Project I.N.V.A.D.E.R. -- thoughts

Has someone not already tried this before? I think I have read about this type off thing before. Hmmm... It didn't work though from what I understand.

Mick
 
Originally posted by Mickey Ptak
Has someone not already tried this before? I think I have read about this type off thing before. Hmmm... It didn't work though from what I understand.

Mick

I think in the 70s an NSSL scientist used his own plane to try lauching rockets...and had bad results. I didn't see anything about what instruments they have in the rocket...anyone know more?

Or are they just tracking the rocket through the tornado?
 
Several issues.

A) No instruments? What's the point other than trying to shoot a rocket into a tornado.

B) These are large rockets. Anything over 1lb requires a notice to airmen at the nearest airport for FAA purposes. This must be submitted 24 hours prior to launch I believe. How do you swing that? (In fairness though, no one will be flying near a tornado hopefully!)

Aaron
 
Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
Several issues.

A) No instruments? What's the point other than trying to shoot a rocket into a tornado.

B) These are large rockets. Anything over 1lb requires a notice to airmen at the nearest airport for FAA purposes. This must be submitted 24 hours prior to launch I believe. How do you swing that? (In fairness though, no one will be flying near a tornado hopefully!)

Aaron

True...but we witnessed several aircraft around the Ulysses storm while the tornado was on the ground.
 
Originally posted by Kiel Ortega


True...but we witnessed several aircraft around the Ulysses storm while the tornado was on the ground.

I can second that. Although I was not on that storm I was on the cell just 20 miles north of it. I saw at least one plane circling around in the clear slot. I did not know if they were performing tests or seeding (<spelling?). That should have been my first clue to go south.

Back on topic… Getting a rocket into the tornado is going to hard enough. I would like to see how far this goes though. Probably not past testing.

Mick
 
Originally posted by Kiel Ortega


True...but we witnessed several aircraft around the Ulysses storm while the tornado was on the ground.

I noticed the same thing Kiel, saw two different planes flying alternating figure 8's around the storm...but not through it.

Also, I looked at their website and found video of lead forecaster/chaser, James Covington, in the video he radioed someone and asked if the tornado was coming towards him....Huh??? Lead forecaster doesn't know the motion of a storm he is chasing??? Seems funny to me! Also he says he sees multiple tornados, up to three. But I think he's confusing those with flanking line CRAP, one of them is just scud. Oh well...the video link is on the page...check it out and see what you think.
 
I can just see the headline now. One of the news helicopters from OKC gets shot down by a rocket on live TV while showing a large tornado on the ground out west of Yukon :wink:
 
Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
B) These are large rockets. Anything over 1lb requires a notice to airmen at the nearest airport for FAA purposes. This must be submitted 24 hours prior to launch I believe. How do you swing that? (In fairness though, no one will be flying near a tornado hopefully!)
Simple, just send out a blanket NOTAM to every airport in the SLGT or SEE TEXT areas. If Tornado Fighters can be there on time, certainly the I.N.V.A.D.E.R. Project can. I'm personally inclined to laugh at this. If it fails, I'll feel justified. On the other hand, it might end up being quite succesful, in which case I'll eat my words. Sometimes its hard to tell if something is crazy or just ahead of its time...


Ben
 
Originally posted by Chris Foltz
I can just see the headline now. One of the news helicopters from OKC gets shot down by a rocket on live TV while showing a large tornado on the ground out west of Yukon :wink:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Thats what rockets that size will get them!!
 
Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
Several issues.

A) No instruments? What's the point other than trying to shoot a rocket into a tornado.

This is exactly what I thought.

1. They seemed so concerned with getting the rocket into the tornado when the dynamics of how it flies will probably radically change if/when instruments are put on it.

2. At their website, they don't even mention future plans that include instrumentation.

3. They say this about Tim Samaras:

"Two stormchasers, Tim Samaras and Brad Carter, recently succeeded with the deployment of the "In-Situ Tornado Probes" and recorded valuable data, but this method remains very dangeous and risky. Anything could go wrong- the tornado could move in too fast and catch the chasers, the vehicle could break down stranding the chasers in the path of the tornado, or who knows what else could go wrong. In the online video of the In-Situ Tornado Probe deployment, you can hear one chaser telling the other in a nervous tone to "hurry up...we have to go" (before the tornado arrives at their location). The purpose of the I.N.V.A.D.E.R. system is to greatly reduce the risk while providing a more reliable deployment method."

Are we supposed to believe that launching a rocket into a tornado at 480 mph is safer than what Tim Samaras is doing?

All of it seems a bit suspect to me...
 
Originally posted by Chris Foltz
I can just see the headline now. One of the news helicopters from OKC gets shot down by a rocket on live TV while showing a large tornado on the ground out west of Yukon :wink:

Well, if it is SWEEPS week, it's all good. :wink:

Darren Addy
Kearney, NE
 
I see that the Project I.N.V.A.D.E.R. Rocket Designer/Stunt Man has a "motorcycle jumping ministry". I don't believe I've ever seen those words together before. :?

Darren Addy
Kearney, NE
 
If their rockets are made of plastic, they might get a little closer, provided there's little debris, to the tornado than the last rocket attempts — they were by Sterling Colgate of the NSF in 1981–2, and they failed because the rockets were made of paper (the FAA wouldn't class them as a lethal weapon that way), and the fins fell off when wet.

Of course, maybe this is just this year's laser guy.
 
Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
(In fairness though, no one will be flying near a tornado hopefully!)

You forget about Ranger 9 and Chopper 4. Maybe we should just put an instrument package on them instead.
 
Kiel Ortega wrote:
True...but we witnessed several aircraft around the Ulysses storm while the tornado was on the ground.
What you saw maybe was the Western Kansas Weather Modification Program based out of Lakin, KS This outfit been seeding clouds to reduce hail for many years in southwest Kansas, could of been the airplanes you saw flying around.

Mike
 
1200-2000 meters?



Launch Considerations and Questions:

* Trinity must be launched with tornadic inflow winds.
* Downdrafts and precipitation must be avoided.
* A parachute glide-in is believed to be the best approach to entering the vortex.
* Even if the rocket is destroyed by the tornado- mission accomplished! We expect that the rocket will indeed be destroyed upon vortex entry.
* How far will Trinity travel when launched horizontally? The rocket is too dangerous to test launch horizontally at the test fields we use. The rocket could cause serious damage to property or very serious injury at 480 MPH.


The answer to the last question, given no wind resistance or forces other than gravity acting on the rocket, would be a maximum of about 2.4 km:

Launching at 45 degrees above horizontal to maximize the horizontal distance flown, we get

At launch:

v0(x) = 216 sin 45* m/s = 153 m/s = v0(y)

During flight:

v0(y) = 153t - 9.8t^2

The zeroes of this equation are found at t = 0 s and t = 15.6 s

(153 m/s)(15.6 s) = 2390 m = 1.5 miles

The maximum height attained by a rocket thus launched would take place at t = 7.8 s and would be about 600 m

Positioning oneself in the dry sector of a supercell within 2.4 km of sufficient inflow to carry a large model rocket while staying out of downdrafts and precipitation and assuring that the inflow would lead to the tornado itself are exercises left to the reader.

(For that matter, why not just launch a bunch of reasonably large and sturdy balloons into the inflow?)
 
Sterling A. Colgate tried firing rockets into a tornado from a large plane during the 1970s, but since the rockets were unguided, they would always deviate from their path and miss. Of course, you can't do guided missiles because of FAA regulations, I believe.

It does sound like the safest bet is for a balloon launched into the inflow with just enough bouyancy to get clear of power lines and houses, but low enough so it doesn't drift too high into the storm before entering the tornado. However, if the tornado is too violent, it could destroy the balloon long before it reached the tornado. Of course, you run the risk of having a rocket with an instrument package destroyed before it reaches the tornado if it is too violent.
 
Even if they could get this rocket into the tornado... what kind of instuments are they going to put in it? I know there site isnt much help (the early design of their rockets shows they have an area below the nose for their instuments... but nothing saying what instruments).

What type of instruments would researchers want in there? What could fit in that rocket?
 
A mouse. They could fit a mouse in there.

To honor Tim Samaras' legitimate experiments, in fact, they could call their mouse T.I.M. for Tornado Intercept Mouse.


Originally posted by bvassmer
What type of instruments would researchers want in there? What could fit in that rocket?
 
Really, launching rockets into tornadoes to collect data is not entirely without merit. No to say that I'm endorsing the method this group proposes, but fundamentally this is could be a sound technique to gather data. Instruments that collect temperature, pressure and moisture data are extremely small these days thanks to advances in electronics - so you certainly can make meaningful measurements that would fit on a rocket - and the financial costs for what ends up becoming a disposable weather instrument become more realistic when the cost can be reduced to a few hundred dollars per probe (rockets are fairly cheap).

There are designs underway to instrument small planes to fly around storms during the next VORTEX project, assuming it gets funded, but these instruments are not meant to be flown into the actual tornado. As previously mentioned, there were some efforts by Stirling Colgate to launch airplane based rockets into tornadoes back in the 80's, but these efforts were largely unsuccessful. Tim's probes are extremely valuable as they are sampling conditions at the ground - where damage occurs - but alone don't provided enough information to fully understand the dynamics of tornadoes.

Another use for rockets proposed in the past is to use them to disperse chaff (small pieces of foil) which allows radars to then "see" air motions in portions of a storm where the chaff is deployed - which is useful for sensing the winds in portions of a storm where this is no precipitation to make it "visible" to the radar.

Erik Rasmussen, who is an innovative although somewhat isolated scientist, is leading the effort to develop the unmanned aircraft probes described above as a part of the RECUV Project, but has also been working with concepts to develop rocket-based deployments, and this may still someday come to fruition.

Glen
 
Back
Top