Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Almost as great as sliced bread.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                               

Airdrop Fireworks

 More bang for your buck.
  (-1)
(-1) 		  [vote for,
against]

After reading some of the other entries in this category this idea seems somewhat plebian. Consider the standard big fireworks show. Large bursting clouds of fire etc etc. But to get up to height, these fireworks must contain a lot of propellant. The size of the blast is limited by the difficulty in getting it up there.

On the Fourth of July there are always little private planes circling around, watching from the air. I propose that a little plane actually run the show. The plane could circle at several thousand feet. Fireworks would be dropped out of the plane. These could be much larger, since they would require no propellant. Other effects might also be possible using a cropduster-like maneuver - dumping a trail of sparks, etc.

—bungston, Jul 06 2004

Flares From a Hercules http://www.defence....rge/000-114-283.jpg
From the Aus Gov't Defense Gallery. [reap, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 05 2004]

Please log in.
If you're not logged in, you can see what this page looks like, but you will not be able to add anything.
Short name, e.g., Bob's Coffee
Destination URL. E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)






       That's all well and good until they go and firework the wrong township....
—DrCurry, Jul 06 2004
   

       This would look spectacular so + but fireworks accidents on the ground are bad enough, could you imagine it happening in an airplane which might then hit the crowd? Yeesh.   

       <aside> I've been in small aircraft over fireworks and it is a decidedly unspectacular way to watch them.
—bristolz, Jul 06 2004
   

       Au contraire, as a child I flew over the US on or near the Fourth, and was treated to a series of firework displays from 30,000'. I loved every moment of it. Maybe you're just too old...?
—DrCurry, Jul 06 2004
   

       When I first saw this I was thinking something like a hercules plane, loaded with "crates" at around 8 000' would do it. With a static line deployment system, setting off the 10 second fuse on the fireworks...Definitly more bang for your buck.+
—swimr, Jul 06 2004
   

       From 30,000 feet you might as well watch them on TV.   

       I am comparing the experience to the one where I am standing 500 feet from the lanch point, literally under the fireworks, and I feel every burst and it seems, at times, as if I am falling into the big mums as they slowly expand to fill my entire field of vision. Sitting at 3500 feet in an airplane and watching them is just a dull experience. No sound of the fireworks. No excited reactions from the children in the crowd.
—bristolz, Jul 06 2004
   

       For reasons I don't entirely fathom, this just prompted the thought of "Swim With Fireworks."
—DrCurry, Jul 07 2004
   

       Sweet flares picture, [reap]!
—bungston, Aug 12 2004
   

       Always thought they should do this, with a real bomber and a massive airburst shell or 2 that would cover much of the visible sky, as a finale. I'm guessing America at least has quite a few obsolete airburst bombs kicking around, just convert a few to fireworks!
—eulachon, Aug 12 2004
   

       Airshows are dangerous enough as it is. You're going to have to shell out big bucks for multiple pilots flying around in pitch black weather, launching explosives with enormous blast radii. I do think, however, that many more pyrotechnic effects could be achieved with an airplane.   

       Better yet, we could keep the planes, give the barges AA guns, and see who wins. Now THAT would be a spectacle.
—WordUp, Aug 13 2004
   

       Some of the best fireworks are the kind that emit sparks as they go up. I also enjoy the sound of the launch tubes. Reminds me of an 82mm mortar. All aside, it's probably going to cost more to get the plane up there than the charges used to get them up there.   

       On the positive side, no charge means a larger firework can be used. I've been to an airshow that used a suhkoi 31 with a spark generator on the rudder, he did his show at night and mostly consisted of loops and dives. Converting to cropduster configuration wouldn't be too difficult I would imagine.
—destructionism, Aug 14 2004
   

       Perhaps a helicopter pinwheel?
—Worldgineer, Aug 14 2004
   

       Roman Candle dogfights...
—destructionism, Aug 14 2004
   

       I watched a fireworks show from a cable/tram car that was going across the river, almost over the barge. *That* was fun.   

       I saw an airshow where the plane dropped a few flares while a couple of major fireworks were launched from the ground to give the illusion they came from the plane. Somebody screwed up on the timing and almost got the airplane.   

       Most big fireworks contain *no* propellant. They aren't rockets. They are fired from mortars, which I think is great to see and hear, so the propellant charge is only limited by the strength of the barrel. Still, a big airplane with a big airburst would be bigger by far. A fuel-air explosion would probably be better than an atomic bomb.
—baconbrain, Feb 20 2005
   


 

back: main index
business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle