![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() As I recall, Dick said something about Edwards and China Lake both tracking it on radar. At best, that might give you a hundred meter accuracy. A radar altimeter at 63 miles is a hell of a feat AND subject to severe angle errors. I'd probably rely on GPS. As Dick indicated, two feet is about the resolution you can get with a regular old GPS (unenhanced). That is my bet. Jim Todd Pattist shared these priceless pearls of wisdom: -I set my Tivo to record the CNN coverage and Dick Rutan -mentioned that there were two tracking stations monitoring -the flight that could verify altitude to about "this far" -and he held his hands about 2 feet apart. I "think" he said -they were optical tracking stations. I presume there's -another form of on-board altimeter for measuring low -pressure or perhaps a radar altimeter. Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup) VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor http://www.rst-engr.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Weir wrote:
As I recall, Dick said something about Edwards and China Lake both tracking it on radar. At best, that might give you a hundred meter accuracy. Do you recall him holding his hands apart? I have to admit, my attention was distracted right about then, so I can't recall exactly what he said. A radar altimeter at 63 miles is a hell of a feat AND subject to severe angle errors. I took a class in the early '70's on radar mapping of Venus and the moon from ground based radar dishes. The basic technique says you send out a spherical wave, and the leading edge of your return wave is the closest point to you. I don't have any info on radar altimeters, but shouldn't they be reasonably self aligning if you get the point below into your beam? I recognize that might be hard for a craft in free-fall, but if it's not tumbling and the beam width isn't too narrow ... of course, now you've got power and detection problems at wide beam and 63 miles. :-) I'd probably rely on GPS. As Dick indicated, two feet is about the resolution you can get with a regular old GPS (unenhanced). That is my bet. Makes sense. Cheaper too. Todd Pattist (Remove DONTSPAMME from address to email reply.) ___ Make a commitment to learn something from every flight. Share what you learn. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm sure if they were smart enough to figure out how to get up there,
they were also smart enough to figure out how far up they got. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Did the Germans have the Norden bombsight? | Cub Driver | Military Aviation | 106 | May 12th 04 07:18 AM |
Hubble plug to be pulled | John Carrier | Military Aviation | 33 | March 19th 04 04:19 AM |
Rules on what can be in a hangar | Brett Justus | Owning | 13 | February 27th 04 05:35 PM |
OT (sorta): Bush Will Announce New Space Missions | Dav1936531 | Military Aviation | 0 | January 9th 04 10:34 AM |
Strategic Command Missions Rely on Space | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | September 30th 03 09:59 PM |