Talk:High-altitude balloon

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Manned?

It seems contradictory that in an article of which the first sentence in the lede states "High-altitude balloons are unmanned balloons.." the second subheading is "Manned high-altitude balloons". Which? Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 13:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Amended first sentence to manned or unmanned - perhaps there is a less clunky way to express this without staying "High-altitude balloons are balloons..". DanB25 (talk) 15:36, 09 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notability requirements

Hello.

It seems to me like the BEAR flights (which are unremarkable) don't belong in the article. If we listed every APRS enabled latex bursting balloon on the page there would be hundreds, and there's no good reason I can see to mention these ones in particular.

Also - it looks like this page is mainly focused on amateur attempts and being used by all these little un-notable projects to link back to their pages. UKHAS gets a link in the first paragraph? They aren't important enough for that and they have nothing to do with large scale scientific balloons, which the article doesn't talk about very much.

I'd really like to edit this page because I work with HAB professionally.

ApoKerbal (talk) 04:37, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agree to the above. Generally this Amateur radio high-altitude ballooning section seems to be used for self promotion. Also unsure on the BalloonSat section - if this is to be coined as the term for a HAB payload (certainly not the phrase we use in the UK) perhaps it belongs in the Uses section after some editing?

The whole ARHAB Program section doesn't flow and requires some editing and likely extending to cover European programs, notably HabHub. My thinking is there should be a subheading under ARHAB for "notable ARHAB programs", and more general information on ARHAB (such as the repeated line on data protocols) should live above this heading.

Happy to make changes with someone's agreement but don't really fancy going on a wanton campaign of deletion.

DanB25 (talk) 15:47, 09 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pressurised or Pressurized?

Shouldn't it be "pressurized suit"? Someone reverted the edit. I suppose pressurise is British and pressurize American. 212.186.15.63 (talk) 11:20, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Missing information

Given the previously mentioned excessive unremarkable balloon flights with unremarkable low weights there is also no mention of the flights of record weights or even higher than hobbyist weight measurements. No mention of the weight of manned or unmanned payloads some of which IIRC go as high as 10 tons. Only mentions weights of a few kilos. No mention of the diameter of the largest balloons at operational altitude. No mention of the height of the balloons at launch, and at altitude. No mention of duration of flights or inadequate construction, and material specifications. 2600:8807:5400:28F0:81C2:DCB4:2657:471D (talk) 15:25, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And do you have any sources? Why didn't you add all this information? CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 16:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because I won't battle with the cadres of uneditor trolls that pwn articles. People can look at talk pages, and see here there's significant information missing, and find a better source, like youtube.2600:8807:5400:28F0:E42A:6292:AD64:41C8 (talk) 10:14, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]