Jan 072021
 

I communicated with Dennis Jenkins today. “Space Shuttle: Developing an Icon 1972-2013” had one single printing, there will be no more… and that one printing is finally nearly sold out. It is still available at the original retail price of $170. But once it’s sold out, the secondary market will be the only place to get it and the price will skyrocket… it’s already $228 to $448 on abebooks, a single $364 copy on ebay. Hell it might even be a good investment for resale. This three-volume set is a remarkable work and is worth every penny. Make sure to get a copy before the Green New Deal kicks in and it becomes difficult to ship things!

 

 Posted by at 5:53 pm
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If this sort of thing is of interest, sign up either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program.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
 

So why not, I’ve uploaded another video of the QM-1 static test from way back in 2015 to YouTube. This one was with a handheld camera, so expect a bit of shakeycam. Bonus: I missed ignition by eleven seconds or so. Consequently, you miss an opportunity to hear what I sound like when I cuss profusely.

The video posted back in 2015:

 Posted by at 11:32 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 The Peacekeeper ICBM was deployed the year after Rockwell produced this document… and the Peacekeeper was withdrawn twenty years later with no replacement in sight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
Dec 092020
 

Trying again…

OH SNAP!

 

OK, one minor malfunction, but that was still the best show I’ve seen since the first dual-booster landing.

IT WAS GLORIOUS!

I found that I still have my own YouTube channel. Who knew? Anyway, if you’ve ever been *desperate* to find out what I sound like, here’s your chance, where I provide scintillating commentary during the touchdown maneuver:

Some of the audience…

 Posted by at 2:22 pm
Dec 032020
 

Ummm. I don’t know squadoo about these folks, but I have questions.

It seems they have a hangar and a mockup and some pretty graphics. I’m not sure they have a sensible business model. The idea is to launch a small rocket into orbit from underneath a newly-built fighter-sized UAV. Why not just launch from under a surplus fighter-sized fighter?

 Posted by at 11:16 am