HAPS-1, UMSFB1 redux Options

[djellison]

Given the fact that you could almost walk from Cambridge to Norwich without being more than 20ft from an RAF base at any time, I was about to say 'Wow - a bit of Norfolk without an RAF base' - but actually, there is one hiding in there. Great work - why on earth would anyone ever hold back with their pictures and not let people do this sort of thing.

[jekbradbury]

What is the reason for the 30 second sleep in every minute of camera operation? Is it heat, space on SD card, or something else?

[Juramike]

The potential for getting regional haze layer information totally fascinates me:

How about using two cameras as suggested (one pointed towards the horizon, one looking sorta downwards) but with polarizing filters over the lenses. The two (relatively cheap) polarizing filters could be offset by 90 degrees.

You'll probably get enough swing that you get overlapping images of the horizon with both cameras. Presto, you get two different polarization modes.

-Mike

[ugordan]

Presto, you get two different polarization modes.

You'd still need calibration capability of the data as two different, cheap-o cameras will behave quite differently even in identical conditions. Remember we're not dealing with scientific instruments here!

[djellison]

space on SD card

Bingo. I wanted a 50% buffer on capacity. From when I turned it on, to landing, used just over half the card. I wasn't 100% sure what the average image size would be at altitude ( taking a photo of a photo from altitude doesn't work as a test ) and there's a HUGE question mark over flight time (2hrs 50 we got - could have been an hour longer, or an hour less without too much being different)

So - I was cautious, but as a result, we got the entire flight fairly well documented instead of most of it very well documented or some of it brilliantly documented

Doug

[ngunn]

This whole thing has been an astonishing and beautiful sucess - enormous congratulations to everyone involved. You may recall I was interested way back in 3D image possibilities from this project. With so many images obtained from many different heights and no doubt some relative movement horizontally too I wonder if anyone has tried cloud 3D (viewed with the horizon vertical-ish?)

[hendric]

Doug,

Does your camera have a UV filter? That might help a bit with being able to see farther through the haze.

If you do have a downwards-viewing camera, may I suggest a wind tell-tale a la Phoenix? It will not mean much scientifically, but would be cool to watch. Maybe a short stick pointing downwards with a shorter section of ribbon? (There's a sponsorship idea, buy an "inch" of ribbon and the team will write your name on it!)

Other than that, it looks perfect to me! Wouldn't it be great if every weather balloon had an imaging package?

[ugordan]

I wonder if anyone has tried cloud 3D (viewed with the horizon vertical-ish?)

I tried, but it's mainly a no-go because of cloud evolution and various lateral motions. This for example doesn't look at all impressive:

It's probably only good for giving one a headache.

[ngunn]

It's probably only good for giving one a headache.

Ha! Very interesting all the same to see that attempt. Those clouds are of course a particularly fast-evolving type of cloud. It might work better with some of the higher ones. Maybe a much higher view looking down through the various layers? Of course it would be easy enough to shoot nice simultaneous pairs of terrestrial clouds from the ground, but I'm thinking of the implications for balloon probes at Titan or Venus. How effectively can evolving cloud forms be studied using images from a single, moving platform within the atmosphere? I think what you've done there does at least begin to address that question. Maybe this is another consideration to factor into the imaging strategy for follow-ups.

[ElkGroveDan]

I tried, but it's mainly a no-go because of cloud evolution and various lateral motions.

Clearly, we need a camera on each end of a twenty foot pole. I guess that will have to wait for the larger payload that will be necessary for the IMAX version.

[ngunn]

Clearly, next flight is going to need a camera on each end of a twenty foot pole

That's more or less what I suggested to Doug when the project was first mooted - either that or two balloons somehow tethered together, or even independent but launched simultaneously a short distance apart. All such options were understandably ruled out for the Mark I, but I still have hopes . .

[jamescanvin]

OK folks, after the balloon burst and HAPS-1 was plummeting back to Earth it did manage to grab a few shots pointed more towards the ground. Here is what I'm been able to piece together. Hardest jigsaw ever!





It's a bit dodgy, many of the images were quite badly blurred from the rapid motion of the falling gondola and the point of view changes quickly as it falls. So it was a challenge to match many of them up. But it is still so far in advance of what I thought possible from this flight I'm over the moon about it really.

Congrats to all involved, I'm very proud to have been able to help out in my own little way on this amazing project.

Cheers,

James

[djellison]

Believe me - watch the utter chaos that is involved in one launch....and you wouldn't think of saying 'can we do two?' - and to be honest, I can't imagine the statistical chance of two independent balloons pointing in independent directions on independent trajectories framing something from a stereo baseline is very high. As for two balloons - you would never be able to fill them the same, thus one would overtake the other and you would just have two cameras, one above the other - and the strops would rub on the lower balloon causing it to fail quite quickly.

Good work James....now do all the movies - like this

Attached thumbnail(s)

 

[ElkGroveDan]

I look at the view from these altitudes and imagine how insane it was that Michel Fournier was going to skydive from a similar height (until his balloon escaped.)

[djellison]

until his balloon escaped

I'd make some sarcastic comment about how amateurish that must be.....but James and Ed are both registered at UMSF. Not that I'm saying I thought I missed a launch a few months ago as a balloon headed up shortly before I arrived only to find that they were still getting ready.


Doug