Boy sends camera into "space" using balloon.

[Kosmo-not]

19-Year-Old Captures Stunning Images of Earth from Space Using Homemade Spacecraft

It seems like you can do anything and the media will praise you like some prodigy. What are your thoughts on this "amazing" accomplishment?

My favorite comment on that article so far: "Isn't he contributing to the ridiculous amount of space trash that we already have?"

I don't consider 32km to be space. Of course, the media wouldn't know the difference.

Also, doesn't the media know doing stuff like this is old news?

[Vanamonde]

I don't mind the story so much, as not many people would bother to figure out how to do something like that, and it's nice to encourage the guy. But yes, the story is aggravating because reporters are generally idiots who get things wrong because they don't know better, or because they're trying to make the story more dramatic than it is. "His pictures are comparable to the images that NASA's team produces after having spent hundreds of millions of dollars on technologically advanced satellites." Yeah, "comparable" in the same way that my KSP screenshots are comparable to Curiousity's images.

(This made me so mad I posted my first-ever comment on a news or Youtube piece.)

[AncientAstronaut]

The journalist who wrote this article is an oxygen thief.

[NovaSilisko]

"His pictures are comparable to the images that NASA's team produces after having spent hundreds of millions of dollars on technologically advanced satellites."

Oh, lord.

[rasheed]

What the, more than a hundred million bucks just to take high quality pictures when that boy did it for under $400. give him a medal of awesomeness. or M.A.

>

[Vanamonde]

I did a stupid thing. I expected the internet (present site excluded) to function rationally. First of all, I seem to have been the only person who read that commentary thread before posting a reply, and no one who posted after my comment appears to have read mine. I should have remembered that the internet is a place for everyone to shout at once, and no one is listening. But my actual mistake was reading the other comments myself. Those people frightened me.

There was a guy who claimed it must have been a hoax because the camera didn't burn up while returning from space, and a number of people jumped on the bandwagon of mocking NASA. Apparently, people will believe anything they see in print, whether it makes sense or not.

I am sad now.

[kaijar]

Oh my... I'm sure some of you guys have seen the Curiosity follow up conferences they have every other week or so. I listen through the question and answer section. Those journalists.... It's a very similar situation.

[PakledHostage]

I did a stupid thing. I expected the internet (present site excluded) to function rationally.

Well, thanks for trying!

[Pleborian]

meh.... you wouldn't see the 19 year olds round here doing things like that, most of them are delinquents.... might not be a mighty feat like the reporter is making it out to be but good on this kid for taking an interest in something that most 19 years wouldnt

[Ydoow]

I give him kudos for following through on the project. It's a bit out of my abilities, but I bet I could research how to do it.

Really what I admire is that he followed through

*looks around at all my stagnant projects*

[Millst0ne MK II]

Ok, most of the people in my school are smoking pot, so I think he does deserve credit.

[PakledHostage]

good on this kid for taking an interest in something that most 19 years wouldnt

You're right, but I don't think much of the criticism here is directed at Adam Cudworth. The problem is with how it is being reported. If the article was posted on these forums, it would probably be deleted by the mods on the grounds that it’s nothing more than a trolling attempt. By failing to put the facts into proper context and by over stating other aspects of the story, it makes NASA/the ESA seem like a bunch of boobs and fuels anti NASA/ESA sentiments.

[sixpackabs]

Obviously NASA should be looking into this 400$ balloon technology, I propose that we send a manned balloon to mars in the next decade.

[Matokage]

This balloon is really nothing compared to the NASA's satellites, why? i will show you

1. Satellites can archive an stable orbit, Balloons just go straight up and them fall down

2. Satellites are heavy, Balloons pay load are just a few pounds

3. Satellites can take photos of specific locations, THIS balloon just taken some random photos on the way up

4. Satellites can work for long periods, balloons just works until the balloon explodes in the vacuum

Resuming

Satellites are expensive because they are made to stay

Balloons are disposable

Just to add Something, here are some projects of space baloons

http://www.instructables.com/id/Low-cost-Near-Space-Without-HAM-Radios-or-Cellphon/

Archived 40k altitude

http://www.instructables.com/id/My-Space-Balloon-Project-Stratohab-Success-High/

archived 65K altitude

http://www.instructables.com/id/Taking-pictures-of-space/

The balloon ascends over 2 hours to a maximum altitude of 100,000 feet

Edited September 12, 2012 by Matokage

[LukeTim]

So many people have done this now that it's beginning to seem pretty boring.

I did want to do this as my Dissertation Project at Uni... except transmitting images back to earth as soon as they're taken, and also transmitting GPS data to track the flight, rather than just storing it all for later. Had problems with licensing, though. You need some pretty powerful radio to transmit that stuff back from 100,000ft. Ended up doing the transmission sort range without a balloon.

I still want to do it... just with a rocket instead of a balloon now.

Edited September 12, 2012 by LukeTim

[DonKamillo]

This balloon is really nothing compared to the NASA's satellites, why? i will show you

1. Satellites can archive an stable orbit, Balloons just go straight up and them fall down

2. Satellites are heavy, Balloons pay load are just a few pounds

3. Satellites can take photos of specific locations, THIS balloon just taken some random photos on the way up

4. Satellites can work for long periods, balloons just works until the balloon explodes in the vacuum

Resuming

Satellites are expensive because they are made to stay

Balloons are disposable

But you are forgetting the most important part: Most sattelites aren't build for taking pretty pictures. They are for scientifical research

[Tauge]

I did a stupid thing. I expected the internet (present site excluded) to function rationally. First of all, I seem to have been the only person who read that commentary thread before posting a reply, and no one who posted after my comment appears to have read mine. I should have remembered that the internet is a place for everyone to shout at once, and no one is listening. But my actual mistake was reading the other comments myself. Those people frightened me.

There was a guy who claimed it must have been a hoax because the camera didn't burn up while returning from space, and a number of people jumped on the bandwagon of mocking NASA. Apparently, people will believe anything they see in print, whether it makes sense or not.

I am sad now.

Expecting logic from people, on the internet no less? You should know better.

[Capt'n Skunky]

Another one of these crap "balloon to space" news pieces? These things are always garbage and over-hyped to get eyeballs. A fluff piece. You got to throw in the occasional fluff piece between all the doom and gloom.

A few months ago the story was about some girls in Tennessee that "put a camera in orbit". As soon as I saw them use "ballon" and "orbit" in the same sentence I died a little. Then I realized it was Tennessee, so about par for the course.

Seriously, the reporter had no clue what an orbit is really.

Arrr!

Capt'n Skunky

[thristydevil]

Hahahahaha really!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! city garden

If he can do this then surely I can make a ship of paper and visit the whole world within 30 minutes lol sorry this is too hard for me.

Edited September 13, 2012 by thristydevil