Just wondering if it is cheaper because you do not need that much fuel
and stuff or because you do not need to worry too much about loosing
your ship?

Tamas


On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:26 PM, ivp <joecolquitt@clear.net.nz> wrote:
> http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20100325/tuk-british-balloon-man-s-amazing-space-dba1618.html
>
> Funny, I was talking to someone only yesterday about realtors using
> balloons for property photos and we wondered how high you could
> get a tethered camera
>
> This free-floating one goes to 21 miles. The balloon expands to 22m
> and eventually pops. The camera parachutes back down and he tracks
> a transmitter to recover it. Sounds like a fun day out
>
> He says each 'mission' costs around UKP500, compared with 300
> million for a shuttle flight. A good rate if a photo is all you wanted,
> although even 500 sounds expensive. Surely the only expendable
> is the balloon and gas
>
> Not sure if I'd want it to inspire hundreds of similar school science
> projects though !!
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>



-- 
int main() { char *a,*s,*q; printf(s="int main() { char *a,*s,*q;
printf(s=%s%s%s, q=%s%s%s%s,s,q,q,a=%s%s%s%s,q,q,q,a,a,q); }",
q="\"",s,q,q,a="\\",q,q,q,a,a,q); }
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist