.47.226.102) joined #highaltitude.
[20:20] rjsnyder (~rjsnyder@p4FCD7544.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) left irc: Remote host closed the connection
[20:36] fab4space (~Fabrice@AMontpellier-656-1-400-3.w90-28.abo.wanadoo.fr) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[20:49] bertrik (~bertrik@rockbox/developer/bertrik) left irc: Ping timeout: 256 seconds
[20:57] andycamb (~Thunderbi@host165-120-207-143.range165-120.btcentralplus.com) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[21:08] jcoxon (~jcoxon@36.251.198.146.dyn.plus.net) joined #highaltitude.
[21:14] gurlavie_ (uid140489@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jjpuqlhslfgclydt) joined #highaltitude.
[21:16] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) joined #highaltitude.
[21:17] Hiena (~boreger@81.93.195.181.datatrans.hu) left irc: Quit: Konversation terminated!
[21:25] Nick change: DL7AD1 -> DL7AD
[21:27] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[21:45] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) joined #highaltitude.
[21:58] Babs_ (522fe266@gateway/web/freenode/ip.82.47.226.102) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[21:58] M0RJX (~M0RJX@cpc97412-hudd9-2-0-cust9.4-1.cable.virginm.net) joined #highaltitude.
[21:58] jan64 (~jan64@bjo33.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[21:58] BrainDamage (~BrainDama@unaffiliated/braindamage) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[21:59] <M0RJX> does anyone know if you can stack on the pi radio boards
[21:59] BrainDamage (~BrainDama@unaffiliated/braindamage) joined #highaltitude.
[21:59] <M0RJX> I cant seem to get anything in the top of the connector on the board
[22:00] iooner (~iooner@2001:41d0:a:5b1d::1:20) left irc: Quit: http://www.iooner.me
[22:03] jcoxon (~jcoxon@36.251.198.146.dyn.plus.net) left irc: Quit: Leaving
[22:16] SP9UOB-Tom_ (~verox@matrix.verox.pl) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[22:20] <Geoff-G8DHE-m> There are different types of connector, not all allow multiple stacking
[22:21] rjsnyder (~rjsnyder@p4FCD7544.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #highaltitude.
[22:26] rjsnyder (~rjsnyder@p4FCD7544.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) left irc: Ping timeout: 260 seconds
[22:35] <M0RJX> I guess mine doesn't ! Hey ho I'll fab my own board
[22:35] G8KNN_ (~pi@cpc91242-cmbg18-2-0-cust1907.5-4.cable.virginm.net) left irc: Ping timeout: 250 seconds
[22:36] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) left irc: Remote host closed the connection
[22:38] <M0RJX> Geoff-G8DHE-m, it actually looks like this http://www.pi-in-the-sky.com/index.php?id=stacking-guide
[23:00] <Ian_> I guess that the biggest impediment is getting the right nomenclature for the type of part you want; or a catalogue with a picture :)
[23:04] <SpacenearUS> New position from 03IV3SRD-11 after 0310 hours silence - 12https://tracker.habhub.org/#!qm=All&q=IV3SRD-11
[23:15] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) joined #highaltitude.
[23:15] Hix (~hix@97e0a657.skybroadband.com) left irc: Remote host closed the connection
[23:26] <mfa298> with the likes of rs and farnel the picture maybe more of a hinderance than help. I've learnt to look at the information and datasheets rather than rely on the image (they often seem to use the same image for a whole range of parts which might include many options.
[23:31] Laurenceb_ (~laurence@host86-179-191-73.range86-179.btcentralplus.com) joined #highaltitude.
[23:39] M0RJX (~M0RJX@cpc97412-hudd9-2-0-cust9.4-1.cable.virginm.net) left irc: Read error: Connection reset by peer
[23:39] M0RJX (~M0RJX@82.29.54.10) joined #highaltitude.
[23:45] <SpeedEvil> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTi6uM8oak4 - antares launch
[23:56] <Laurenceb_> wow Assange stuff is hotting up
[23:56] <Laurenceb_> inb4 he is thrown out of embassy
[23:57] <adamgreig> successful launch, in happier news
[23:57] <Laurenceb_> what engines are they using on first stage?
[23:58] <adamgreig> some ukranian made thing? an rd?
[23:59] <adamgreig> RD-181
[00:00] --- Tue Oct 18 2016