
Skydiver shatters world record with 24-mile leap - mittermayr
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/10/14/skydiver-sound-barrier-baumgartner/1632329/
======
lordlarm
Two funny insights from Neil deGrasse Tysons twitter:

«The "Edge of Space" jump: A corresponding fall to a schoolroom globe begins 1
millimeter above its surface. I'm just saying.» [1]

«I'm told somebody's jumping out of a perfectly good balloon from 23-miles up.
The theory of gravity no longer needs to be tested in this way»[2]

Congrats to Felix and his team anyways - great endurance and a great show.

[1]: <https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/257591067833139200> [2]:
<https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/255691761341587456>

~~~
zavulon
I'm starting to agree with Maddox that "Internet really needs to stop sucking
Neil deGrasse Tyson's dick." [1]

The man is not without accomplishments, but it's getting to the point of
complete over-saturation. Just enough already.

[1] <http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=youre_not_a_nerd>

~~~
arrrg
Wow, that guy is a pompous ass. His doling out of nerd status is too
ridiculous.

~~~
DavidAdams
For those unfamiliar with Maddox, he is a blogger whose public persona is in
fact an over-the-top professional pompous ass. So your observation is spot on,
but he does it on purpose.

------
KevinEldon
This was special for me. I wasn't alive when the moon landings or early space
program happened. Space shuttles were exciting, but mechanized and somehow
predictable; I was probably too young to appreciate them and by the time I was
old enough to appreciate what was going on they were routine (even that
disasters were disasters not because it was crazy to try an launch some
massive machine with a bunch of people in it into space, but because some sort
of process or engineering failed... we expected success).

This was different. A balloon, a capsule, and a single man with a suit
supported by years of engineering and hard work. My whole family watched as
Felix stepped out onto the little skateboard sized step; we held our breaths
as he jumped. We watched the infrared camera as he started to tumble and I
wondered how I would explain his death to my 4-year old who was watching too.
I'm glad I didn't have to. I'm glad I get to explain how hard work,
engineering, bravery, a very talented team and a little bit of individual
craziness can do some amazing things.

For me this was special to watch. Thanks to everyone who participated in
making this event happen.

~~~
sageikosa
I guess the best part is that no government funds were expended in the making
of this high-tech extreme sport event.

------
Arjuna
Preliminary (i.e., non-record certified) telemetry:

Exit altitude:

    
    
      128,100 ft
      39,045 m
    

Free-fall time:

    
    
      4m:20s
    

Free-fall distance:

    
    
      119,846 ft
      36,529 m
    

Maximum velocity:

    
    
      373 m/s
      1,342.8 km/h
      833.9 mph
      Mach 1.24

~~~
bradgessler
Is breaking the sound barrier noticeable to the sky diver?

~~~
nikcub
No it doesn't. The problem with the sonic boom in fighter jets and the
associated forces it produces is because the control surfaces of the planes at
the time weren't designed to deal with the effects from supersonic speeds[0],
so they would lose control.

There is no 'force' associated with breaking the sound barrier, as most would
imagine

Most of the forces in the freefall would have been G forces from the tumbling
or spinning motion as he jumped out.

[0] the tl;dr for aircraft is that as you approach and overtake mach 1, at
some point the airflow at the beginning of the wing is supersonic while at the
rear of the wing it is not, as you accelerate this point moves from the front
of the wing to the rear. the problem is that it causes the airflow from that
point to separate from the wing which results in a stall, spin, crash etc.

~~~
jasonwatkinspdx
This is slightly misleading. There is wave drag, which is caused by the
formation of shocks. This happens when the plane/body is nearing the speed of
the pressure wave it creates ahead of itself. The air no longer has sufficient
time to flow around the body in a smooth (or even turbulent) way. Instead it
piles up into sharp discontinuities called shocks, with very low pressure
regions behind the shocks. This produces a lot of drag, several times more
than that due to viscous drag alone. That's where the concept of a 'sound
barrier' came from. People weren't sure what the maximum drag would be, or if
we could build engines powerful enough to overcome it. Obviously we can and
did.

But in the case of free fall from space or near space, the air is so thin that
these effects are minimal. Also his starting velocity moving through the thin
air is much lower than say a reentering space craft, so the whole thing is
much more mild and manageable. By the time the air gets thick enough to worry
about, he'll have shed enough speed to even the slight early drag to be at a
reasonable terminal velocity. (This is the same concept used by SpaceShipOne's
'shuttlecock' re-entry).

~~~
001sky
_But in the case of free fall from space or near space, the air is so thin
that these effects are minimal._

\-- This is interesing, Thanks.

Do we know at what altitude he hit Mach 1.0, out of curiousity?

~~~
gort
Back of envelope calculation:

    
    
      A. Starting height = 39045 m
      B. Desired speed = 343 m/s
      C. Acceleration = 9.8 m/s/s
    
      D. Average speed while accelerating = 171 m/s (half of B)
      E. Time to reach desired speed = 35 s (B divided by C)
      F. Therefore distance travelled = 5985 m (D times E)
    
      G. Therefore altitude at Mach 1 = 33060 m, give or take the small amount of drag.
    

Edit: Meh, I see from the video that he didn't accelerate as fast as this, I
guess the drag was significant after all. Even a small amount of gas will move
you if it's coming at you at significant speeds...

~~~
shasta
I think he meant altitude at which he was slowed back to mach 1.0.

------
mittermayr
Hey, who changed the title? I submitted this as "Austrian" Skydiver shatters
world record with 24-mile-leap? What happened, HN?

~~~
random42
HN Guidelines: <http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>

Avoid unnecessary editing of the article's original title.

~~~
hnriot
But adding Austrian added additional information. I'm sick of these arrogant
hn title editors that think they know best.

~~~
Steko
Consider that if a dozen people submit this story with the correct title but
their submissions count as upvotes / duplicates to this first submission then
the algorithm may automatically correct the title to the most common
submission which is likely the actual article.

------
WalterBright
I'd like to see if this can be extended to re-entering from orbit. This could
make space travel more practical, as there'd be less weight dedicated to re-
entry vehicles.

(The only thing that needs to come back from orbit is the astronaut. The whole
idea of reusable spacecraft is completely impractical, as weight is by far the
biggest expense.)

~~~
dkokelley
While burning off excess speed is one major concern for this approach, I've
always wondered what it would take to use a balloon like this one to get past
some of the tricky parts of rocketry like dealing with atmosphere and carrying
extra fuel to carry the extra fuel you are carrying. If you could launch a
rocket from 40km (roughly the height of the balloon), you're 25% into the
minimum LEO, and ~10% of the way to the ISS. More importantly, the fuel
savings from launching at a higher altitude are exponential, because each
meter of altitude is one meter of less atmospheric drag (with diminishing
returns) and the corresponding fuel/weight savings from not having to carry
fuel to travel the first 40km.

I would imagine that the current limitations on doing something like this are
related to the maximum weight a hot air balloon can lift, in addition to the
untested physics and engineering of a mid-air space launch. Imagine if
SpaceShipOne (which was launched at 13.3km) could be taken to 40km and then
launched.

Perhaps someone with a better understanding of lighter-than-air lift physics
could explain what the current limitations on this are.

~~~
ghjm
Suppose you could use a balloon to get to LEO altitude. You're still not in
orbit. Anything that actially _is_ in orbit will come hurtling at you faster
than a bullet. Most of the fuel used in getting to LEO is used to achieve
orbital speed, not orbital altitude. So the question of ground launch vs space
launch is really one of where your engines operate most efficiently, or if you
can avoid air friction in the dense lower atmosphere, or that sort of thing.
Baumgarnter was nowhere close to "10% of the way to the ISS."

~~~
jlgreco
A good way to sort of wrap you mind around exactly LEO means is to consider
that at LEO altitudes the strength of gravity is, for most intents and
purposes _(9.0m/s^2 vs 9.8m/s^2)_ , the same as on the surface. If you get up
that high then let go, you are going to drop like a rock.

If you want to not fall, you have to keep thrusting straight up, which
obviously is not practical. The next best thing is to try to move sideways.
Sideways fast enough that you clear the horizon before you hit the ground. You
have to move fast enough that when you fall you _miss the earth_.

Moving that fast is pretty damn hard. Any rocket capable of doing it, even if
it is already "up there" is going to be far to large to practically lift with
a balloon.

~~~
tripzilch
> You have to move fast enough that when you fall you miss the earth.

So what you're saying is that there is an art, or rather, a knack to flying,
and that the knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and
miss?

~~~
ema
took a while to get that reference.

~~~
tripzilch
I didn't figure I'd get downvoted for quoting Douglas Adams, though.

And it wasn't even "just" a joke, finding out there was actually a grain of
truth to that classic, I felt worth pointing it out.

~~~
tisme
I thought it was hilarious, thank you. Never figured Douglas Adams was right
on that one until you pointed it out.

------
at-fates-hands
Incredible. This kind of stuff puts my faith back in humanity. With all the
horrible stuff going in the world, you see something like this and its simply
amazing.

I actually got teary eyed when he landed and fell to his knees. Such a huge
leap for the space program.

~~~
46Bit
This is the big change between now and Kittinger's jump in 1960: private,
truly non-governmental* companies can and will achieve incredible things just
to market some sugar water.

* I see a distinction between companies like SpaceX and those like Lockheed, in the will to do things if nothing else.

~~~
radicaldreamer
Doesn't that make sense though?

1960 was 50 years ago, the government (or multiple world governments) could be
bank rolling a human mission and initial human outpost on Mars right now if
that was a priority the public would support.

~~~
46Bit
Very true. The question is whether the government saw sense and scaled back
it's unsustainable future drive, or whether things just stalled. I'm still
undecided.

~~~
aggie
The government put a man on the moon so they could appear more technologically
capable than the Soviets. Once they got their propaganda piece, the incentive
died out.

------
InclinedPlane
Confirmation from the post-jump press conference: mach 1.24.

------
mittermayr
GIF of the first five seconds or so
<http://images.4chan.org/sp/src/1350238600230.gif>

~~~
Swizzy
That link will expire once the thread 404s and imgur does not accept files
over 2MB so here is an alt link from tinypic:
<http://i47.tinypic.com/30vllw6.jpg>

~~~
skeletonjelly
min.us is a good alternative to imgur when it comes to large gifs.

------
Laremere
One giant leap for man, one small step for mankind.

~~~
lordlarm
Well not really that giant leap, since Joseph Kittinger basically did the same
jump 50 years ago [1].

He actually was in freefall longer (4min and 36 seconds), which hence is still
the world record. Since Felix "only" fell for 4min and 22 seconds.

Also, as Neil deGrasse Tyson funnily put it: «I'm told somebody's jumping out
of a perfectly good balloon from 23-miles up. The theory of gravity no longer
needs to be tested in this way» [2]

But still, cool video and congrats to Felix and the Rebull Stratos team.

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Kittinger> [2]:
<https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/255691761341587456>

~~~
spullara
Kittinger reduced his speed through the use of a drogue chute. Not directly
comparable.

------
flyinglizard
All the while this kept playing in my head
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrBZeWjGjl8>

------
Jarihd
He was spinning like crazy for quite some time - that literally had my heart
beating like crazy - i was like - what's going to happen - is he unconscious -
is the automatic parachute ejection not working - then; later was happy to
seem him gain control on his free fall. :-)

~~~
mittermayr
yeah and at exactly the same time communication stopped suddenly ... that was
a very horrifying moment indeed

~~~
kalms
Red Bull didn't want to show it if anything went wrong. That's why it was
transmitted with a 20 second delay.

My heart skipped a beat or two!

------
mittermayr
i'd love to see some stats on youtube for this. i noticed over 6 million
concurrent viewers, flipped to HD and it worked instantly ... it's purely
amazing to push out these amounts of video data.

------
Roritharr
He failed breaking the record for longest free fall duration.

If he will get a second chance to do that?

~~~
gmaslov
Not likely. I believe the record holder for longest free fall duration is
Valeri Polyakov, at 14 months aboard MIR ;-)

~~~
anonymouz
I have not seen this noted anywhere so far (comparisons are always with
Kittinger's jump duration), but it's actually a great point. Only the longest
free fall would have to be counted inbetween station boosts, so it would
presumably be a lot shorter (but maybe a lot longer than 4minutes?).

~~~
jlgreco
_Way_ longer than 4 minutes. Station-keeping boosts on Mir were done only a
few times a year (and were usually done by attached resupply crafts).

Edit: Here's a cool altitude graph for Mir:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:MirOrbitalMan...](http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:MirOrbitalManoeuvres.svg&page=1)

------
ninetax
Does anyone know where I can see this video? I missed the live jump...

~~~
mittermayr
here you go:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETbQv7RC8V8&feature=youtu...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETbQv7RC8V8&feature=youtu.be&a)

------
andyjohnson0
First Man in Space - Skydiving From The Edge Of The World
<http://vimeo.com/9980332>

------
Jarihd
LIVE: Press Conference RedBull Stratos

<http://www.redbullstratos.com/live/>

------
nazgulnarsil
This might be a silly question, but couldn't his suit have added a tail to
help prevent spinning?

~~~
lloyddobbler
Most of those sorts of options will do more harm than good. If you've ever
attempted to skydive (or fly in a wind tunnel), you know that the slightest
move of one's hand can cause instability, or a spin. It takes a lot of
experience to gain enough control to be able to really fly your body (and in
the dead air at the altitude of this jump, all previous bets are off). Adding
any sort of wings, fins, or whatnot would cause more uncertainty than it would
certainty. (This is why wingsuits are so dangerous to fly - the extra surface
area means that the subtlest of moves are magnified significantly.)

The safest option is a drogue parachute - the small stabilization parachute
you see when watching tandem skydiving videos. They kept a drogue as an
automatic backup to attempt to stabilize him if he encountered an
uncontrollable spin.

But even that has its risks. An entanglement on a jump like this (or any jump,
really) could be a death warrant.

------
padraigm
Here's an interesting coincidence: I noticed that October 14 is also the date
that Chuck Yeager first broke the sound barrier in the Bell X-1 [1].

[1] - <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_X-1>

------
thomasilk
Congrats to Felix and Red Bull! Makes me and so many others proud to be
Austrian.

------
mrtriangle
I was watching this live yesterday and my heart skipped a beat when he took
that leap off of the capsule. The balls on that guy.

------
ezpassmac
The BBC is airing a documentary about the fall in 4 weeks. It was 5 years in
the making. Should be good.

------
freshfey
I loved the view from the balloon when he jumped, just incredible.

Is there a video of his on-man camera view?

~~~
wr1472
I suspect this will be shown in the upcoming documentary. I understand the BBC
were filming this to be shown in around a month's time (National Geographic
will show a 2 hour documentary on this based on the BBC footage).

------
psychotik
Any idea what type of camera was used to track his descent? Satellite imagery?

~~~
dmd
[http://www.redbullstratos.com/technology/cameras-
communicati...](http://www.redbullstratos.com/technology/cameras-
communications/)

------
pirateking
This is why I drink Red Bull - seriously. Transcendent marketing.

------
ezequiel-garzon
Can anyone shed some light on the natural limit for this record?

~~~
lloyddobbler
Are we talking about the speed record? It depends on a number of variables,
most notably being body position and altitude.

The higher the altitude, the thinner the air. Whereas terminal velocity at
10,000' MSL (mean sea level) is 120mph, if you go up to 30,000', terminal is
faster due to less air molecules to create drag.

As for body position, if I'm flying my body belly-to-earth, in a stable arched
body position, I'll fall a lot slower than I will flying head-down with my
arms tucked to my sides. Apparently, Felix was attempting to increase his
speed by flying close to head-down - he flared out in mid-attempt when his
visor began to fog and decreased his visibility. (You probably saw the
spinning on the video as he reached close to 730mph - to me, that appeared to
be the result of him flaring out of his head-down dive to a belly-to-earth
body position in the thin air, which doesn't provide a lot of control).

Additionally, if he were to make this jump in a latex suit, he'd be moving a
lot faster due to decreased drag. (However, he'd also be dead from exposure to
cold.)

So the "natural upper limit" is basically however fast he went, given the
equipment, altitude, and body position. If we change the variables, we'd get a
different maximum speed. Terminal velocity is terminal velocity, given all
those factors.

~~~
ezequiel-garzon
Thanks for such a thorough reply! I'm very curious about the highest possible
(and feasible) altitude. I couldn't find out how high you can go and still
fall towards the Earth. (At some point you would just orbit the Earth, right?)

Edit: Thanks to both replies. Never mind, then!

~~~
losvedir
> _(At some point you would just orbit the Earth, right?)_

No way. I think you really misunderstand how weightlessness works in space,
and I can assure you it's much more interesting than you think. :-p

While gravity does decrease with distance, it doesn't decrease nearly as fast
as you think. For instance, at the altitude of the International Space Station
(280 miles, or roughly ten times the altitude of this jump), the force of
gravity is still 90% as strong as on the surface of the Earth.

In fact the only reason people are "weightless" up there is because they're
constantly falling towards the surface of the earth. (Think of if you're in an
elevator whose cable snaps, you'll appear to be "weightless" inside the
elevator).

Fortunately for the astronauts, the ISS is moving _horizontally_ so fast, that
the Earth is actually falling away from them (due to it being round) at the
same rate that they're falling to the ground.

This is the same with, say, the space shuttle. The reason people seem to float
in there is because the thing is falling like a rock. It just happens to be
moving forward 17,000 mph, so the earth falls away with it.

~~~
lloyddobbler
This is absolutely fascinating...something I hadn't considered. But makes
perfect sense. Thanks!

------
tripzilch
"A giant leap for me, a small step for mankind."

