nerys

I want to build a large light model airplane and load it up with camera's Hang this from a weather balloon or two and send it to 100k+ feet and let it go.

Here is the thing. I want it to come back to me. But I have NO idea how to do this and googling gets all flack :-(

I figured there are 2 possible ways to do this affordably.

#1 GPS controlling just a rudder. IE I load a destination and it simply keeps steering the rudder to try to get it to that destination. The idea being that when it gets withing visual range I take over and land the airplane. (its gonna have about 2 grand worth of camera's onboard so I really want it back :-)

#2 Compass heading. have an electronic compass on board that can control a servo to guide it on a heading. I can receive telemetry and use a laptop to track it and "burst" new heading instructions up to the airplane.

Is either one of these feasible or is there another way ? I saw the make magazine podcast video on there balloon adventure and REALLY want to do this with an airplane. I would love to LIVE control it with telepresence and may try that if I can afford it or make it work (need to transmit upto 40 miles reliably as its gonna be 20miles straight up and x miles downwind when it releases) so either way a way to "bring it back" on its own would be a good thing :-)

Suggestions? I plan to make the plane essentially rudder only (maybe elevator) and make it extremely self stable (massive polyhedral wings etc..) so I just want to "nudge it" in the right direction and then take over once I can see it. So all I need to control autonomously is the rudder.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

MajorTomski

Well for starters, what you are asking for help in doing will probably be viewed as illegal by the FAA. Call your local FSDO and ask them what you have to do to safely fly a UAV in the manner you're describing.

jetmech05

I think the Major is probably correct. When your done with the FAA You'd better check with the FCC as well.
100,000 huh wow

Flying freak

umm also if your planning to go up that high you may or may not be crossing some flight paths you will also need aproval from who ever takes care of air traffic controel in your are i figure the firwst 45 thousand feet will be the most dangerous as if there are any airplanes thats when you will probably meet also you will needto give the person a set area where the aircraft will come down form 100 thousand feet..

nerys

I am not worried about the legality. Its not too hard to get the waiver needed and meet the requirements. Yes a waiver is required to go that high but its relatively easy to aquire one you just have to meet some conditions (recovery safety etc..)

The trick is bringing it back :-) I want to FLY back to maximize picture taking ability and improve chances of GETTING it back. Mentioning the altitude was important because most consumer GPS units do not work above 60k

MajorTomski

Have you seen the NEW FAA policy letter on UAV's?

Do you have access to a vaccuum chamber to test if all of your electronics will work at those altitudes and temperatures.

By the way none of the links on your webpage are working.

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

[link=http://www.chem.hawaii.edu/uham/part101.html]Part 101 of the FAA Regulations[/link] covers balloons, kites and rockets. The first section of Part 101 spells out exactly which kinds of devices the rest of Part 101 applies to. Regarding "unmanned free balloons," Part 101 applies if the balloon:

(i) Carries a payload package that weighs more than four pounds and has a weight/size ratio of more than three ounces per square inch on any surface of the package, determined by dividing the total weight in ounces of the payload package by the area in square inches of its smallest surface;
(ii) Carries a payload package that weighs more than six pounds;
(iii) Carries a payload, of two or more packages, that weighs more than 12 pounds; or
(iv) Uses a rope or other device for suspension of the payload that requires an impact force of more than 50 pounds to separate the suspended payload from the balloon.

Ken

nerys

Well its gonna be radio controlled (will be using Ham Radio Frequencies) the GPS will be backup in case I lose radio contact temporarily.

It will actually probably be under both the 6 pound limit and the weight to surface area ratio. I am shooting for 5 pounds and very large. either way I am going to get all the waivers anyway just because it would be cool to frame them with the results when done.

I have dealt with this stuff before Just never tried it on my own by my self and with a glider instead.

I just have no idea how to make the GPS thing or Compass thing actually work.

I was thinking if I can blast down a Television signal I can put a gps readout and compass right in front of the camera and guide it that way :-)

but if I loose signal....

ag4ever

Do you know how far off course a weathe baloon can get when going up 100,000 feet.

I am sure this can be done, but I would think the limits you have put on it will make it very hard (size and cost).

nerys

Meh they (Make Magazine Bree Pettis) did this and it got from ground level to 100k in 9 minutes. Can't drift THAT far in 9 minutes :-) even if it goes up in a 60mph current of air it will only drift 9-10 miles horizontally.

with a 20-1 + glide ratio (probably a lot better) I really do not anticipate a problem. in fact it will probably get "back" to me and spend quite some time circling the field before I can even see it. I mean assuming it freefalls to 50k (I am betting the air at 100k is too thin to even attempt to glide no matter how fast it goes) I mean from 50k it can in theory glide over 180 miles !! even a 10-1 glide ratio can go almost 100 miles !! in fact now I think I have another concern. Making sure there is enough battery power since this indicates it will be in the air a LONG time !! :-)

beepee

nerys,

Have you factored in the very high winds aloft? Upwards of 140mph at times. You won't be gliding around in a circle to maintain position.

Good luck!

Bedford

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

Another thing to take into account is you need to make sure you have insurance to protect you. If something goes wrong and it causes property damage or injures somebody you can be pretty sure you'll be facing a lawsuit.

Ken

AussieBrett

I have the answer..RING NASA.It honestly seems like a very expensive exercise. I think someone who deals with Weather Balloons and has some sort of high atmospheric weather station/study situation may very well have the answers.As for getting it back, it sounds military in concept, i think u would honestly need someone very very specialised here.P.S - paint it bright yellow so the 747's flying past can fly around it, or place a return to sender sticker on it as there are no guarrantees it will come back no matter what money or technology you put into it.If i see it floating past Australia i will send it back.Have fun.I think u are determined u mad man and u will probably pull it off just to prove us all wrong!!!

daveopam

My Feedback: (9)

nerys, I don't know you so look at the big picture. You could be building something to hit a target not take pictures. In this day and time you should be really carefull about what information you are giving to the public. Your project is most likely to do exactly what you are saying you want it to do. But what about the person who has something else in mind? How much help are giving him?

David

triplej

Well... i think the baloon will drift many many miles away befor it gets to 100K feet, there are many 150+ mph jet streams up there!
another thing, a model with a 20:1 ratio at 100k feet will glide for over 350 miles (less since it will be in a freefall for a while due to low density air) that is HOURS! you will need a verry high capacity battery to power cameras and maybe 5 or 6 hours of flight time!

are you goin to make this model composite? you may be able to make a model similar to the rutan planes!

man... sounds like fun! IF you pull this off PLEASE put lots of pictures on here!

Tall Paul

You can do this, provided you go along with it.
You must maintain visual contact of the device for the entire trip (eyeball from the ground or a chase plane), otherwise it becomes an Autonomous Air Vehicle, and you WILL have a Certificate of Airworthiness from the FAA.
IOW. fugedaboudit.

Tired Old Man

My Feedback: (1)

Moderator:

This thread needs to be closed and removed. The action the original poster is asking about is indeed illegal in many ways, a hazard for manned flight, and he has indicated that he does not care about legalities, hence has no concern or the safety of others. Much of the information that the poster is requesting is controlled under regulations concerning International Trade and Arms and cannot be legally responded to in a public forum.

Maintaining eye contact with the aircraft does not in any way make this flight legal.

nerys

Hey Silversurfer ? how is this illegal and hazzardous.

Thats what Waivers and Permits are for. I will aquire whatever permissions the FAA tells me I need. I already contacted my local FAA agent and he said once I have some idea of what I want to send up send detailed plans to him and he will let me know who I have to talk to what permits I need waivers etc.. He said this stuff is pretty common place. Not common for civies to do but common enough that they have processes in place to vet out projects for safety.

I have already sent rockets to in excess of 40k ft. For a rocket its a simple waiver. And let me tell you that rocket was many times heavier than this glider is going to be.

Also get off the terrorists hump. Its old quaint and wearing thin the populations patience. If I was a terrorists and wanted to do this there is a MUCH MUCH easier way to do it. You can not HIDE something like this. You do realize something like this will make a rather nice RADAR image return as soon as its launched.

I want to FLY the plane back. I want to put stereo camera's on it and FLY it from 100k to me. but alas that would cost far far more than a mere mortal like me can afford. So far most autonomous systems works like this. When you turn it on it gets a lock. THAT is its home point. I have yet to find one that lets you PROGRAM a destination or course for JUST that reason. They do not want people doing nasty things with these (while I disagree with the logic I understand and agree with the concern) and who cares. makes my life easier. Last thing I need to do is put in some funky numbers and have the plane land out in the middle of the damned ocean.

Some people need to wake up. THIS IS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - not Russia or WWII Germany. Land of the Free - NOT land of the "Enslaved by terrorists and politicians who want to strip our rights in the name of stopping terrorism"

I am not stupid. You can not "HIDE" a 15ft glider at 100k - they will see it moments after I launch it. IN FACT that was ONE idea I had. I was thinking of having the local Control Tower relay coordinates to me and I could "burst" control commands up to the airplane. All I would need is a heading lock system with a compass on board. the Tower could say ok your "here" I plug that into my laptop figure out what heading brings it back to me from THERE and blast that number up to the glider.

Every 10 minutes or so update it in case something changed (wind drift etc..) but that puts a burden on the tower people and they have more important things to do. Would still be a cool idea. Would give it that nasa feel :-)

Why do I want to do this ? well I want to goto space. I want to goto space really bad. Put pooh hooh I do not have 20 million dollars. I could not even goto space if I WON a seat for I could not afford the TAXES on 20 million dollars (that would be about 8-9 million BTW)

So the next best thing is to do what Rutan did but without people. I may not be able to get to space but 110,000ft is close enough to please me. and I xan sure send some EYES to space.

Sure I can get pictures from anywhere but I can now play this video back and say hey "I TOOK THIS VIDEO" - I DID THIS !!!

If you think I am going to let some foolish dumb stupid inane fear of fictional terrorism stop me. Your nuts. Where does it stop ? The only way to stop terrorism BTW is to EMPOWER the citizens. (which BTW is the exact opposite of what we are doing) but thats a discussion not for this forum.

AIRPLANES are used for terrrorism. Should the Wright Brothers have been stopped ? I mean that is the kind of thing terrorists can use (flying planes)

Should Flying be restricted to commercial aircraft ? (oh wait thats what was used in the attack) So no more airliners ?

Where does it stop.

What I want is pretty simple in concept. I want to control JUST the rudder to guide the airplane back into my direction. I may even have a couple of universities who want to help me out (would eliminate most of my permit waiver issues as it would be officially educational greasing the paperwork trail greatly) I figure they can build a few light weight instruments to put about for there science glasses.

I do not want full control and guidance because that adds weight (not a big deal) and MASSIVE expensive (very big deal) I am probably going to be limited to $800-$1000 on this project not counting the camera's I already own. I am not rich. I am hoping needing only rudder control and guiding back to a fixed point (the launch point) will greatly reduce the cost.

Hope that explains a few things. I have a dream to goto space even if only in telepresence. the important part of that dream is ME going to space. that means MY ship MY camera's MY Flight otherwise its just someone else going to space and sending me post cards. I WANT TO DO THE POST CARD SENDING.

I am not going to let some silly fear of terrorism stop my dream. Not for a second. I have no concerns with the FAA - its just a matter of procedure. They will tell me what I need to do and I will comply and get my waivers and permits. Thats just a matter of red tape and time. My guy tells me by keeping the mass so low will help a lot (and make it cheaper for me) No composite all foam. Maybe some carbon veil to reinforce important joints.

I plan to do flying wing lifting body style aircraft for strength. By having guidance I make it SAFER because now it will fly a more predictable path and be easier to issue waivers and notams for. With free flight glider from 50k it could go and end up anywhere in the entire North East. now THAT I could see them worrying over. I would not be surprised is some form of guidance to restrict flight path is REQUIRED for just that reason.

Oh and my second dream ? I want an astronaut on the shuttle on eva to take a small model airplane (plastic so water won't ruin it) to THROUGH and airplane at the earth and "see what happens" :-)

Chris Taylor
http://www.nerys.com/

Tall Paul

http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert...vals/uas/cert/
This is the requirement your thing must adhere to.
I doubt you're capable of this task.

daveopam

My Feedback: (9)

Why would anyone think your a danger after that diatribe you just posted? BTW Google Earth is off. My house is one to the East.

David

nerys

Thanks for the link I already have that one. Did you actually READ the page before using it to say I can not complete such a task. Once I explained to my guy this is a 2 pound 3 pound max plus 2-3 pounds of camera's under 10 pounds flying weight project he said I probably would not even be made to get a ex ua waiver.

That waiver was not designed for what I am doing. He said they have no classification for what I am trying that it would be between a normal uav launch and a balloon launch. Its nothing more than saying this is my plane. this is how I plan to control it (well guide it its not really control) this is how I plan to keep it safe and why its not a danger.

If they agree they stamp me a waiver with a launch window to fly in. If they disagree they will send back what they want to see in modifications. I make the changes send it back they agree and I get my waiver.

Simple as that. sure lots of red tape and all but it will not even cost me anything. I just have to make it safe. and get there approval. He said once they see its a non dangerous foam glider with some camera's and a rudder it will not be much of a problem. He said most of the delay in fact would be them trying to figure out how to classify my launch :-)

I really do not anticipate any FAA problems at all. its the LEAST of my worries and my SIMPLEST problem to solve.

ALSO so far as I can determine I still do not actually have any issues. According to the FAA my model at the size mass an construction I am using would be a Model Airplane and therefore not subject to FAA regulation (even with the guidance) Its when it get large enough to be classified as an AIRCRAFT in the FAA sense of the word that it becomes regulated. IE this flight would appear to still be a simple balloon launch from a regulatory perspective. This is one of the reasons for the "homing guidance" and not a programmed planned guidance.

The compass heading lock would be even easier. NO faa involvement at all at my masses and except for the balloon launch waiver itself. With the compass there is no onboard guidance as I SEND it the headings I want it to follow IE its a variation of radio control.

I would need to get a FCC waiver for the transmitter to send a signal over that kind of distance if I could not find unregulated equipment to handle that but that is what my HAM Radio License is for :-) ie I already have the waiver.

Tall Paul

You are going to bring a plane back from 100 miles or so with ONLY A RUDDER?
I have no doubt you're incapable of this task if that's the level of control you want.

iron eagel

I agree with Tall Paul about flying rudder only, you may want to look at using rudder and elavon for control.

Now as far as radio you mentioned using Ham Freq's for control, could you not use that for your carrier using typical RC control information for flying. I noted you mentioned uplink from your PC if that is the case there is no reason that you could not use that for control as well down linking video ( web cam) besides your high res image system.
Work with your FAA contact and be sure that they have no concerns about your flight.
You may want to add radar reflective material to you airframe so that any commercial of government flight would be able to "see you" on radar as well as bright colours to enhance it in flight.

nerys

Well I am not looking to control the airplane. The plane itself will have full Rudder and Elevator control surfaces but under self guidance only minimal rudder.

The more control I add the more expense and complexity I add. I was actually hoping I could give it more guidance as with the glide ratio I have there is no reason to not say go somewhere else first ie just "let it float around" for say 30 minutes then tell it ok come home. BUT I figure don't get fancy keep it simple.

I am not looking to control this plane from that far away. I am looking to "nudge" it just guide it lightly into the direction I want it to go. I want to make the control input small enough that if the system "faults" with the guidance rudder fully deflected that the airplane will not go into a spiral. I can not afford to lose the $600 camcorder I am going to mount to this! (records in 720p!!) Plus my $500 5mp cammera! and at leas 4 small qvga solid state camcorders at $50 a pop. Plus all the memory cards!

I will probably try it first with a few of the $50 camera's before making the primary flight with the expensive gear.

My Primary concern is recovery of the aircraft intact. This also means safely so it works hand in hand. Think an overly stable free flight foam airplane with a small rudder to "nudge" it in the direction I want it to go. I am depending on glide ratio. I can not do anything about high winds since the only way to beat that is with penetration which means mass which means MUCH heavier and far less safe should something go wrong. I want to make the surface area large enough and the glide speed slow enough that if this were to come down and wonk you in the back of the head it would not hurt you well at least not badly :-)

I would love to virtually fly the airplane but I am unsure of "how" to do this within my budget. Bursting a short signal with some data in it is a bit different than 2 way 50+ mile control. Plus if the control fails and I have no backup .....

If I have the backup there is no real need to spend the money on the virtual flight gear. Now if I either come into some money or figure out how to do it a whole lot cheaper they heck yeah I will go that route. FLYING it all the way down will be SO much more fun for sure !!

YES a radar reflector is one of the requirements to make it easier to track it. there is X cm/2 that I have to use.

Theoretically the first flight will be totally unregulated since it will be under 6 pounds. I would only need a waiver for the balloon flight.

I am allowed payloads of up to 6 pounds totaling no more than 12pounds totally unregulated. I am not sure I could stay under 12 pounds for the bigger flight but definitely for the smaller flight.

I am also thinking of a way to hold the plane nose down vertically and have it smoothly slide release from the balloon rig. I am hoping that in the thin air of 100k it will retain this down facing configuration for a few hundred feet. I will have one camera in the tail looking straight back. Should make for some truly awesome video of the "release" and receding balloon :-) That would be cool!!!

Another nice thing about a smaller model is I can make many flights since it will take far far less helium!!

iron eagel

I have a few comments about what you want to attempt.

First of all consumer electronics are not made to work in a space or near space environment. I used to work for a electronics company which provided solid state components for aerospace industry and the government. You said you wanted to use your $600 camcorder, sorry but it will not work. Why??? Because of the near space vacuum at 100k ft, the lcd displays on your camcorder will explode, or destroyed. As a matter of fact, one possible thing that could happen with the display is that it may hold for sometime. Then the display will then let go in an explosive manner (explosive decompression) whith such force that it could destroy your airplane. The same will hold true for electrolytic capacitors, batteries and alike. Now this is just the vacuum issue, granted a pressure vessel would solve that issue but it would have to be large enough for all of your electronic components, and provide protection for the duration of the high alt. flight. Added weight you must figure on.

Next, cold the environment at 100k is cold enough to make the south pole during the winter season seem warm. Your batteries, camcorder radio and all the electronics must also be kept warm. They will not function in the cold of space either, more power required for the heat elements and controls for heaters, more weight.

One other issue is lift at altitude due to the air density and acceleration when released for for reentry.
At 100k the air density is such that the total lift and drag created by your craft will be equal to a 1/8 inch dowel at sea level. When your plane is released it will accelerate at the rate of 32 feet per second/ per second. Back in the fifties a air force guy jumped from a that altitude he is the only man to have traveled supersonic without an airplane. Your plane will drop like a stone for a few minutes and during this time it will pick up a lot of speed, how much I am not sure, but despite the drag of the human body the test pilot I told you about went supersonic, I would expect a streamlined fuselage and wing will do better. As the air gets denser the high aspect wings of your glider may be subjected to flutter or just riped off as you start your pull out. More structure more weight.

The next thing you must consider is that after you release you will have no aerodynamic control surface that will work, in order to maintain proper flight attitude you need to have another method of control. So now you are going to have to add some for of reaction type of control jet to substitute for aerodynamic control. If you don't trust what I am saying about this read the story about General Yeager and his flight in a F104 shooting for an alt. record. Again more weight....

Also I noticed that you are in PA... Lots of airplanes in the air in the North East not the best place to do this....

I am not saying that it can't be done but it will take a lot of research and work to pull it off.