Feb 192021
 

Recently for sale on ebay was a display model of the Saro “Princess” turboprop flying boat, as Convair planned to modify it into a nuclear-powered research prototype. This late 50’s design was ballsy if nothing else: a nuclear reactor would be installed within the fuselage, providing superheated air from the reactor to the inboard above-wing modified turboprops. Unlike the NB-36H, this aircraft would have been actually powered by the reactor.

A description of the concept was written up HERE. A set of detailed diagrams are available as Air Drawing 8.

 Posted by at 8:52 pm
Feb 182021
 

It will hit the Martian atmosphere at 3:55 PM eastern coastal elite/12:55 left coast time (2:55 central/1:55 mountain flyover country time). With any luck, about seven minutes later it will hit the Martian surface at a speed that doesn’t turn the rover and it’s helicopter payload into scrap.

Here’s a chatty NASA live stream:

Animation of the landing process:

 Posted by at 12:26 pm
Jan 202021
 

As is known far and wide, I’m not well known. What little fame I have is largely bound up is the aerospace history research and illustration I’ve done; I’m *hoping* that when the two books I’m working on now get published things will change a bit (well, I hope my *work* gains a bit of fame; I’ve little use for *me* becoming famous). Still: while I toil in obscurity, I find that the products of my labor do have a tendency to pop up here and there. Usually when the diagrams I’ve created are used by someone else there’s some sort of attribution… but not always. There’s little to nothing that can be done about that, of course. Just sorta grit my teeth and move on.

So I watched this video, gritted my teeth and will, I suppose, move on. Note that it uses diagrams I created for Aerospace Projects Review issue V1N3 and US Transport Projects #07. What I suppose was funny was that when I started watching the video I largely *expected* to see my diagrams to show up in it… and, yup, there they are. As of this writing, the video has had about half a million views, not a one of which read where the diagrams came from.

UPDATE: After comms with the video maker: it seems he received the diagrams from someone else claiming them as their own. There have been revisions to the description including proper attribution. If this all pans out, there may be collaborations in the future.

 Posted by at 9:04 am
Dec 312020
 

Just released, the December 2020 rewards for APR Patrons and Subscribers. Included this month:

Diagram: a large format diagram of a Lockheed cruise missile. The designation of the missile is not given, but this looks like a SCAD design.

Document 1: Consolidated Class VB Carrier Based Bomber, from 1946

Document2: “Economic Aspects of a Reusable Single Stage To Orbit Vehicle,” a paper by Phil Bono on the ROOST launch vehicle from 1963

Document 3: “Shuttle Derived Vehicles,” a NASA-MSFC briefing to General Abrahamson from 1984

CAD Diagram: XSM-64A Navaho, the configuration that would have been built as an operational vehicle had the program gone forward

If this sort of thing is of interest, sign up either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program.




 Posted by at 1:30 pm
Dec 242020
 

In 1985, Rockwell International considered the possibility that there might be profit in ICBMs. In particular, small ICBMs (“Midgetman”), road-mobile with a single warhead. Sadly, the SICBM did not come to be. Nor did any other ICBM. The current ICBM that the USAF fields is the Minuteman, merely an updated version of the same missile first fielded nearly *sixty* years ago. The Peacekeeper ICBM was deployed the year after Rockwell produced this document… and the Peacekeeper was withdrawn twenty years later with no replacement in sight

 

 Posted by at 12:55 am
Dec 212020
 

I honestly wonder what practical value there is in the White House putting out memos on national strategy at this point, when the Manchurian is soon to be installed into power. Perhaps it’s just a poke in the eye… “go ahead and overturn this and show yourself to be a tool of the ChiComs,” perhaps?

Memorandum on the National Strategy for Space Nuclear Power and Propulsion (Space Policy Directive-6)

Section 1. Policy. The ability to use space nuclear power and propulsion (SNPP) systems safely, securely, and sustainably is vital to maintaining and advancing United States dominance and strategic leadership in space. SNPP systems include radioisotope power systems (RPSs) and fission reactors used for power or propulsion in spacecraft, rovers, and other surface elements. …

(a) Develop uranium fuel processing capabilities that enable production of fuel that is suitable to lunar and planetary surface and in-space power, nuclear electric propulsion (NEP), and nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) applications, as needed. …

(b) Demonstrate a fission power system on the surface of the Moon that is scalable to a power range of 40 kilowatt-electric (kWe) and higher to support a sustained lunar presence and exploration of Mars. …

(c) Establish the technical foundations and capabilities — including through identification and resolution of the key technical challenges — that will enable options for NTP to meet future Department of Defense (DoD) and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) mission requirements …

(d) Develop advanced RPS capabilities that provide higher fuel efficiency, higher specific energy, and longer operational lifetime than existing RPS capabilities, thus enabling survivable surface elements to support robotic and human exploration of the Moon and Mars and extending robotic exploration of the solar system. …

(a) By the mid-2020s, develop uranium fuel processing capabilities that enable production of fuel that is suitable for lunar and planetary surface and in-space power, NEP, and NTP applications, as needed. …

(b) By the mid- to late-2020s, demonstrate a fission power system on the surface of the Moon that is scalable to a power range of 40 kWe and higher to support sustained lunar presence and exploration of Mars. …

(c) By the late-2020s, establish the technical foundations and capabilities — including through identification and resolution of the key technical challenges — that will enable NTP options to meet future DoD and NASA mission needs.

 

Even had Trump won re-election I have serious doubts that this memorandum would have changed things much… the anti-nuclear religion is far too powerful. Still, better to have a forward-thinking document like this than not. We are *generations* behind where we should be in the development of space-based nuclear power systems and nuclear thermal rockets.

 Posted by at 1:18 pm
Dec 162020
 

A recently donated blueprint of the AGM-69A Short Range Attack Missile:

 

I’ve made available to above-$10 subscribers and patrons both the full resolution scan of the above, as well as a processed clearer B&W version. If you’d be interested in helping to preserve aerospace history such as this, as well as receiving bonus content like this, please consider signing up either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program.




.

 

 Posted by at 3:06 pm
Nov 222020
 

Well, this sounds just spectacular:

BLM Co-Founder Calls on Biden to Back a Crazy Progressive ‘Civil Rights’ Bill

The text of the BREATHE Act is available HERE. It calls for some interesting things, including but not limited to:

  • Abolishing the Drug Enforcement Administration
  • Abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement
  • Abolishing funding for drug interdiction efforts
  • Slash the budget of the DoD by 50%
  • Slash the budget of the Department of Energy by 50%
  • Eliminate the Space Force
  • Eliminate all modern fighter jet programs
  • Unilateral nuclear disarmament
  • Withdraw US military forces and assistance from everywhere in the world
  • Prohibit Federal police forces from using “less than lethal” systems, “military grade” weapons, drones or BODY CAMERAS

 

That last one there is interesting. At they same they want to stop Federal police from using “military grade weapons” (which in modern progressive parlance means any semi-automatic weapons) as well as tasers and pepper spray. This will make them *incredibly* vulnerable to criminals armed with little more than ball bats, never mind the automatic weapons that will be available to criminals in abundance. And they want to eliminate body cams, which will show how the federal cops are being set upon by the now-empowered criminals who do not have to worry about actually facing real resistance.

 

The BREATHE Act also repeals:

  • Laws against the material support of terrorism
  • Laws against conspiracy and gang offenses
  • Laws against prostitution

The Act would raise the minimum age to be tried as an adult to *24*

It would end both the death penalty *and* life sentences

End deportation of illegal aliens who also commit violent crimes

Basically end all bars to immigration

And here’s the really good part: within 5 years of the Act, prison population would be reduced 50%, and by 10 years, *all* prisons would be emptied.

There are 126 pages of this gibberish and I could not be bothered to read all of it. So go ahead and imagine how much of it  will be read by those genetic defectives in Congress who will vote for it. Will this pass into law? Almost certainly not. Even as addled as he is, Biden is probably goign to realize that this Act, were it to become law, would result in the prompt destruction of the United States as a going concern. Very few republicans would be stupid enough to vote for it, and a bunch of Democrats would likely realize how nonsensically destructive this BS is. Still: this is the sort of thing that some “mainstream” Democrats such as Pressley and Tlaib are pushing for.

 Posted by at 12:45 pm
Nov 162020
 

And good for Britain if this comes to pass:

Rolls-Royce plans 16 mini-nuclear plants for UK

It seems that of Britains current crop of nuclear powerplants, six will go offline by 2030, and the last by 2035. the new Small Modular Reactors are to cost about £2 billion a pop and produce 440 megawatts of electricity. The consortium led by RR says they can build the first facility in ten years and produce two a year after that.

Unsurprisingly, Greenpeace is opposed. Because of course they are.

 

 Posted by at 10:45 pm