Man Sends Camera Into Space to Take Cool Photos

[ossie]

Michael Gray (KD7LMO), Randall Taylor (KC0NNT), and others had done it before... sadly, Mike had a fatal bike accident last year.
http/www.ansr.org/kd7lmo/www.kd7lmo.net/ansr/ansr.html
http/www.ansr.org/kd7lmo/www.kd7lmo.net/ansr/ansr_45_photos2.html

Note: space (flight) implies leaving the atmosphere...
But what wouldn't some people do to stir up the interest with catchy titles...

 

[Pei-chen]

Space is at least 100km (62mi) above the surface.

BTW, isn't Icarus the name of the satellite that Bond's villain sent up in Die Another Day?

 

[rambo117]

[citation][nom]datawrecker[/nom]All he needs to do now is to send a video camera up to record as much of the journey as possible.[/citation]
now THAT would be cool

 

[jenesuispasbavard]

[citation][nom]hundert[/nom]750 dollas ist still alot for 1 try.22 miles!!!22 miles is no space! SATELLITES ARE THOUSANDS MILES HIGH!Look at the pictures, the earth is barely curved. This is only twice as high as airplanes fly.[/citation]
Only twice as high? I didn't know airplanes flew at 58,000 feet...

 

[Guest]

What do you do? "I make motion pictures.. space movies"

 

[AIstudio]

Well I think it absolute genius!!
BIG well done to this guy as it has taken some serious effort on his behalf.

 

[ShadowFlash]

I'm amazed he can recover it with such accuracy...landing within 50 miles of the launch site when it parachutes from 22 miles up is astounding! One would think temperature change and wind currents would cause it to simply float for an eternity. Back in the model rocket days, I was lucky to find ANYTHING I launched.

 

[hundert]

[citation][nom]jenesuispasbavard[/nom]Only twice as high? I didn't know airplanes flew at 58,000 feet...[/citation]

The commercial ones I fly are 35000 feet. Business planes go all the way up to 45000feet.

While 22 miles would be around 116000 ft, I am not stupid enough to write x2.5 and to make a point, I did not use commercial planes altitude.
For an object to be in space, it has to go above 62 miles high. To be more scientifically exact, it has to be 75 miles.

22 miles aint no space. Period.

These pictures were taken with wide angled lense. If you as a person find yourself being 22 miles high above surface, you will know that this is really not high compared to the pictures you see in the NEWS. I can see buildings clearly that are 10 miles away from a balcony.

THIS AINT HIGH

What's your point?

 

[mavroxur]

[citation][nom]datawrecker[/nom]All he needs to do now is to send a video camera up to record as much of the journey as possible.[/citation]


That's what im saying... Video camera, large SD card, record the whole trip in HD!

 

[tsnorquist]

Not too many planes fly at a 58,000' ceiling hundert. The air is getting pretty thin at that point.

 

[khourig]

I've lost model rockets to power lines and high roof tops. I wonder if he has the same issues.

 

[rockyjohn]

Amazing. Would have been nice if the writer at least told us where it was or what the pictures were of. Isn't the "where" still part of basic journalism? Pictures of and more specifics on his device would also have been nice.

 

[jotiocomomola]

Spanish students of only 17 and 19 years old made it first, with a budget of 100€. They also won a price.

The name of the project was Meteotek08. You can see pictures in his blog or at flickr.

 

[calmstateofmind]

[citation][nom]hundert[/nom]The commercial ones I fly are 35000 feet. Business planes go all the way up to 45000feet.While 22 miles would be around 116000 ft, I am not stupid enough to write x2.5 and to make a point, I did not use commercial planes altitude.For an object to be in space, it has to go above 62 miles high. To be more scientifically exact, it has to be 75 miles.22 miles aint no space. Period.These pictures were taken with wide angled lense. If you as a person find yourself being 22 miles high above surface, you will know that this is really not high compared to the pictures you see in the NEWS. I can see buildings clearly that are 10 miles away from a balcony.THIS AINT HIGHWhat's your point?[/citation]

Our point is that it's still more than you've ever done. Stop being a douche and give the man some credit...I don't know too many people that in their spare time send cameras into space (thats right, I said space) and have them successfully come back, or at all for that matter.

This is an awesome hobby and I'd love to know how to do it!

 

[jonpaul37]

Actually, there was a human who went that far into the earth's atmosphere...

http/www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/13/earlyshow/main1496715.shtml

 

[tayb]

[citation][nom]ikefu[/nom]This is what NASA will be reduced to if the current administration has their way with the budget.But definite kudos to this guy for taking the initiative to build his own psuedo spacecraft. I admire people who can do incredible things on low budget using elbow grease and their own ingenuity.[/citation]

Elbow grease and ingenuity is exactly what NASA is lacking. Too many old geezers who did their best creative thinking in the 60's. If we don't get some young fresh minds churning out new ideas NASA doesn't deserve the budget they once had.

 

[Shez]

Is anyone else really surprised that the furthest one of his cameras has fallen from the launch point is 50 miles? Perhaps thats the furthest one he's recovered but if not that's just plain shocking. Up 22 miles and back down with only 50 miles of horizontal travel?

 

[gm0n3y]

He needs to sell these kits at $1500+ and make a killing.

 

[micr0be]

i bet ther wer UFO spottings all around his area ..... omgz alliensz

 

[builderbobftw]

Wow, A hell of a lot cheaper than the hubble.

I think we should fire everyoen at Nasa, And put him in charge.