Hi-Tech Paper Airplane Makes 82 Mile Flight

[Maui]

You can read the story here:

http://www.electronicproducts.com/E...airplane_sets_record_with_82_mile_flight.aspx

This would be an awesome high school class project for those of you with children that age.

Maui

 

[Latexman]

Having launched many paper airplanes as a youngster, this is AWESOME!

Good luck,
Latexman

Technically, the glass is always full - 1/2 air and 1/2 water.

 

[dgallup]

Not you average paper airplane!

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[Artisi]

Seeing as how my paper aeroplanes can achieve about 3 metres at best with a strong tailwind and performing like a dead duck, this flight is pretty awesome.

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. (Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.)

 

[IRstuff]

Well, not to discount its performance, but starting at 18 miles up gives it a pretty big advantage over the paper lead balloons most people can cobble together. Nevertheless, a 4.5:! glide ratio is still pretty reasonable.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

Of course I can. I can do anything. I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

 

[Artisi]

Even my poor attempt to build something that would fly would benefit from a starting point 18 miles up.

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. (Sherlock Holmes - A Scandal in Bohemia.)

 

[SomptingGuy]

Football can be interesting:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BV6EP9bBbac

Is that Alan Partridge commentating though?

- Steve

 

[BigInch]

Not to belittle the work that went into such a project; it's hard to get to get anything 18 miles high, but I think that was probably the extent of the real accomplishment. Given that it was launched from such a height, I also believe that the plane's glide ratio was actually far poorer than a rock hand thrown from that altitude.

you must get smarter than the software you're using.

 

[IRstuff]

82 miles/96563 ft = 4.48 glide ratio.

Not fantastic, but almost identical to the Space Shuttle on approach. According yo Wikipedia, a 767 has a glide ratio of ~12

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

Of course I can. I can do anything. I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

 

[davidbeach]

If I've done the math even close to correctly the rock would have to have been thrown at something like 3600 mph for it to have covered 82 miles horizontally before it would cover 18 miles vertically. Not many folks around that could throw a rock that fast.

 

[SomptingGuy]

Not many ballons work in a vacuum either.

- Steve

 

[IRstuff]

?? 18 mi is still a long way from vacuum, which is generally accepted to be at 100-km altitude, or 62 mi.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

Of course I can. I can do anything. I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

 

[SomptingGuy]

I wondered if I needed to explain. I meant the 3600 mph estimated throwing speed is probably based on free-fall in a vacuum. Not in the air that's required to hold the ballon up. That calculation would be much more involved.

- Steve

 

[davidbeach]

Free fall without air resistance, also horizontal velocity without air resistance. Yes, the real equation is rather complex, but the velocity necessary to throw a rock 82 miles while it falls 18 miles is way outside human capability.

 

[IRstuff]

You don't need to throw the rock 82 miles, you need a 4.5:1 glide ratio, or better. The Space Shuttle had often been compared to a rock, so your typical high-performance skipping rock could probably manage some sort of glide, but it would be horrifically unstable without stabilizer surfaces.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

Of course I can. I can do anything. I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

 

[btrueblood]

What's more, the real glide ratio of the plane probably exceeded 4.5:1 by a factor of two or so - the thing was un-guided, so probably spiraled down, and achieved cross-range due to the wind. Another calculation from "the flight took 2 hours and 7 minutes", gives its vertical fall rate average; something like 12 ft/sec. Still no great shakes as a glider, but better than a parachute, or a rock.

 

[MadMango]

Did anyone catch this "automatic paper airplane gun"?

http://youtu.be/J7K91g8yG_w

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[BigInch]

Jet stream at that altitude probably helped more than glide ratio.
Glide ratios for aircraft are around 20:1, sailplanes 40:1

you must get smarter than the software you're using.

 

[KENAT]

It would be interesting to see the exact flight path and know what resolution it was recorded with. I'd think that it's quite possible, even likely, that for parts of it's flight it wasn't following a true glide path but just blowing in the wind.

Additionally it has a very low aspect ratio wing, so it's glide performance wouldn't be great. Although it is probably reasonably stable by paper aeroplane standards which in gusty flight conditions may be more useful that good nominal L/D ratio.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[VEBill]

Maybe it drifted (for example) 80 miles sideways while still attached to the balloon.