Yipes!!!

The family is a TV family, that is they have been on TV before
http://abc.go.com/shows/wife-swap/episode-guide/heenemartel/132697

The Heene family from Colorado live life on the edge. Wife Mayumi (43) and storm scientist Richard (45) take their three kids, Bradford (8), Ryo (7) and Falcon (5), out of school to go on storm chasing missions to prove Richard's theories about magnetic fields and gravity. If conditions are right, Mayumi wakes her family by shouting "Storm Approaching, Storm Approaching!" into a bullhorn. The family sleep in their clothes so they can leap out of bed and into the storm-mobile. Richard calls Mayumi his 'ninja wife'; she maintains equipment, drives the storm-mobile, films tornadoes and waits with the kids while Richard jumps on his motorbike, heads into the eye of the storm and launches rockets to measure magnetic forces. At home the family are as chaotic as a twister: the kids have no table manners and throw themselves around the house, and while Richard devotes every moment to his research, he expects Mayumi to cook, clean and run the house without any help.
Click to expand...

The 5 year old is named Falcon.
 
smigaldi said:
Been watching a lot of AF1 movies lately? ;)
Click to expand...


from the AP
"The Colorado Army National Guard sent an OH-58 Kiowa helicopter and was preparing to send a Black Hawk UH-60 to try to rescue the boy, possibly by lowering someone to the balloon."


I must be insane if I'm thinking the same way that the military is.
 
deafsound said:
from the AP
"The Colorado Army National Guard sent an OH-58 Kiowa helicopter and was preparing to send a Black Hawk UH-60 to try to rescue the boy, possibly by lowering someone to the balloon."


I must be insane if I'm thinking the same way that the military is.
Click to expand...


I came up with the same idea.
 
Lordy me, I hope it's all a hoax.
 
Dave Theisen said:
just reported that he is alive and at home, no other details
Click to expand...

One report says he was hiding in the garage. He probably let the thing loose by mistake and was hiding because he figured he was in trouble.

What a great ending!!!
 
Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden told media in Fort Collins that the 6-year-old boy thought to be missing in a balloon craft has been found alive at his home.


"He was found in a box in the attic above the garage," Alderden said.
 
FlyNE said:
Larimer County Sheriff Jim Alderden told media in Fort Collins that the 6-year-old boy thought to be missing in a balloon craft has been found alive at his home.


"He was found in a box in the attic above the garage," Alderden said.
Click to expand...

(snicker)

Boys will be....
 
Oh, to be a fly on the wall during that parental conversation.

"It wasn't me. It was HIM! He made me!"
 
Proof once again that "cable news" is the biggest oxymoron since "flat busted".

:)
 
Wasn't the kid in a closet all day.

Reminds me of the Family Guy where the plane crashes in a field and they say here is our simulation of what it would be like if it had crashed into an elementary school.

Where's the story??
 
It was news as it was unfolding, but now that the story has unfolded it is a non-event. Just a case of kids being kids.
 
I gotta tell you, I was so happy to hear that the litlun was safe. However, had it been me in the late 60's, my Dad would've beat that tar out of me! lol.. I'm glad all ended well.

I know that kid felt the "oh ****" factor and didn't know what to do once he realized that balloon was aloft.
 
ps. do the parents have to pay the cost of the search and rescue efforts?
 
I'm gonna vote "yes". Up here in AK, if you need rescue because you were dumb, a bill comes your way.
 
Its interesting that folks might have tried lowering Charlton Heston to the damn thing but no one in the Miltary or at CNN bothered to compute the volume of a dome shaped thing 20 feet across and five feet high and ask if a helium balloon that big could loft a 50 pound child to 8500 feet.

<a quick swag with Wolphram Alpha says about 750 cubic feet of Helium to loft 50 pounds and if the balloon was dome shaped with a 20 foot diameter and five foot height it comes in at 800 cubic feet - so figuring weight of structure - might leave the ground but wouldn't climb very high>

I suspect they weren't expecting to find the intrepid passenger when it landed, the first fellow to grab it didn't look in the little gondola.

This is less a lesson in calculations and more on the number of people it takes to get high resolution audio/video in our homes and none of them thought to call their high school science teacher and ask ...
 
OtisAir said:
ps. do the parents have to pay the cost of the search and rescue efforts?
Click to expand...

In Colorado taxpaying residents generally aren't billed for services in their fire/rescue district. A sheriff can bill but probably won't within the county unless fraudulent claims are made. Now if you're a hunter, skier, snowmobiler, hiker, fisherman, etc. then you better have insurance from a hunting license or similar. The insurance just makes certain that out of pocket costs for all SAR folks are covered and everyone is a whole lot happier.
 
Clark1961 said:
A sheriff can bill but probably won't within the county unless fraudulent claims are made.
Click to expand...

Like, say, Daddy putting this whole thing together as a publicity stunt? Kid says "You said we did this for the show" on TV interview:

 
That mylar balloon does not have the structural strength to lift 50# without completely collapsing in shape and probably ripping...
The parents are nut cases - see their previous escapades...
A balloon does not self untie and float away when it has been tethered there for days or weeks...
There is nothing to be learned from letting that balloon loose into a thunderstorm - which was the claimed purpose...
If he did launch it into a thunderstorm with several pounds of payload, then he is endangering the public with falling objects...
The father is guilty of letting it leave Class E airspace without prior authorization and should have a $10K fine...


denny-o
 
Falcon's father asked, "Why didn't you come out?" The boy answered, "You had said we did this for a show."
Click to expand...
I thought this was all about the way kids think, and maybe it's about an adult acting like an irresponsible kid? Hoo-boy.

In any event, my computations suggest the balloon was only capable of lifting about an 11-lb payload from the elevation at Ft Collins...

The launch point is elevation 5003 feet. At that altitude, air density is 0.0020481 lb-sec2/ft4, or 0.0659 lb/ft3. Density of helium at STP is 0.1785 g/L, which at 5000 ft should be about 0.1538 g/L. Converting g/L to lb/ft3, we get 0.000339 lb/L, and then converting to cu ft we get .0096 lb/ft3. At 5000 ft, that gives us a differential of .0563 lb/ft3. Multiply that by an estimated 1500 ft3 gas bag, and we get a net buoyancy of 84 lb -- hardly likely to loft a 50 lb kid, plus box and balloon structure.

Further, we have been told that the box-less balloon topped out at about 9000 feet. At that altitude, the outside air density is .0018111 slugs/ft3, or 0.0583 lb/ft3. Assuming the contained mass of helium hasn't changed much (assuming not much stretch in the fabric of the gas bag), the differential there is down to 0.0487 lb/ft3, which with 1500 ft3 of volume gives us 73 lb of buoyancy, suggesting the balloon itself weighed about that much. That suggests the net payload loftable from 5000 feet would only be about 11 lb.

Anyone find any fault in my computations?
 
Ron Levy said:
I thought this was all about the way kids think, and maybe it's about an adult acting like an irresponsible kid? Hoo-boy.

In any event, my computations suggest the balloon was only capable of lifting about an 11-lb payload from the elevation at Ft Collins...

The launch point is elevation 5003 feet. At that altitude, air density is 0.0020481 lb-sec2/ft4, or 0.0659 lb/ft3. Density of helium at STP is 0.1785 g/L, which at 5000 ft should be about 0.1538 g/L. Converting g/L to lb/ft3, we get 0.000339 lb/L, and then converting to cu ft we get .0096 lb/ft3. At 5000 ft, that gives us a differential of .0563 lb/ft3. Multiply that by an estimated 1500 ft3 gas bag, and we get a net buoyancy of 84 lb -- hardly likely to loft a 50 lb kid, plus box and balloon structure.

Further, we have been told that the box-less balloon topped out at about 9000 feet. At that altitude, the outside air density is .0018111 slugs/ft3, or 0.0583 lb/ft3. Assuming the contained mass of helium hasn't changed much (assuming not much stretch in the fabric of the gas bag), the differential there is down to 0.0487 lb/ft3, which with 1500 ft3 of volume gives us 73 lb of buoyancy, suggesting the balloon itself weighed about that much. That suggests the net payload loftable from 5000 feet would only be about 11 lb.

Anyone find any fault in my computations?
Click to expand...

I will assume you to be correct, as it has been 18 years since I have done any of those calculations.
 
Ron Levy said:
I thought this was all about the way kids think, and maybe it's about an adult acting like an irresponsible kid? Hoo-boy.

In any event, my computations suggest the balloon was only capable of lifting about an 11-lb payload from the elevation at Ft Collins...

The launch point is elevation 5003 feet. At that altitude, air density is 0.0020481 lb-sec2/ft4, or 0.0659 lb/ft3. Density of helium at STP is 0.1785 g/L, which at 5000 ft should be about 0.1538 g/L. Converting g/L to lb/ft3, we get 0.000339 lb/L, and then converting to cu ft we get .0096 lb/ft3. At 5000 ft, that gives us a differential of .0563 lb/ft3. Multiply that by an estimated 1500 ft3 gas bag, and we get a net buoyancy of 84 lb -- hardly likely to loft a 50 lb kid, plus box and balloon structure.

Further, we have been told that the box-less balloon topped out at about 9000 feet. At that altitude, the outside air density is .0018111 slugs/ft3, or 0.0583 lb/ft3. Assuming the contained mass of helium hasn't changed much (assuming not much stretch in the fabric of the gas bag), the differential there is down to 0.0487 lb/ft3, which with 1500 ft3 of volume gives us 73 lb of buoyancy, suggesting the balloon itself weighed about that much. That suggests the net payload loftable from 5000 feet would only be about 11 lb.

Anyone find any fault in my computations?
Click to expand...
I did similiar computations yesterday. That is why I asked about the size of balloon in an earlier post. I calculated that it was highly unlikely that there was any sort of weight near what a small boy would weigh inside that balloon and still have it be able to fly. I kept my mouth closed because I did not have any other evidence. But in light of what has been transpiring late last night and this morning I feel more comfortable in feeling that this was a hoax.

The real question is now is it a hoax that the parents were behind or was this something the brothers did and were trying to cover their tracks and things got way out of hand? I don't know, but my spidey senses are tingling that there is something not right here.
 
smigaldi said:
The real question is now is it a hoax that the parents were behind or was this something the brothers did and were trying to cover their tracks and things got way out of hand?
Click to expand...
My sense yesterday was that the kids were playing with something they were told not to, it got away, and after that it was "an icicle fell off the roof" time. However, in conjunction with the family's apparent penchant for public view, what the kid said to the reporter ("You had said we did this for a show.") has me wondering. Maybe he meant that the dad was planning to use the balloon for some sort of storm-chasing show and he thought he'd destroyed Daddy's plans by losing the balloon, maybe something else less innocent. We shall see.
 
One wonders whether there was any way the kid could have been in the compartment at the bottom -- it looks very small, with no apparent access panels/doors/hatches. Further, if the dad knew bugger-all about balloons, it's hard to imagine him thinking it could lift the kid's weight. Thus, it's hard to imagine how the dad could think the kid was in there. We shall see...and as MSNBC said, the sheriff's deparment "has more questions."
 
Its looking more and more as if this were all a publicity stunt...

Between the kid's statement and this video, I would guess the authorities now have a lot more questions to ask of the parents.

And should they be found culpable of creating this event on purpose, I surely hope the State recovers their costs of this escapade.

As an aside to how S+R costs are usually dealt with- in Colorado, you can purchase "insurance" for S+R costs, by a $1.00 fee added to any fishing or hunting license. This covers 100% of costs. If you do not have this insurance, and are lost in the back country(for example), you can be held liable for 100% of the incurred costs.

Even those of us who ski back country in the winter, always carry our fishing or hunting licenses in our wallets... just in case...
 
Ron Levy said:
Anyone find any fault in my computations?
Click to expand...

I put the volume of the two half domes with radius 10 and half height of 2.5 at less than 1000 cubic feet.

in any event even less likely to fly ....

I am less interested in the dad, than in the fact that none of the machinery at CNN thought to do the math.
 
twdeckard said:
I am less interested in the dad, than in the fact that none of the machinery at CNN thought to do the math.
Click to expand...
MSNBC did get a guy from the ABQ balloon mob on the phone after a couple of hours, and he came to pretty much the same conclusion. Yeah, it did take them a while, but think about it -- who do you call when you have a question on something about which you know nothing? Remember, it has to be someone who really knows, not just someone with a page on the internet. Also remember these folks are TV reporters, not experts on anything except looking good on TV, and probably aren't good at research like journalists of past generations (RIP, Walter).
 
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • neverforget.png
    neverforget.png
    78 KB · Views: 69
SkyHog said:
That is still not telling, since they claim they weren't sure if the kid was in the balloon at the time.

But the story doesn't jive....
Click to expand...
The story was, and granted it is the story as report by the media, that the kid undid the balloon, the brothers saw this happen and that they sstated the kid was inside. The brothers "Ran into the house" to tell dad. Hmm if dad was there then that part os the story does not jive. But your point is taken Nick.

The other part of the story that does not jive is that the kid said he was in house already because his dad yelled at him.

Some holes in all of this. Enough holes to cast an eye of suspicion upon the whole mess.
 
I saw the "launch" video - clearly the 'rents were there.

I DO think its plausible - ONLY plausible - that what the boy meant by the "did it for the show" comment was something like "I hid cause the balloon was for dad's new storm chaser show and I got in trouble once already for climbing in the balloon so when it flew away I thought I'd be in even MORE trouble."

He's 6, for crying out loud - how subtle about any dishonesty can he be, really? I mean, I don't think 6 yr olds are pure as the driven snow - just that their lies are pretty stupid and easy to catch them in.
 
What does the FAA have to say about this? I know the local police aren't going to do anything, but any chance the FAA will fine the family?
 
I guess that explains what I heard on guard yesterday early afternoon, something about establishing a TFR on the DEN 010 radial. I wasn't really paying attention because we were headed in the opposite direction. I didn't know anything about this until it was all over.
 
Keane said:
What does the FAA have to say about this? I know the local police aren't going to do anything, but any chance the FAA will fine the family?
Click to expand...
A review of 14 CFR 101.1:
(4) Except as provided for in Sec. 101.7, any unmanned free balloon that--
(i) Carries a payload package that weighs more than four pounds and
has a weight/size ratio of more than three ounces per square inch on any
surface of the package, determined by dividing the total weight in
ounces of the payload package by the area in square inches of its
smallest surface;
(ii) Carries a payload package that weighs more than six pounds;
(iii) Carries a payload, of two or more packages, that weighs more
than 12 pounds; or
(iv) Uses a rope or other device for suspension of the payload that
requires an impact force of more than 50 pounds to separate the
suspended payload from the balloon.
Click to expand...
...suggests that Part 101 wouldn't normally apply to this balloon because it had no payload at all. However, Sec. 101.7 says:
Sec. 101.7 Hazardous operations.

(a) No person may operate any moored balloon, kite, unmanned rocket, or unmanned free balloon in a manner that creates a hazard to other
persons, or their property.
Click to expand...
Given the size of this thing, I think the FAA could make the case that it created a hazard to air navigation, especially since it traversed the arrival/departure corridors for DIA. Since the video suggests the dad allowed it to launch (and may even have intended for it to launch) without complying with either the operating limitations:
Sec. 101.33 Operating limitations.

No person may operate an unmanned free balloon--
(a) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, below 2,000 feet above the
surface within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B,
Class C, Class D, or Class E airspace designated for an airport;
(b) At any altitude where there are clouds or obscuring phenomena of
more than five-tenths coverage;
(c) At any altitude below 60,000 feet standard pressure altitude
where the horizontal visibility is less than five miles;
(d) During the first 1,000 feet of ascent, over a congested area of
a city, town, or settlement or an open-air assembly of persons not
associated with the operation; or
(e) In such a manner that impact of the balloon, or part thereof
including its payload, with the surface creates a hazard to persons or
property not associated with the operation.
Click to expand...
...or the notice requirements:
Sec. 101.37 Notice requirements.

(a) Prelaunch notice: Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, no person may operate an unmanned free balloon unless, within 6
to 24 hours before beginning the operation, he gives the following
information to the FAA ATC facility that is nearest to the place of
intended operation:
(1) The balloon identification.
(2) The estimated date and time of launching, amended as necessary
to remain within plus or minus 30 minutes.
(3) The location of the launching site.
(4) The cruising altitude.
(5) The forecast trajectory and estimated time to cruising altitude
or 60,000 feet standard pressure altitude, whichever is lower.
(6) The length and diameter of the balloon, length of the suspension
device, weight of the payload, and length of the trailing antenna.
(7) The duration of flight.
(8) The forecast time and location of impact with the surface of the
earth.
(b) For solar or cosmic disturbance investigations involving a
critical time element, the information in paragraph (a) of this section
shall be given within 30 minutes to 24 hours before beginning the
operation.
(c) Cancellation notice: If the operation is canceled, the person
who intended to conduct the operation shall immediately notify the
nearest FAA ATC facility.
(d) Launch notice: Each person operating an unmanned free balloon
shall notify the nearest FAA or military ATC facility of the launch time
immediately after the balloon is launched.
Click to expand...
...they have him pretty much dead to rights on multiple violations of 14 CFR Part 101. In this case where there is no FAA certificate to suspend or revoke, a civil penalty could be assessed. How much? Not sure of the limits, but they may decide to make an example of him lest some other idiot launch a similar balloon without observing the legal proprieties. Even if they decide the launch was inadvertant, they can still sanction him on the basis of carelessness in not ensuring it stayed put.

And frankly, I hope they do.
 
Last edited:
You guys must really be bored today...go flying or something for heaven's sake.

But I guess we're proving that "cable news" indeed has an audience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top