January 28, 1986. One of the few school days that I remember clearly.
Manly tears are appropriate.
Jan 282023
Jan 242023
A 1950’s film describing the “Lobber” rocket from Convair. This was a small battlefield cargo delivery system… rations, medical supplies, ammo, that sort of thing. Kind of a neat idea, but obviously it didn’t go into service. The ability to launch 50 pounds of stuff eight miles just wasn’t that spectacular when cargo planes could para-drop tons of stuff hundreds of miles away, when choppers could zip in and out in the time it would take to pack stuff into the rocket. Today i imagine drones would take on the task… not as fast, but less harsh on the cargo and much more precise.
Note that it is also described as a system capable of delivering *nukes.* Well, any rocket that you can swap out the payload could be a nuclear delivery system if it’s got the capability. Fifty pounds just barely covers it. It would be safer for the launch crew than a Davy Crockett with a range of only a couple miles, but 8 miles is still pretty close. The W54 warhead weighed right about 50 pounds and could yield up to about one kiloton. Eight miles would be a safe distance… so long as the fallout didn’t rain down on your head.
Jan 212023
Below, a twitter thread discussing a recent increase in the appearance of air defense systems in and around Moscow, including Vlad Putin;s digs. The optimistic way of looking at this: every missile placed near Russia is a missile not placed near Ukraine. The pessimistic outlook: you generally don;t go to this kind of bother and expense to take weapons systems *away* from an ongoing conflict unless you have a reason to. It seems the Russians seem to think that the conflict is going to expand to aircraft attacking Moscow. Do they think the Ukrainians are going to do that? Or are they expecting NATO to do that? if so, keep in mind that the excuses being used include “it was a pre-emptive strike against Ukraine because they were going to attack *us.*”
Another possibility is they’re afraid of elements of the Russian Air Force deciding to go a wee bit off mission.
Air defense system spotted near one of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin's residencies in Moscow Oblast. Yesterday, air defense systems started to appear on top of high buildings in the city of Moscow, including the Russian defense ministry. #WhatAirDefenseDoing pic.twitter.com/0sZLUKQLP7
— Euan MacDonald (@Euan_MacDonald) January 20, 2023
Jan 192023
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…
Jan 172023
The new tools and techniques are now operating reliably. Behold:
The wide-view photo is pretty awful; taken in bad lighting, no flash. Ah, well.
Once split apart these will be 12″x44.” Probably going to go for $35 each, plus postage. Anyone interested?
Jan 162023
Things don’t look great for Virgin Orbit
AARRRGH, aircraft, Crazy, Gah., Hmm..., news, rockets, spacecraft, ಠ_ಠ
No Responses »
Jan 102023
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.
Even before Monday’s launch failure, Virgin Orbit’s finances were dismal
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.
Jan 022023
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
Jan 022023
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.
Dec 162022
Todays test involved mounting the UV light bar to a crude frame and just letting it run, not waving it over the print like an idjit. As you can see most of it is pretty uniform; the end of the print that was furthest from the light bar wasn’t adequately exposed. However, come the weekend two more UV lights will arrive and will extend the reach.
The learning curve this time around is going *much* faster than the first time. This should probably not be a surprise, but it’s nice to see that things are trending quickly in the correct direction.
