Double The Pleasure, Double The Fun

John Hare has an interesting Ares I alternative:

Suppose that instead of stretching and totally redesigning the SRB, they had shifted to a two SRB first stage with the exact same units as used for the last hundred and something shuttle launches. These rockets are fully developed and tested with an extensive flight history of operating in pairs over the last three decades. The purchase costs, handling , and performance are known quantities. Development consists of building an attachment structure, upper stage adapter, and vibration dampening gear. With the considerably more lift performance available from eight segments compared to five in Aries I, the problem fixing payload hits could be absorbed without sacrificing the flavor de jour safety systems NASA would like to have. They wouldn’t even have to game the requirements to match the competition from ULA, Direct, and various upstarts. While it’s possible that this would cost as much as the projected Ares I, it shouldn’t, and if it did, it would be for a system nearly twice as capable.

The first thought, of course, is that it increases the marginal costs quite a bit, but as Jon notes, you can buy a lot of extra SRBs for the billions you might save in trying to tart up the pig. As I noted in comments, one other advantage is that it would allow the first stage to do its own roll control with the SRB gimbals (something that Ares I is incapable of, necessitating a roll-control system for the entire stack on the second stage). But thrust asymmetries could be a big problem. Shuttle can compensate by gimballing the SSMEs, but this configuration wouldn’t have that capability.

A Harrowing Account

from an Iranian protester:

5:30 pm, the battle zone

“Ely………….., Hooman,….. bodoeen, Omid…” screamed Jaleh. The police and plain clothed militia had cornered Omid and were beating him. We ran towards him and attacked the dogs. Hooman charged towards the guards in the street, opened his arms wide and with his operatic bas voice screamed “Bezan, Bezan,..(hit me, hit me), maadar gh.. bezan (mother xxx hit me). The guard raised the club but his hands were shaking and then brought his club down. I arched over Omid as Jaleh was screaming “bee gheirat” (a man without virtue) and people started chanting “bee gheirat” to the guards and the police. I felt the burning on my back as I tried to shield Omid, he was crying “man faghat mikhaam beram khooneh (I just wanna go home). They were hitting me hard, my hands, and my legs and suddenly there was darkness as I felt a terrible pain on the back of my head and the sounds and vision blurred into oblivion.

All we can do is hope for the best.

Remembering The MGB

Thoughts over here.

I never owned a B, because I learned my lesson from my first car, an MGA — don’t buy a convertible.

There are people with hair who can manage convertibles, but I am not one of them. My hair looks bad enough without going through a seventy MPH uncontrolled blower. Or even slower, for that matter.

So I bought a 1967 (pre-emissions, pre-uglybumpers) MGB-GT. It got me through high school. I gave girls rides home in it. It was my preferred car for dates over my dad’s company-car GM behemoths. I loved it in many ways.

But it never got me laid. Sometimes, a car just isn’t enough.

Light Blogging

Yeah, was busy today. We got up this morning and went to a range down in Pembroke to try out some 9mm guns that a friend had (the Glocks were nice), and then worked on the irrigation timer in the afternoon, changing out a switch and replacing a solenoid in the valve. For the first time in the five years that we’ve been here, we now have an automated system.

From A Concerned Pilot

This is an email that has apparently been making the rounds in the general aviation community:

As the days go by I find myself more and more apprehensive about the drift of America toward becoming what, not to mince words, can be described as a “police state.” To the average citizen this drift is not yet all that obvious, as except for the now-familiar hassle of taking a commercial airline flight most people can go about their daily activities without interference. The average citizen, therefore, reacts to this police state notion with something ranging from a shrug to an outright “B.S.-what’s he talking about?”

Where the drift is showing up is not yet in the world of the average citizen but on the powerless fringes of society… affecting only those who, in the judgment of the “authorities,” lack the political muscle to fight back. What follows is a perfect example.

A tiny minority of Americans, a minority of which I am a member, are airplane pilots and owners. We own and operate small propeller-driven aircraft, used primarily for personal recreational travel. In other words, for fun. I compare us to RV owner-operators, as these airplanes are equivalent in price range to the RVs and campers so many Americans own and enjoy.

Just like the RVers we airplane operators have historically enjoyed the freedom of travel our machines can provide. In other words, we have been able to get in our airplanes and go somewhere without seeking permission from some government security agency. This is all changing.

Utilizing their seemingly unfettered authority to do anything that strikes their fancy without oversight by anyone, Homeland Security has instituted a requirement that private aircraft operators seek government permission each time we propose to take off if we are planning to depart for Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean. We must provide advance detailed information about where, when, and who, including the names, social security numbers, addresses, etc., of all persons who will be in the aircraft. The justification for this, they say, is that we, our spouses, family or friends might be on their mysterious and top secret “No Fly List.” The most significant aspect of this is that Homeland Security has indicated that this is a preliminary step toward their ultimate objective of requiring this data submission prior to EVERY aircraft takeoff in America, regardless of destination. Keep this in mind as we continue.

It is important to understand that this requirement breaks entirely new ground. While ENTERING any country requires formalities, never, ever, has it been necessary to seek and receive government permission to LEAVE America, the “land of the free,” much less to travel within its borders. And never, ever, has it been proposed that such permission is somehow necessary to preserve “national security.” This is a requirement only previously seen in Iron Curtain dictatorships.

Another entirely new and very unsettling aspect of this program has just surfaced in the form of several incidents in which citizens who filed the required information and received official permission to depart the USA have been detained as they were preparing to take off and had their personal aircraft, luggage, wallets, purses, etc., searched by government agents. In one particularly frightening case (Long Beach, California) the airplane was blocked in by multiple vehicles with red lights and sirens and the occupants forced from their plane, hands on their heads, by “screaming” agents from several agencies pointing drawn weapons. In this and all the other incidents, after extensive searches the agents told the citizens it had been just a “routine ramp check” and departed, leaving the shaken travelers to repack their belongings. This activity, totally unrelated to traditional arrival customs checks, also breaks new ground. On the face of it, it seems to clearly violate the Fourth Amendment of our Constitution, as it is not a match for any of the situations Courts have ruled would make this type of warrantless “random stop and search” activity permissible.

Complaints to Homeland Security higher ups about these “routine checks” were answered by spokeswoman Kelly Ivahnenko with a statement that said, and I accurately paraphrase, “we maintain we have this power and authority, you can expect we will continue to do it whenever and wherever we wish, and there is no requirement that we justify ourselves or explain our reasons.”

This answer itself is, in my opinion, even more frightening than screaming gun-wielding agents. Having an American bureaucrat maintain that their police organization possesses unlimited discretionary authority should give pause even to the most passive among us, as it is exactly what the Geheime Staatspolizei (Gestapo) said when anyone complained. Overrides of our Constitutional rights by authorities are supposed to be backed by Supreme Court rulings based on clearly articulated justifications, not on the whim of some unelected bureaucrat.

What does this mean to the average citizen? Yes, you don’t own an airplane and, OK, you really don’t give a [bleep] about how airplane owners are treated. But consider this: Do you own an RV? A car or van? All the “justifications” being used to restrict, control and harass aviation people would apply equally to anyone who travels in RVs, cars, vans, busses, trains, bicycles or what-have-you. And if you think that if unchecked it will stop with airplane owners, well, I fear you are sadly mistaken.

First they came for the pilots, and I said nothing because I wasn’t a pilot…