Turns out the Chinese are zapping surface targets with lasers. This *seems* to be a benign scientific technique, checking atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide and pollution and whatnot… but this is the Chinese Communist Party we’re talking about, so…
This sort of thing would be weird as hell to see out in the wild. I’m not sure if this is naked-eye visible, however, or if it took sensitive cameras to pick this up.
January 28, 1986. One of the few school days that I remember clearly.
Manly tears are appropriate.
There is a fan-built replica of the original USS Enterprise set – the whole ship, at least as built in the 1960’s – in Georgia. These sets were used for the filming of the “Star Trek Continues” fan films, and they look convincingly like the originals.
There are two such complete sets… this one, and one in New York. Every kid who was a fan of this show in the 60’s, 70’s and into the 80’s would have killed to have a set like this… at least the captains chair. I imagine there are a lot of folks who want a set of the Enterprise D bridge, probably some Voyager fans. But can anyone really suggest that, fifty years from now, fans of Star Trek Discovery will have recreated the sets from that show in a warehouse somewhere for their own fan films, offering daily tours to paying customers? I suspect not: not just because the show sucks, but because the sets are bleh and soulless… and if anyone wants to do fan films of STD, they’ll likely just work in front of a green screen and CGI-in the sets.
I do wonder if the builders for either of these Enterprise sets could make a decent business out of selling replicas of the captains chair, navigation, the science station, perhaps even occasionally the complete bridge. I suspect there are legal issues that would stand in their way, but if not, I don’t doubt that there are a number of fans with a lot of money and a lot of floorspace who’d happily pay for their own little bit of the Enterprise.
This new Apple+ show looks like it *could* have truckloads of potential… and I can see where it could torpedo itself. Behold “Hello Tomorrow!” Some sort of alternate history where the 1950’s never ended yet technology continued, so there are hover-cars, robots and spaceships that all look like they belong in the 50’s. This *could* be friggen’ spectacular: a bright, uplifting story of possibilities. But there are unsubtle hints that “things are not what they seem,” that could turn the whole thing into garbage. “Ascension,” anyone?” The space colonies don’t work, or there are dark conspiracies, or bog-standard “racism and misogyny and transphobia, oh my,” or it’s all some sort of simulation.
Remember the days when you saw a great-looking trailer and you actually held out optimism? But as I don;t have Apple+, I guess it doesn’t much matter…
Back in the mid 80’s, one of the things I got a kick out of was the FASA Star Trek starship combat game. Not just the game itself, but all the books and miniatures that went along with it. I bought, assembled and painted a number of the little metal ships, and have tried to keep them through all the decades since… but through numerous moves and general attrition and entropy, a bunch of the ships have vanished. Recently I’ve had an itch to take the ones I’ve got, strip their decades old paint and try again, and to replace the ones I’ve lost. I’ve looked for replacements on ebay with limited success. Most of what’s available are still in their packages, which means the prices are nuts, and the ones I really want to replace haven’t popped up.
So… does anyone have a collection of these things – or even just one – that you want to unload for a reasonable sum? If so, let me know.
Also: am I alone in having an attachment to these lead/pewter miniatures that simply doesn’t exist for plastic ones, including modern 3D printed versions? There just seems to be something special about them. Perhaps it’s the weight… and perhaps it’s the fact that these were what I had when my brain was developing connections that have ossified since I became an adult. I’d accept either or both explanations, but the fact remains: metal > plastic.
Virgin Orbit is Richard Bransons space launch company. Their launch system, LauncherOne, uses a 747 to haul a more or less conventional expendable rocket into the air for launch to orbit. yesterday they flew a launch attempt, the first orbital launch attempt from the UK. Note “attempt.” It got close, but something went wring and the vehicle didn’t attain orbit. That’s never a good thing, but things apparently weren’t good at the company before then.
The math seems weird:
Independent estimates suggest that, over that time, Virgin Orbit spent as much as $1 billion to develop and test its LauncherOne rocket and air-launch system. The company made its first successful launch in January 2021 and has averaged one mission every six months since then.
An obvious question is this: With such high development costs and a low cadence for a rocket that sells for $12 million per launch, how can Virgin Orbit be financially sustainable?
How indeed. $12M per launch would require 83 launches to make a $Billion, and that’s forty years at the current rate. And $12M is the selling price of the mission, not the profit.
Two separate projects to create virtual Discoveries from “2001.” Neither one is complete, both are interesting.
The “Enzmann Starship” is named after Robert Enzmann, who “designed” it decades ago. Just exactly *when* has been an issue of some confusion in recent years.
It first came to light in the late 60’s or early 70’s, with claims that he thought it up around 1964 or so. The design is unique: a giant spherical ball of frozen deuterium fuel at the front, followed by a cylindrical ship, ending with a series of Orion-style nuclear pulse engines. It was an *ok* concept for a practical starship, though relatively recent analysis presented in the Journal of the British Interplanetary Society argued that it was not nearly as good as imagined. It became something of a sensation in the 70’s after appearing on the cover of “Analog” in 1973.
Nothing has ever been produced, so far as I’m aware, backing up the concept with any sort of detailed design of analysis until that JBIS paper. No reports, proposals, pages of math, from Enzmann seem to be available… just text descriptions of a few sentences and some art. And that’s fine. But in recent years the claims have become more and more expansive. Enzmann, near the end of his life, claimed that the design for a nuclear-pulse vehicle dated not from the time of the Orion program, but back to the *40’s*.
I spoke to Enzmann on the phone a few times over the years. He was enthusiastic, verbose… and baffling. He made lots and lots of claims about having worked on this or that amazing program, but when asked for verifiable details… it was classified. Those who have picked up his mantle and are trying to carry his torch seem to be following in his footsteps there, continuing his claims without much apparent criticism. I’ve recently engaged their twitter contact to get some sort of verification of his claims… but we have now reached the point where not only am I convinced that no such evidence will be produced, I feel no reason to assume anything remarkable is true at all. Behold:
He published nothing on his Starship before NYAS conference #1 other than his own words. ANP aircraft were built in the 50's, and buried deep under a NM mountain, according to Enzmann, who was there. He is the reference.
— Enzmann Archive (@EnzmannArchiv) January 2, 2023
Claiming that nuclear powered aircraft were actually built in the fifties and then buried in a mountain? Yeah… no. I’m out.
Where the thread started:
Enzmann Starships refueling at Saturn's moon.
Paining by RDE, 1949.
“We stand today upon the doorsill of manned inter-stellar flight. It will happen swiftly.” =RDE pic.twitter.com/tgNZYzMoCY— Enzmann Archive (@EnzmannArchiv) January 1, 2023
The December 2022 rewards are available for APR Patrons and Subscribers. This latest package includes:
Large Format Diagram: AWACS model diagram
Document: “Preliminary Design of a Mars Excursion Module,” 1964 conference paper, Philco
Document: “Astronauts Memorial” 2 diagrams
Document: “Patrol Reconnaissance Airplane Twin Float,” Convair brochure (via photos), 1944. Two piston engines, two turbojets
Document: “Hard Mobile Launcher,” Martin Marietta PR, two images. One photo, one artists impression
Document: “JVX Space Proposal” apparently a fragment, 1984 Bell maps of manufacturing facilities for what would become the V-22
Document: “Minimum Man In Space,” 1958 NACA memo describing proposals made to Wright Air Development Center for what would become the Mercury program
If you would like to help fund the acquisition and preservation of such things, along with getting high quality scans for yourself, please consider signing on either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program. Back issues are available for purchase by patrons and subscribers.
And because I forgot to post about it at the time, the November 2022 rewards were made available a month ago:
Large Format Diagram: B-50A Superfortress Model Diagram
Document: “Design Study of a One Man Lunar Transportation device,” 1964 North American Aviation conference paper on a rocket “hopper”
Document: “Project EGRESS (Emergency Global Rescue, Escape and Survival System),” 1964 Martin conference paper on ejection capsule for aerospacecraft
Document: “The Hydrogen Fueled Hypersonic Transport,” 1968 Convair conference paper
CAD Diagram: Mach 3 turbojets: Allison 700 B-2 (J89), GE YJ-93-GE-3 (cutaway), P&W J58
If you would like to help fund the acquisition and preservation of such things, along with getting high quality scans for yourself, please consider signing on either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program. Back issues are available for purchase by patrons and subscribers.
Ran two prints today. The second one, the 4th test of the new setup, turned out to be pretty much there with just a few minor issues. The main issue I’m looking at now is getting proper coverage of the paper. For whatever reason, the cyanotyping fluid doesn’t really like the vellum paper and you get occasional blotchiness. This was a constant problem before, and was solved largely by tossing prints that weren’t up to code. Experiments will continue…
