Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Low Budget Air Space Photography

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the because-you-can dept.

Space 162

An anonymous reader writes "With a budget of just 350 pounds, two British PhDs in engineering sent a balloon with cameras attached to a height of over 30 km." The photos and video are pretty amazing. Especially the very hi-tech styrofoam box.

cancel ×

162 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

heavy! (2, Funny)

chihowa (366380) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080178)

With a budget of just 350 pounds...

That's some heavy styrofoam!

Re:heavy! (1)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080788)

It's 2011, and Slashdot apparently still doesn't support anything outside the EBCDIC character set.

£?

Re:heavy! (1)

gstrickler (920733) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080862)

EBCDIC? Hello, no one supports EBCDIC. Maybe you mean ASCII.

Re:heavy! (1)

xaxa (988988) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080894)

The £ symbol works for me when I type it on my UK keyboard.

Re:heavy! (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081076)

What about the euro?

Re:heavy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081068)

Most of the weight is from the time machine.

It's NOT SPACE (0, Troll)

thomasdz (178114) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080196)

30km up is NOT SPACE. 100km up is space. wake me up when someone gets a balloon up that far.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (5, Funny)

thomasdz (178114) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080208)

oh and by the way... Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny? NOT REAL!

Re:It's NOT SPACE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080260)

They said "Air space" Photography. RTFS dude. No one said "Outer space".

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

hoferbr (707935) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080278)

Actually, it's space. It's just not outer space. But the news never claimed that they reached outer space.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

msauve (701917) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080450)

It's not "space" by the common understanding of the term [wikipedia.org] . If, by "space," you mean simply existing in space-time, so the atmosphere doesn't matter, then nothing can be sent into space, since it was always present in space.

OTOH, the OP was incorrect in implying an error. The article only claims "edge of space," which seems accurate enough to describe a height where the contrast between the earth's atmosphere and space can be clearly seen.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080692)

It's not "space" ... then nothing can be sent into space, since it was always present in space.

That reminds me of this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcU4t6zRAKg [youtube.com]

Re:It's NOT SPACE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080728)

The atmospheric interface is 100km - is 30 km the edge of space? I can clearly see "space" at night from the ground. I don't think sending a balloon w/ 350 lb. payload to 30km is that big of a deal anymore. Maybe in the 60's, not today. The real question - is why so heavy?

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080524)

What's with TFS image depicting planets, and linking to "space" filter?

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

Rhaban (987410) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080614)

Actually, it's space.
It's just not outer space. But the news never claimed that they reached outer space.

I just reached space bar six times.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081898)

I just reached space bar six times.

I'll have a pan-galactic gargle blaster.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080284)

Not only that - what is suddenly the point of having the same exact news (just with different people...) again and again, every month or two? Especially if it's something done for many years...

Re:It's NOT SPACE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080374)

Same purpose as posting about dupes on slashdot. again and again. For many years. :) Kettle, meet black.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080698)

The best part about this story is it took two PhDs in engineering to do what high school kids have been doing for many years ;)

Next story: four PhDs in engineering build pinewood derby car, lose to boy scouts

Think they should mail their diplomas back to whatever website they ordered them from

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

Stregano (1285764) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080814)

Actually, it is cub scouts that do pinewood derby. There is a difference between them, but not a big one (mainly age)

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

Teancum (67324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081880)

It is mostly the dads of the Cub Scouts who make the pinewood derby cars, so I would argue that losing to a bunch of Boy Scouts is more likely something made by the actual kids.

Pinewood Derby competitions turn into flat out Pinewood Derby Engineering complete with wind tunnels to reduce drag from air turbulence, grinding axles with a lathe, and studies of various lubricants to beat out the competition. One interesting book I just read even went into the moment of inertia for the car to maximize the amount of energy obtained from the car dropping down the track (hint: put most of the weight of the car in the back to eek out a few extra joules of energy). Reducing the coefficient of friction on the wheels is the best way to win, however.

It is serious business, and real engineering does go into those cars.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

melikamp (631205) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080848)

The point is to advertise YouTube, and therefore Adobe. HTML5 my ass. Wouldn't it be cool if someone actually started a torrent with a Theora or WebM space video with sub-half-inch pixels? I couldn't even finish watching this one, it's a mess. You would think that a university could afford 20 kbps uplink for a month, and PhDs in engineering could figure out how to seed a torrent, but no. It has to be the shittiest quality imaginable, piped through Flash.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

Teancum (67324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081778)

What is sad is that a real story [slashdot.org] about a vehicle going to this altitude, but with technology that clearly can go much further, was simply ignored and forgotten. The difference? Pretty pictures.

Personally, I think the idea that a rocket that may go to the Moon eventually is something worth "news for nerds". Yet another "high altitude" balloon launch? Not really.

I thought the same thing.... More high altitude balloon pictures? I'll wait for the tourists who go up on the VSS Enterprise to bring back their snapshots on their cameras. Those will likely be higher quality even if it is a relatively cheap camera bought at Wal-Mart on the night before their launch, and from a little more than double the altitude.

Re:It's NOT SPACE (1)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080656)

Yeah, because the video in the story wasn't cool at all because it only went up 30km and not 100km. Riiiiiight.

Pretty cool (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080224)

For 1947. Why is this news more than half a century later?

Re:Pretty cool (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080264)

because random 2 guys with 350 pound budget did it.

Re:Pretty cool (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080356)

Random two engineering PhDs?... A lot less qualified folks are launching such balloons for many years. Also, 350 pounds is strangely expensive.

Just call it what it is (constant reporting of it, not the fun activity itself!) - some temporary media fad / phenomena.

Re:Pretty cool (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080444)

then they are of the first ones that were able to make into mainstream media. then THAT is the news.

Re:Pretty cool (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080808)

Not even that, I'm pretty sure there were some media reports at least over half a decade ago. They're just ... two engineering PhDs who jumped on recent media bandwagon about one type of small fun projects done by middle-schoolers (for many years)

Re:Pretty cool (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080940)

well, i didnt see any media reports at least half a decade ago, or longer. for me, its news. simply, probably for a lot of other people, its same too. so, it IS news.

Re:Pretty cool (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081298)

Even about balloon-lifted stratospheric UAV... [google.pl] (after most straightforward attempt at news search; I think I've seen more than one "just a balloon" in UK mainstream media few years ago)

Which in itself wasn't unheard of since a few years [members.shaw.ca] even in 2005... (BTW, except for "just a balloon" media fad resurfacing in a few years and people forgetting this round, I fully except "OMG it's a spaceplane!" fad relatively soon)

Re:Pretty cool (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081862)

I think I've seen more than one "just a balloon" in UK mainstream media few years ago)

realize that 'uk' is not 'world.

most of us havent seen it. it didnt exist for us.

Re:Pretty cool (1)

Ksevio (865461) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080298)

Because as you see from the start of the video - it's from December 2011!

Not only did they send this into space, but they sent it back in time!

Re:Pretty cool (1)

nzap (1985014) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080350)

Wait a second... what year is it where you're from?

Re:Pretty cool (1)

alta (1263) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080610)

2011 here, but it sure as hell isn't December yet.

Re:Pretty cool (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080476)

Not to mention this has been done, like, 93 times in just the past couple years. It's like a new hobby sweeping the land.

Not bad, but not new (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080246)

Neat video. Of course, amateur groups have been doing this for decades, so it's not really news:

http://www.eoss.org/

Re:Not bad, but not new (1)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080344)

This one is pretty amazing: 37 km altitude, fun to watch and nice music :-)

Re:Not bad, but not new (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080498)

And Slashdot has posted a lot of them. Used to be the easiest way to get a mention on Slashdot was design an interesting case mod. Now it seems to be balloon space photography.

Re:Not bad, but not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080770)

And Slashdot has posted a lot of them. Used to be the easiest way to get a mention on Slashdot was design an interesting case mod. Now it seems to be balloon space photography.

Pretty sure balloon space photography takes a little more doing than a case mod.

Now a balloon space photography case mod... that would be news!

Re:Not bad, but not new (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080960)

Pretty sure balloon space photography takes a little more doing than a case mod.

Probably not. At least, not a good one. I feel fairly confident in my ability to send up a balloon with a camera in it. But I would have trouble making even a simple looking case like this [extremetech.com] , this [gearlog.com] , or this [elitechoice.org] .

Re:Not bad, but not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081098)

The next big thing will be ballon space photography with an interesting case mod.

Re:Not bad, but not new (1)

mikael (484) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081582)

Maybe an Imax 360 HD 3D camera will Dolby surround sound and music specially composed by the Philharmonic orchestra will be the next big thing...

Re:Not bad, but not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080674)

Neat video. Of course, amateur groups have been doing this for decades, so it's not really news:

http://www.eoss.org/

But did you see the self applying duct tape? Where do I get that?

Re:Not bad, but not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081138)

The REAL news is that they managed to send the balloon into the future and then retrieve footage from December 2011!!

When will you be able to buy kits on Think Geek (1)

maxwells_deamon (221474) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081166)

Probably will not happen for liability/littering reasons

Re:Not bad, but not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081310)

Seriously - send a fucking model rocket attached to a balloon lift platform and start taking pot-shots at the moon. Even if you don't make it its cooler than this camera on a balloon trick. Well, on second thought the camera might still be needed, but 3-4 balloons with a rudimentary stabilization system could provide a launch platform for a multi-stage model rocket at the edge of space, and could feasibly hit the moon with about 8 decent size stages.

Re:Not bad, but not new (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081624)

It's still pretty damn cool, though.

Sounds like ... (1)

kmf (792603) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080248)

the http://www.astdroid.com/ [astdroid.com] project :D

Air clearance? (2)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080262)

Are people supposed to get air clearance before launching a balloon that passes through altitudes used by commercial aircraft. Just curious.

Re:Air clearance? (3, Informative)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080322)

Yes, you're supposed to coordinate the launch with local airspace authority (at least that's the way at my place...). Also, the payload should conform to certain requirements... (if it gets hit despite all the precautions, apparently)

But generally, a very straightforward formality / folks dealing with it tended to be nice.

Re:Air clearance? (4, Informative)

Migraineman (632203) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080372)

In the US, the FAA has rules for untethered balloons. [gpoaccess.gov] If you're below certain size and material restrictions, you're good to go. Issuing a NOTAM (Notice To Airmen) is highly recommended, even if you're not required to file one. Demonstrates that you're being professional about your activities.

Re:Air clearance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080392)

i frequently issue a NOTAM to my boss.

as in im NOT coming to work this AM.

offtopic, carry on..

Re:Air clearance? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080464)

Just shows how much lower 'education' has become - these are supposed to be PhD level students - wrong date on the video, no thought over air clearance. Not to mention the completely derivative, unoriginal, simplistic project that is just an attempt to do something headline grabbing.

What's next for PhD students a model volcano with real fizzing "lava"?

Re:Air clearance? (1)

sirrunsalot (1575073) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080642)

Just shows how much lower 'education' has become - these are supposed to be PhD level students

Oh, now come on. You're just being negative. It specifically says they did it in their spare time. Most PhD students probably stare at the wall and cry quietly in their spare time. At least they did something, even if it's not novel. Don't confuse this, however, with me thinking it should be on slashdot. I kinda like the recent father-son team, but there's nothing new here. Just a fun low-key, low-budget project for a couple students who may or may not be doing perfectly valid work on University time.

Re:Air clearance? (5, Interesting)

fatboy (6851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080604)

Our group has never submitted a NOTAM, because we are exempt. I have audio recorded of a "near miss" [youtube.com] with one of our group's balloons. Never saw the jet, but it sure sounded close. I think we will be filing NOTAMs from now on, even though we are not required to.

Re:Air clearance? (1)

phantomcircuit (938963) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081536)

Looks like someone found your jet!

Simpsons did it. (1)

gblackwo (1087063) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080292)

Is there anything they've improved upon versus the other dozens that have been done? I'm too lazy to RTFA after the nth one of these stories.

Time travel (1)

Skuto (171945) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080296)

If you watch the video carefully, you will see they invented time travel as well!

Re:Time travel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081206)

Indeed... They apparently filmed this 11 Months from now!

December 2011? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080300)

Its amazing that they were able to send it to December 2011 and back

Been there, done that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080324)

These balloon projects are old news.....I participated in the same thing back in 1998/1999 (and even then people had been doing it years earlier)...did it for 1/2 the amount of money too, no PhD on staff either. Our balloon had cameras, wireless communication repeater and GPS tracking for recovery....and it was live on the internet at the time.

has been done dozens of times now (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080342)

And at least three Slashdot stories in the past couple years. Its a pretty common science fair project now.
The "swiss-army-knife" smart phone is the device that makes this possible. It does almost everything you need for a couple hundred bucks..

Re:has been done dozens of times now (1)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080376)

I thought the same thing - "This AGAIN?", but at least this time the guys putting together the video made it entertaining.

Re:has been done dozens of times now (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080582)

The guys putting together the video apparently couldn't be innovative even regarding the soundtrack; it's non-viewable in many places / some copyright hiccups, it seems.

Re:has been done dozens of times now (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080412)

At least three Slashdot stories in the past couple months... (easy and inexpensive enough (or less, regarding price...) without smartphone, too)

Re:has been done dozens of times now (1)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080454)

Indeed. I'm surprised this story keeps getting posted every time some group of geeks decides to do this. It isn't newsworthy anymore and the pictures, while great for amateurs, are not so worth my time compared to NASA or USAF photos.

-d

Re:has been done dozens of times now (2)

louic (1841824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080998)

It isn't newsworthy

This is about the 10th comment I read about the article not being original. Should be modded +1 funny for the irony of it. If you are criticising an article for not being original, what about the comments?

Video from UMG? (1)

kwwii (663850) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080410)

Can't view the video in Germany, it says "This video contains content from UMG. It is not available in your country."

Server? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080422)

Someone should host a server on one of these, and try to keep it in the air as long as possible

Re:Server? (1)

Stenchwarrior (1335051) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080508)

They could run it off a MacBook Air...

Re:Server? (1)

sirrunsalot (1575073) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080804)

Are you making an uptime joke?

Low calibre PhD students! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080436)

...should be pushing the frontiers of science and original thinking. Not reinventing the wheel. Shame on you. I recommend not completing your PhD theses and get a job at Tesco.

This has been done too many times already. Shame!

Nothing to see here, float along... (2)

the_other_chewey (1119125) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080448)

"This video contains content from UMG. It is not available in your country."

Just imagine... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080472)

Wow. Just imagine yourself on-board on one of those things. But much bigger. *POP!* OMG! WTF! I'm falling! AAGGHHH!

No money for licenses though (1)

clickety6 (141178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080504)

This video contains content from UMG. It is not available in your country.

Cool, but... (1)

Stenchwarrior (1335051) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080552)

It could have been way cooler if they used multiple cameras, or at least one more pointing down toward Earth. And how feasible would it have been to add some sort of shared storage device so they wouldn't run out of space and could record the entire flight?

Re:Cool, but... (1)

hubie (108345) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081484)

If these were Ph.D. graduate students, they don't have a whole lot of disposable cash in their pockets. Feasibility comes down to how much do they want to spend of their own money on something that might be destroyed or lost, or how much feature creep do they want when they just want to launch it. If their motivation was to move the bar on amateur balloon launch innovation, then perhaps they could/should/etc. have done what you suggested or much more. However, if it was something more like the desire to do something they find interesting for its own sake, then kudos to them.

I think the complaints about how many of these stories make it to the Slashdot front page are valid. However, if these guys aren't making any particular uniqueness claims, then I think the people grousing here about how so-and-so did it first, or did it for less money, or whatever, should shut up and get their own hobby.

Re:Cool, but... (1)

mikael (484) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081752)

A fisheye lens would do - couple of those and you only need two cameras - use video processing to stitch the two movies together and you have a full 360x180 view. Or get one of those "Gorgon Stare" military surveillance camera systems.

Future is here! (2)

sergiy.gagarin (1006187) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080628)

Or is it that my computer's clock is really off? Because it was done in December of 2011 according to the video in the article. Anyway this hardly is something new since there was this £500 launch this summer in fancy orange styrofoam http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1288688/The-incredible-pictures-edge-space--taken-30-digital-camera-attached-balloon.html [dailymail.co.uk] and even this 150$ launch from September 2009 and subsequent Project Icarus http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/09/the-150-space-camera-mit-students-beat-nasa-on-beer-money-budget/ [wired.com]

Egg drop (1)

gaderson (555659) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080678)

Wow, finally I can put all that 'egg drop' expertise from childhood to good use.

swinging and spinning (1)

pz (113803) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080680)

I expected there to be less swinging and swaying well above the clouds. Commercial jets, at a mere 10 km high (very roughly) are able to often find very still air. Three times higher isn't very very very still? Do we have any experts here?
 

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080704)

Their balloon had no provisions to efficiently damp acquired oscillations.

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

pz (113803) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081650)

Their balloon had no provisions to efficiently damp acquired oscillations.

I know nothing about balloon design. How do you dampen perturbations?

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

the_other_chewey (1119125) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081896)

I know nothing about balloon design. How do you dampen perturbations?

With water.

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080760)

Simple answer: Stillness isn't a monotonic function of altitude.

Simplified more complicated answer: Air comes in layers, many layers, depending on the local weather, but there are generally several major layers covering the whole earth (stratosphere, troposphere, etc.). Each layer has its own characteristics of temperature gradient and general wind pattern. Between the layers is where the most turbulence is, because air really doesn't like shearing. And in one of the upper layers winds of hundreds of kph are typical, and turbulence is as well.

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

maxwells_deamon (221474) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081122)

I also suspect the swinging parts of the video were more interesting. The camera would not show as much when it was not moving around.

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

pz (113803) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081622)

I also suspect the swinging parts of the video were more interesting. The camera would not show as much when it was not moving around.

I thought about that ... seems a shortcoming of the imaging mechanism they chose. More than one camera might have been useful.

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

hubie (108345) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081124)

Plus, once you start swinging there isn't a whole lot that will dampen your oscillations.

Re:swinging and spinning (1)

qmaqdk (522323) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081356)

At high altitudes there's much less friction from air to dampen oscillations.

Would not be legal in the USA (0)

Andy Dodd (701) | more than 3 years ago | (#35080742)

TFA implies that their comm/tracking system used a cell phone. In the USA, FCC regulations prohibit use of cell phones while airborne in general. (There are exceptions for situations where measures have been taken to eliminate interference with terrestrial networks, such as a microcell within an aircraft cabin that causes the handsets to drop their transmitter power). However, it has never been legal in the USA for an airborne cell phone to communicate with the terrestrial cell network.

This hasn't stopped numerous USA-based HAB projects from looking at the FAA regs on balloons, saying "we're legal!", then using a cell phone for their comm system without bothering to check the FCC rules and licensing for cell phones. I think one of the few HAB projects I know of that did things legitimately was Project Blue Horizon - All of their comms are in the amateur (ham) bands and every year the project has at least 2-3 licensed hams.

Re:Would not be legal in the USA (2)

Archon-X (264195) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081046)

Hey!
You're that guy I'm always 'lucky' enough to bump into at parties.
I remember you saying you were part of some club, was it the TIA (Totally Irrelevant Anecdotes) or CBHFO (Can't be happy for others) ?

Please don't let me know, thanks.

Re:Would not be legal in the USA (1)

cvtan (752695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081062)

So the music is illegal, the cell phone is illegal, the lack of flight plan is illegal. Good thing this was done somewhere outside the good ole USA. I feel safer knowing this thing couldn't land on my grandchildren (not really).

Is it ok to just say 'That was cool'? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35080934)

Or do we have to piss all over it with our need to be tech dicks?

It was nice to watch. I'm glad they did it.

Good example (1)

cvtan (752695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081026)

Good example of "duct tape engineering". After all, it is not recommended to use duct tape on ducts.

Re:Good example (1)

ThatMegathronDude (1189203) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081336)

Its called "duck tape". The plastic backing causes water to bead off rather than soak through, just like a duck's feathers. "Duct tape" has a foil backing that is airtight but not very flexible.

Re:Good example (2)

cvtan (752695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081452)

Sorry, but Duck tape is a brand name for a type of duct tape.

dante (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35081254)

http://moekino.3dn.ru/

Bah, humbug (1)

SpinyNorman (33776) | more than 3 years ago | (#35081508)

It was news the first time someone did it, but not the 100th or whatever we're up to now. I've lost count of how many times slashdot has run "balloon takes camera to edge of space for $x" stories.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>