Image of the Day…” Upside-down Rainbow…”

Brief, beautiful circumzenithal arc

Circumzenithal arcs are sometimes referred to as “upside-down rainbows” or “a smile in the sky.”

View larger. | Photo by Amanda Cross.

Amanda Cross in Lancashire, UK, submitted these photos to EarthSky. They show the beautiful sky phenomenon known as a circumzenithal arc. Amanda wrote:

Sun halo spotted on the school run, dashed home for camera then the circumzenithal arc appeared above, smiling. Worth dashing home for! Smiling in the sky, upside down rainbow 🙂

Only lasted 10 minutes then it was gone, brief but beautiful.

Photo by Amanda Cross.

Les Cowley of the great website Atmospheric Optics says of these graceful and colorful arcs:

The circumzenithal arc, CZA, is the most beautiful of all the halos. The first sighting is always a surprise, an ethereal rainbow fled from its watery origins and wrapped improbably about the zenith …

Look straight up near to the zenith [overhead point in your sky] when the sun if fairly low and especially if sundogs are visible. The center of the bow always sunwards and red is on the outside.

Les says that the most ideal time to see a circumzenithal arc is when the sun is at a height of 22 degrees in the sky. Look here to see Les Cowley’s illustration of the various kinds of halo phenomena, related to circumzenithal arcs.

Bottom line: Photo from September, 2015 – Lancashire, UK – of a circumzenithal arc. They’re sometimes called upside-down rainbows, or “a smile in the sky.”

Source…..www.earthskynews.org

Natarajan

Image of the Day….Best Seat in the World…!!!

The central bugle of our Milky Way galaxy shines brightly above the vast ocean of lights of Yaqing Temple in China.

View larger. | Jeff Dai submitted this photo of the Yaqing Temple, Sichuan, China. He calls it ‘Lights or Stars.’ Visit his Flickr page.

Jeff Dai submitted this photo to EarthSky – taken September 9, 2015 – and wrote:

Lights or Stars? Today most city skies have become virtually empty of stars. But there is someplace beyond your imagination. Pictured above, the central bugle of our Milky Way galaxy shines brightly above the vast ocean of lights of Yaqing Temple. Located at Garzê Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture in Sichuan province of China, Yaqing temple lies in an isolated valley with 4,000 meters above sea level. The monastery is associated with the Nyingma tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. With more than 30,000 Sangha members now, it’s the largest concentration of nuns and monks in the world.

This is a single exposure image, No photo montage, additional filter and black card.

Read more about the Yaqing Temple and Monastery

Posted by   …www.eathskynews.org

Natarajan

 

” WHY DON’T COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES HAVE PARACHUTES FOR PASSENGERS?…”

Seatbelts and airbags in cars save passengers lives. Parachutes save people who, for a variety of reasons, exit a plane in mid-flight. So why aren’t parachutes provided to passengers on commercial airline flights, in case of emergencies?

Because they almost certainly would not save anyone’s life.

Parachuting Basics

When your average daredevil skydives for fun, the plane is typically travelling at between 80 and 110 mph when the skydiver jumps. Tandem and accelerated free fall (AFF) jumps occur between 10,000 and 13,000 feet, while static jumps can be as low as 3,500 feet.

Student divers choosing the easiest, tandem jump, where the newbie is physically and securely attached to an experienced instructor, are still required to undergo “a half hour of basic ground instruction.”

Braver neophytes who wish to fly untethered will have to endure:

Four to five hours of intense ground instruction, including learning body flight maneuvers and hand signals that instructors use to coach the student as they fly alongside.

For an AFF jump, although not harnessed together, freshman flyers are accompanied by two instructors who “hold onto the student’s harness until” it’s deployed.

Those who choose a static line jump also have to take four + hours of training prior to the jump, although the parachute is deployed as the rookie flyer leaves the aircraft.

When skydivers leave a plane, they do it alone or in small groups. When successive groups will be jumping, they try to keep separated by anywhere between 500 and 1500 feet; this is often accomplished by waiting until the preceding group is “back under the tail to 45 degrees behind the airplane” or several seconds in between groups.

 

parachute

Experienced skydivers can make even riskier jumps, although when descents begin at higher than 15,000 feet, “the risk of hypoxia and being significantly affected by altitude” increases dramatically and divers are less able “to make effective safe decisions at critical times.” Therefore, divers who jump from 15,000 feet or higher carry supplemental oxygen.

Further, each parachute weighs around 40 pounds and the equipment is expensive. To be fully outfitted with “rig, main, reserve, ADD, altimeter, jumpsuit, helmet [and] goggles” can run between $5,900 and $9,000.

Commercial Airplane Basics

Perhaps the most popular commercial jetliner is the Boeing 737 family. Its 737-800 can carry nearly 200 people (including the crew).

Although speeds can vary slightly, the 737-800 travels at approximately 600 mph when at its cruising altitude of 35,000 feet. Cruising altitudes are assigned by air traffic controllers and are usually up to 39,000 feet, except for longer flights that may fly higher.

Individual Parachutes Won’t Improve Passenger Safety

Doing the math . . .

Passenger Training

Since four hours of training just to board a plane is unrealistic, passengers would have to read and execute detailed skydiving instructions including how to properly strap the chute on in order to benefit from the parachute. Not everyone is good at following detailed, technical instructions even when time and stress aren’t a factor.  In a situation where the plane is going down and one has only a moment to get the parachute properly strapped on (likely while keeping an oxygen mask firmly attached and perhaps also needing to keep the seat belt on to keep from being thrown about in the cabin), it’s unlikely most would be able to even get this far.

Every Man for Himself

Unless passengers wanted to fly suited up and tethered for a static jump, parachuting from a commercial airplane will be an AFF jump; however, unlike the conditions that students get – training and trained instructors to assist, commercial passengers will just have to learn as they go.

In addition, they will have to keep calm and proceed in an orderly fashion, which will require most to patiently wait their turn to exit. This is not likely to happen.

Parachuting Equipment is Bulky

Adding just parachutes (not counting helmets, altimeters, etc.) for each passenger would add another 8,000 pounds or so to the flight’s weight. In addition, that equipment would take up space, that is already at a premium.

Parachuting Only Makes Sense if Something Happens in Mid-Flight

The only feasible time for people to jump from the plane is while it’s cruising. However, most fatal airline accidents occur on airplanes during takeoff and landing.

Consider that between 2003 and 2012, only 9% of all fatal accidents on commercial flights, seven total, occurred while the plane was cruising; moreover, at least one of those accidents happened as a result of wind shear or thunderstorm. This is a situation where parachuting is extremely dangerous even if you’re an expert.

So even if parachuting were feasible from a jetliner, the conditions in which parachutes could theoretically save lives are almost never apparent in fatal commercial accidents. But even if they were, it still wouldn’t be a good idea.

Jetliners Cruise Very High and Very Fast

At 35,000 feet (three times higher than a typical jump) every passenger would need high altitude equipment (HALO) that includes an oxygen tank, mask and regulator, flight suit, ballistic helmet and altimeter just to manage the thin air. Or they could just pass out from hypoxia and wake up later, hopefully when the parachute automatically deployed at under 15,000-20,000 feet.

Of course, none of this would matter since the plane is moving so fast (600 mph), and it is so large, that many passengers would almost certainly smash into it and suffer debilitating if not fatal injuries.

 

Whole Plane Parachutes May Save Lives

There is hope, however. Over the past few years, many small planes have been equipped with whole-plane parachutes that slow the craft’s descent. As of late 2013, the largest planes equipped with these safety devices carry five people, but plans are in the works for putting them on larger crafts. As one manufacturer said, “There is no doubt that big commercial airlines of the future will be equipped with some kind of parachute recovery system.”

Bonus Airplane Crash Survival Tips:

  • Sit in the back with the cool kids. According to several studies, “passengers near the tail of the plane are about 40 percent more likely to survive a crash than those in the first few rows up front.”  The other advantage is that most passengers choose not to sit in the back.  So unless the plane is full, you might get the row of seats to yourself.
  • However, other research into surviving plane crashes indicated that “those [passengers] who sat more than six rows from an exit were found to be far less likely to survive.” So if the plane doesn’t have a rear exit, that’s something to be factored in.
  • If you do happen to fall out of a plane at 35,000 feet (without a parachute), Popular Mechanics has some advice on how to survive the fall:  “The concept you’ll be most interested in is terminal velocity. As gravity pulls you toward earth, you go faster. But . . . you [also] create drag . . . . and [eventually] acceleration stops. Depending on your size and weight, and [other] factors . . . your speed at that moment will be about 120 mph [this takes about 1,500 feet. At about 22,000 feet] You sputter into consciousness [hypoxia had knocked you out from shortly after you exited the plane]. . . . Take aim . . . . Glass hurts, but it gives. So does grass. Haystacks and bushes . . . and trees aren’t bad, though they tend to skewer. Snow? Absolutely. . . . Contrary to popular belief, water is an awful choice [to cushion the fall]. . . . With the target in mind, the next consideration is body position. To slow your descent. . . spread your arms and legs, present your chest to the ground, and arch your back and head upward. . . . Relax. This is not your landing pose. . . . . [To land, assume] the classic sky diver’s landing stance – feet together, heels up, flexed knees and hips.”
  • According to the Geneva-based Aircraft Crashes Record Office, between 1940 and 2008 there were 157 people who fell out of planes during a crash and without a parachute and lived to tell about it. A full 42 of those falls occurred at heights over 10,000 feet! One such incident involved a British Tail-gunner whose plane was shot down in 1944 during WWII. He fell over 18,000 feet without a parachute. His fall was broken by pine trees and soft snow.  After his “landing” he found himself completely fine, except for a sprained leg.  Things didn’t initially improve for him as he was quickly captured by the Germans. Apparently the Germans were more impressed by his near death experience than his nationality, because they released him the following May after having given him a certificate commemorating his fall and subsequent survival.

Source….www.today i foundout .com

Natarajan

” The British Flying Jeep….” !!!

WWII Files: The British Flying Jeep

How many of you science fiction buffs have fantasized about zipping around town in your very own flying car? Sure, a trip in a helicopter or airplane has now become the standard or even mundane mode of long distance travel, but imagine taking your very own flying machine on a trip across town, presumably with The Jetsons’ theme song blasting in the background. With advances in modern technology, it is only a matter of time right? What may surprise you though, is that way back in 1942, twenty years before Americans were meeting George Jetson and marveling at The Jetsons‘ flying car, the British Military actually had their very own flying jeep.

It was right smack in the middle of the Second World War and the military needed to find a way to airdrop more than messages, medical supplies or rations. They wanted to sky dive off-road vehicles to provide transportation for their infantry soldiers and other military personnel. They had previously tested the Hafner Rotachute, a rotor equipped parachute towed by an airplane with the objective of delivering armed soldiers more precisely to the battlefield, and they figured they could apply similar technology to a large vehicle.

So they looked to Raoul Hafner again. Hafner was an Austrian engineer – a contemporary and admirer of Juan de la Cierva, that Spanish pioneer of rotary-winged flight – with a passion for helicopters. Hafner first designed the Rotachute and later conceptualized its spin-off the Hafter Rotabuggy. While both machines used rotor technology, the Rotachute was actually a fabric-covered capsule with room for one pilot and a notch for his weapon with fairing in the rear and an integrated tail. After various modifications, the first successful launch occurred on June 17, 1942 from a de Havilland Tiger Moth. Taking off, the airplane towed the Rotachute on a 300 foot towline and released it at an altitude of 200 feet. A rough landing necessitated further improvements in the form of a stabilizing wheel and fins to improve stability.

hafner_rotabuggy_4In the case of the Rotabuggy the question was how to build a vehicle that they could fly and drop from a height without causing damage. They did some tests using a regular (non-flying) 4×4 wartime jeep- a Willys MB- loaded with concrete and discovered that dropping it from heights up to a pretty impressive 2.35 metres (7.7 ft) could work without damaging the unmodified jeep.

With durable jeep in hand, they then outfitted it with a 40 ft rotor as well as a streamlined tail fairing with twin rudderless fins. For added toughness, they attached Perspex door panels, while stripping it clean of its motor. Inside they installed a steering wheel for the driver and a rotor control for the pilot and other navigational instruments. So visually you had the now-bantamweight jeep in front with two guys inside, a driver and a pilot, a rotor on top and a tail bringing up the rear. Welcome to the Blitz Flying Jeep!

Hafner_Rotabuggy-3In November of 1943, the flying trials started at Sherburn-in-Elmet, near Leeds. The first challenge was how to get the jeep up in the air. As so often happens with first attempts, during the first test flight the jeep literally failed to get off the ground. It ended miserably as they used a lorry to tow the flying jeep but it couldn’t get enough speed to lift the Willys MB airborne. During the second attempt, the jeep was towed by a heavier and more powerful Bentley automobile and it flew, gliding at speeds of reportedly about 45 to 65 mph. Later, they tested the jeep behind an RAF Whitley bomber, managing to achieve an altitude of about 122 meters (approximately 400 ft) in one ten minute flight in September of 1944.

Hafner-Rotabuggy-2While the records show that in the end the Flying Jeep worked very satisfactorily, there is an account of a witness who observed a rather shaken and exhausted pilot emerge to lie down relieved after one terrifying test flight. Apparently it had taken superhuman effort for him to handle the control column on that particular flight, which led to a rather scary, bobbing and weaving, bumpy ride. When the jeep finally dropped safely to the ground, the driver took over. After the vehicle came to a stop, reports say the ensuing silence was protracted, then the pilot was helped out to a spot adjacent to the runway where he lay down to rest and collect himself.

 
Although the Flying Jeep machine was improved with upgraded fins and rotor functionality, perhaps it was just as well that its further development was abandoned after military gliders, like the Airspeed Horsa, that could transport vehicles, were introduced.

Source….www.today i foundout.com

Natarajan

Famous Concorde supersonic airliner could start flying again ….

How good would travelling to Europe in less than 14 hours be?

THE Concorde supersonic airliner looks like it will make a return to the skies thanks to some aviation enthusiasts with very deep pockets.

Club Concorde, a group of ex-pilots, airline executives, engineers and Concorde enthusiasts have unveiled their plan to have the legendary jet back in the air by 2019.

It has been nearly 12 years since Concorde took its last flight, with the final journey occurring on October 24th, 2003.

Although they need a little maintenance, these fully-functional planes are scattered across the globe in aviation museums and science centres.

The particular plane Club Concorde is after is located at Le Bourget airport in Paris, which they want to buy and restore for around $250 million.

Once the restorations are complete, Club Concorde wants to use the iconic plane at air shows, corporate events and for private charters. At this stage, there are no plans to resume commercial flights.

The pride of British aviation, the Concorde making its final landing in 2003.

The pride of British aviation, the Concorde making its final landing in 2003.Source:News Corp Australia

Flying at Supersonic speeds, a Concorde could fly between London and New York in a little less than three hours. In Comparison, a regular commercial flight can take around seven hours. However not many people got to experience this speed in its years in the sky. Due to limited seating capacity in the planes, ticket prices for regular economy seats were often around the same price as a first-class ticket in a standard airliner.

The Concorde’s 27 year life came to an end in 2003 following severe financial problems. A crash in 2000 which led to the death of all on-board passengers and crew, high maintenance costs and lack of customers after 9/11 was reported as the main reason for its downfall.

Despite the fact that we will most likely never see another commercial Concorde, companies such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin and even NASA are working on ways to have commercially available supersonic airliners in the air again by 2030.

Source….www.news.com.au

Natarajan

Clear Skies Over the United States… A View from International Space Station

Lights of the United States at night photographed from the International Space Station with HTV cargo vehicle in foreground

On Sept. 17, 2015, NASA astronaut Scott Kelly captured images and video from the International Space Station during an early morning flyover of the United States. Sharing with his social media followers, Kelly wrote, “Clear skies over much of the USA today. #GoodMorning from @Space_Station! #YearInSpace.”

Tuesday, Sept. 15 marked the midpoint of the one-year mission to the space station for Kelly and Russian cosmonaut Mikhail Kornienko. The average International Space Station expedition lasts four to six months. Research enabled by the one-year mission will help scientists better understand how the human body reacts and adapts to long-duration spaceflight. This knowledge is critical as NASA looks toward human missions deeper into the solar system, including to and from Mars, which could last 500 days or longer.

Image Credit: NASA

Source…www.nasa.gov

Natarajan

World’s first-ever unmanned airport control tower….

Bye guys. A plane takes off beyond a remotely controlled control tower.

HAVE you ever imagined landing at an airport with no humans watching from the control tower?

Introducing the world’s loneliest airport.

In an era where pilot error is the leading cause of commercial airline accidents, a Swedish airport is testing an unmanned control tower.

And Australia may soon follow suit.

The commercial planes landing at the remote Ornskoldsvik Airport are instead watched by cameras, guided in by controllers viewing the video at another airport nearly 150 kilometres away.

Ornskoldsvik is the first airport in the world to use such technology.

Others in Europe are testing the idea, as is one airport in the United States.

While the majority of the world’s airports will, for some time, still have controllers on site, experts say unmanned towers are coming.

They’ll likely first go into use at small and medium airports, but eventually even the world’s largest airports could see an array of cameras mounted on a pole replacing their concrete control towers.

The companies building these remote systems say their technology is cheaper and better than traditional towers.

There is a lot of good camera technology that can do things that the human eye can’t,” says Pat Urbanek, of Searidge Technologies, “We understand that video is not real life, out the window. It’s a different way of surveying.”

Cameras spread out around an airport eliminate blind spots and give controllers more-detailed views. Infra-red can supplement images in rain, fog or snow and other cameras can include thermal sensors to see if animals stray onto the runway at the last second.

None of those features are — yet — in the Swedish airport because of regulatory hurdles.

Ornskoldsvik Airport is a vital lifeline for residents who want to get to Stockholm and the rest of the world. But with just 80,000 annual passengers, it can’t justify the cost of a fulltime control staff — about $175,000 a year in salary, benefits and taxes for each of six controllers.

In April, after a year and a half of testing a system designed by Saab, all the controllers left Ornskoldsvik.

Now, a 24-metre tall mast housing 14 high-definition cameras sends the signal back to the controllers, stationed at Sunvsal Airport. No jobs have been eliminated but ultimately such systems will allow tiny airports to pool controllers.

Old habits are hard to break. Despite the ability to zoom in, controllers instinctively grab their binoculars to get a closer look at images on the 55-inch TV screens. And two microphones were added to the airfield at Ornskoldsvik to pipe in the sounds of planes.

This is the first airport in the world to use such technology.

This is the first airport in the world to use such technology.Source:AP

“Without the sound, the air traffic controllers felt very lost,” says Anders Carp, head of traffic management for Saab.

The cameras are housed in a glass bubble. High pressure air flows over the windows, keeping them clear of insects, rain and snow. The system has been tested for severe temperatures: 22 degrees below zero and, at the other extreme, a sizzling 122 degrees.

Niclas Gustavsson, head of commercial development for LFV Group, the air navigation operator at 26 Swedish airports, says digital cameras offer numerous possibilities for improving safety.

Computers can compare every picture to the one a second before. If something changes — such as birds or deer crossing the runway — alerts are issued.

“Maybe, eventually there will be no towers built at all,” says Gustavsson.

Saab is currently testing — and seeking regulatory approval — for remote systems in Norway and Australia and has contracts to develop the technology for another Swedish airport and two in Ireland.

Competitor Searidge is working on a remote tower for the main airport in Budapest, Hungary. That airport serves 8.5 million passengers annually and, within two years, controllers could be stationed a few miles from the airport.

Now, Saab is bringing some aspects of this technology to the United States.

Leesburg Executive Airport in Virginia is a relatively busy airport with 300 daily takeoffs and landings.

Just a few kilometres from Dulles International Airport, Leesburg does not have its own control tower. A regional air traffic control centre clears private jets into the airspace and then pilots use an established radio frequency to negotiate the landing and takeoff order. That often leads to delays.

Saab has built a system for Leesburg and has just started a three-month test with the Federal Aviation Administration.

FAA controllers will, at first, familiarise themselves with the technology and just observe the planes operating as they already do today.

If the FAA approves, the next phase would be to start clearing planes onto taxiways and to take off and land.

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association says it is participating in the testing.

Towers for large commercial airports are expensive. They need elevators, air conditioning and heating, fire suppression systems plus room for all the controllers.

A new tower in Oakland, California that opened in 2013 cost $51 million. Towers at smaller airports are cheaper.

Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport opened a new one in February at a cost of $15.4 million. Saab won’t detail the cost of its system except to say it is “significantly less.” There is no need for a tower and elevator.

The companies see a giant market: The vast majority of US commercial airports — 315 of 506 — have control towers. However, only 198 of the 2,825 general aviation airports have manned towers.

source….www.news.com.au

Natarajan

Image of the Day….Ancient theater of Aegira, Greece…

Settled in the 3rd millennium BCE, Aegira – or Egira – once was a prosperous and important city of ancient Greece

The ancient theater of Egira, Greece, and the Milky way, in a summer night.  Photo by Nikolaos Pantazis.

Nikolaos Pantazis posted this photo to EarthSky Facebook this week. It’s a stunning view of the ancient theater of Aegira (or Egira) in Greece, under the starlit trail of the summer Milky Way.

This area of western Greece was settled in the 3rd millennium BCE. It’s the site of some fascinating archeological finds, including the head, left arm and right finger of an ancient statue of Zeus, a small temple, this ancient theater and other structures.

Source….www.earthsky.org

Natarajan

 

Good Morning From the International Space station….

Nighttime photograph of lights on Earth with HTV cargo vehicle on space station in foreground and moon and Venus visible

NASA astronaut Scott Kelly (@StationCDRKelly) shared this photograph on social media, taken from the International Space Station on Sept. 10, 2015. Kelly wrote, “#GoodMorning Texas! Great view of you, the #moon, and #Venus this morning. #YearInSpace”

On Sept. 15, Kelly and Russian cosmonaut Mikhail Kornienko clock in for their 171st day aboard the International Space Station since arriving on March 27. The pair, set to come home March 3, 2016, are spending 342 days in space to help researchers better understand how the human body reacts and adapts to long duration spaceflight. In their almost six months in orbit, Kelly and Kornienko have participated in a range of scientific experiments focusing on seven key areas of human research. The one-year crew mission is the latest step in the International Space Station’s role as a platform for preparing humanity for exploration into deeper space.

Image Credit: NASA

Last Updated: Sep. 15, 2015
Editor: Sarah Loff
Source….www.nasa.gov
Natarajan

These students launched a GoPro into space in 2013 and only just found it, along with some stunning footage….

Normally when you send something up in a weather balloon, you expect it to come back down again. But, what if you lose the ability to track your package, and the terrain it lands in is a virtually endless desert up to 80 kilometres away from your original launch location? Gulp.

That’s what happened to this group of Arizona-based university students who wanted to find out what their GoPro camera would see if they attached it to a weather balloon and sent it to the edge of space over the Grand Canyon.

The team’s video shows they weren’t exactly unprepared for the voyage, either, spending months testing parachutes, calculating wind trajectories, and custom 3D-printing their GoPro camera chassis for its maiden flight.

gopro space video weather balloon

The GoPro captured some stunning footage during its time in space.

Everything goes swimmingly at first. On launch day the students drive out to their chosen spot, 32 kilometres west of the Grand Canyon. They release the balloon, which swiftly ascends to an altitude of more than 30 kilometres in less than an hour and a half, at which point the Grand Canyon has become more of a grand indentation on the distant orb below.

However, sometimes no amount of preparation can fend off bad luck. As one of the teamrecounts in a Reddit post, due to GPS and data coverage difficulties, their package’s return to Earth didn’t go quite as smoothly as planned:

“We planned our June 2013 launch at a specific time and place such that the phone was projected to land in an area with cell coverage. The problem was that the coverage map we were relying on (looking at you, AT&T) was not accurate, so the phone never got signal as it came back to Earth, and we never heard from it….

The phone landed ~50 miles [80 km] away from the launch point, from what I recall. It’s a really far distance considering there’s hardly any roads over there!”

AT&T may well have been responsible for the group losing their device, but as luck would bizarrely have it, it would later come to the team’s rescue also. Two years after losing track of their GoPro, an employee of the company happened upon the device while hiking in the desert. She was able to identify the SIM card and return the camera – and its valuable recorded footage – to the owners.

An amazing story and an awesome video.

Read the original article on Science Alert. Copyright 2015.

Source….Peter Dockrill..Science Alert…and http://www.businessinsider.com…and http://www.youtube.com

Natarajan