Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

Wow. And here I thought a union could only initiate a ULP against a company or agency that employed some of its members (and in most cases, only those where a collective bargaining agreement has been negotiated and implemented).

So, since I'm obviously wrong about that, how do I go about getting some union to initiate a ULP against me?

Posted by McGehee at March 19, 2004 06:18 PM

Judging by the prose in Ms. Cantwell's letter, she is a typical government union pol. I wonder if she really thought that her letter wouldn't be published on the web, and how lame she would look after it made the rounds?

Hey, I'm to post this in Daily Kos and see what they think of it ....

Posted by Brian at March 19, 2004 06:55 PM

I aims ta pleeze Rand!

In the spirit of that Union Thugs Naziesque (In Godwin's name, humor me this once) threats and being aware of Rand's love of the Simpsons, I bring you an excerpt from when Burns sold the powerplant to the Germans.

Just think the word "Union" wher your read "Germans". I guess this makes Keith our C. Montgomery Burns for today ;)

Horst: [threatingly] We Germans aren't all smiles und sunshine.
Burns: [recoils in mock horror]
Oooh, the Germans are mad at me. I'm so scared! Oooh, the Germans!
[hiding behind Smithers] Uh oh, the Germans are going to get me!
Horst: Stop it!
Man 2: Stop, sir.
Burns: Don't let the Germans come after me.
Oh no, the Germans are coming after me.
Man 2: Please stop the `pretending you are scared' game, please.
Horst: Stop it! Stop it!
Burns: [brief pause, then resumes]
No! They're so big and strong!
Man 2: Stop it.
Horst: Stop it, Mr. Burns.
Man 2: Please stop pretending you are scared of us, please, now.
Burns: Oh, protect me from the Germans! The Germans...
Horst: Burns, STOP IT!

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 19, 2004 07:31 PM

And as for our dear Virginia:

[SgtHulka]Lighten up, Francis![/SgtHulka]

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 19, 2004 07:35 PM

Y'know just as I think it is going to be a slow news day the twits come out of the woodwork and send me these gems.

As St. Homer of Simpson would say: D'OH !!

Posted by Keith Cowing at March 19, 2004 07:37 PM

I just sent the following in an e-mail to Keith, but perhaps you'll all enjoy...

Keith,

Whoa, Comrade Cantwell surely (or is that surly) needs a good fisking (which I'll perform in the following), as well as an industrial strength chill pill...

> I suggest that you change your "Editor's Note" to
> "Editor's Attack". Your rude assault against this Union
> and the author of the March 19, 2004 IMPACT
> Bulletin is grounds for an Unfair Labor Practice which
> may indeed be filed against you. IF you are not
> familiar with the term it is a legal action.

Ummm... Unless you are part of the Glenn management in some capacity, this threat is null, void and silly (unlike faster, cheaper, better, you CAN have all three in this case...). I think the rank & file at Glenn need to at least get a Commissar (I mean President) that actually knows what the heck she's talking about. If that's the extent of her knowledge of the rights granted under Party (I mean Union) membership, the rank & file are seriously screwed and are definitely NOT getting their money's worth for their Party (Union) dues.

> Did the free ride on the NASA aircraft to NASA Glenn
> buy you off? IF not, what has? When I introduced
> myself to you on Wednesday, you seemed like a nice
> guy. But, I can admit it when I am wrong; neither nice
> guys, nor professional editors, make personal attacks
> such as you have done.

Actually, I believe that the legal term for making a baseless accusation of a crime (bribery) in writing is LIBEL. Comrade Commissar Cantwell should be counting herself lucky that she and whole Workers' Collective (dang! there I go again... I mean Union) that she speaks on behalf of aren't being sued by you for libel.

> You have either missed the point of the Bulletin, or
> you are trying to stifle Freedom of Speech. There was
> nothing "hopeless" in the Bulletin. Dr. Jones is a
> highly respected and honorable man who thinks "out
> of the box" which is usually called innovation! You do
> not have to agree with his article and neither do any
> of our Membership - but you certainly should, at the
> very least, treat him with the respect that he deserves.

And the respect Keith Cowing is apparently NOT entitled to. But then, that's all part of the Communist (shoot! strike that. I meant Union) way -- you have freedom to have an opinion, as long as the Party (Union) gives it to you!

> As for your assault on the Union and it's Members you
> are way out of line! Our Membership understands that
> they have the right to speak out and if they should
> disagree with anything that this Union does, or says,
> they know that we will listen and respect them for their
> opinions!

Riiight... Typical. Any opinion at variance with established Party (Union) dogma is criminalized. Only Party (Union) members in good standing are apparently allowed an opinion. Which makes sense, as members in good standing will only be getting their opinion from the authorized source.

> IF you were a gentleman, and/or a professional editor
> - you would make a public apology with regard to
> your personal attack!

And, of course, Comrade Commissar is under no similar obligation to apologize for libeling you...

> In Solidarity,

A typical Proletariat closing line...

> Virginia A. Cantwell (LESA@grc.nasa.gov)
> President
> IFPTE, LOCAL 28, LESA
> NASA GLENN RESEARCH CENTER MS. 15-10
> 21000 BROOKPARK RD.
> CLEVELAND, OHIO 44135
> (216) 433-5623

I don't know... If this is typical of the quality of people working at NASA, our future in space is in deep doo-doo! Luckily, of course, I don't believe that it is.

Now... where's the e-mail address for the Federal Gov't.'s Waste, Fraud & Abuse clearinghouse???

- Eric.

Posted by Eric S. at March 19, 2004 07:58 PM

Well, just remember that any moron can be an idiot but it takes genuine dedication to craft to become an imbecile.

Somebody stop me, I've been on a roll today since this morning when I pulled the soldering gun from under my coat and pointed it at my secretary and told her to "Stop in the name of Ohm's law!" and warned her not to become a "resistor" or she would "diode".

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 19, 2004 08:01 PM

On this subject, I do agree with Keith Cowing and Rand and the others far more than one might think given the tenor of my other posts. This brand of NASA-think is simply unacceptable.

Yet on the question of cheap, commercially available access to LEO, I do have a question.

Why would the Pentagon ever permit it?

For example imagine a rogue state (NKorea or Iran) had access to Delta II equivalent technology. Either on their own or because a rich Saudi buys it from Burt Rutan. Then they deploy 500 kilograms of gravel into polar orbit at 12600 miles altitude.

Good bye GPS coverage, right?

Perhaps LEO access will remain under tight governmental control for years or decades to come, for some very good reasons.

Posted by Bill White at March 19, 2004 08:08 PM

I am sure there will be restrictions on just who can buy/lease an orbital RLV under some munitions export mumbo jumbo.

Just to picks nits, I would not call 12,600 LEO anymore. 500KG of gravel sounds like a lot but draw a sphere at that altitude and it would encompass an area many,many times the surface area of the Earth. I don't know if a ton of gravel or sand would produce a high enough density to do damage.

Remember, although the GPS sats are at the same altitudes, I think they are in several different inclinations of orbit.

I am more afraid of Jim Oberg's old "Perl Harbor in Space" scenario of stuff being injected into a retrograde orbit via lunar flyby into the Clarke Belt as it is all in one plane.

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 19, 2004 08:19 PM

Mike -

Good point concerning the size of the debris cloud.

As for inclinations thats why I specified a polar orbit. Over time it will intersect ALL other inclinations.

Export-import controls? Sure, yet how much stuff did the Chinese buy under our last President?

Anyway - long before 9/11 I recall reading Zubrin or someone being all poetical about 75 minute passenger flights from London to Sydney or New York to Tokyo and the image of hi-jackers flying the thing into an urban downtown filled my mind even then.

Posted by Bill White at March 19, 2004 08:38 PM

I hope if we develop air travel of that magnitude, we will have to ability to take it over remotely in an emergency.

Posted by Mike Puckett at March 19, 2004 09:14 PM

Bill,

The scenario you envisage is certainly relevant, but doesnt seem any reason to slow development of private launchers. Apart from the size of the debris cloud and the subsequent low probability of damage, the action you are proposing is a radically slow motion strike. "Terrorists" want to cause shock and fear, not a gradual inconvenience in communications services that might actually stimulate growth by promoting terrestrial communication alternatives. "Rogue States" on the other hand, would be signing their own death warrant without gaining any real benefit. You dont launch a rocket into orbit without the US military noticing, and the sort of general mayhem created by this sort of attack would likely attract international condemnation (lets just forget the early US orbital nuclear and radio communications tests for now, they were pre-Outer Space Treaty).

Mike,

You do raise a scenario that should be considered in security planning, but it seems that it would be significantly easier to just hijack a normal cargo plane, or easier yet, just go put a bomb on a subway. The point is that using the risk of "terrorism" as an argument to block new spacecraft(and aircraft) development is counterproductive. It risks economic development in sectors where the US can make up for the movement of workers overseas in other areas, while not accomplishing the goal of creating "security".

That being said, I'm all for a thorough discussion of the risks involved (which is all I read your comments as being).

As for remote takeover, most pilots would tell you that just increases the risk. Then we would have to worry about hackers crashing planes through remotes. This concern might be overcome and it could potentially be implemented domestically, but it would be much harder, if not impossible to implement this globally. The requirement for reinforced cockpit doors has met stiff resistance from overseas carriers; imagine trying to convince foreign carriers (and the governments that own many of them) to allow the US to remotely take control over their air/spacecraft. For that matter, imagine trying to convince the US to allow other states to remotely take over our craft.

Posted by Nathan Horsley at March 20, 2004 10:18 AM

Sorry Bill, miscredited the urban terror attack scenario to Mike. D'oh.

Posted by Nathan at March 20, 2004 10:23 AM

I am 100% in favor of maximum commercialization of space. The goal needs to be to escape the single payor system where all revenue for the aerospace companies passes through the US government.

That said, I am less worried for myself than I suspect there are generals at NORAD who would be terrified by the prospect of off the shelf LEO technology being commercially available.

Its like those Mars bootstrappers who blithely assume the US government will consent to giving 100 pounds of plutonium to a libertarian-anarchistic group wanting a nuclear reactor for their Mars colony utopia.

Posted by Bill White at March 20, 2004 12:52 PM

To expand my single payor comment - - to have the private sector compete for US government space contracts remains single payor just like Hillarys health care plan.

True commercialization requires private sector DEMAND for space related technology. Private sector SUPPLY is not sufficient, IMHO.

Yet are our national security interests advanced when hi-res sat photos are always available to anyone willing to pay the price? I remember finding a horrific sat image of Manhattan after 9-11. A few weeks later I went to show my brother and was told I wasnt authorized to view that site.

Posted by Bill White at March 20, 2004 12:59 PM

I have an interesting thought about sabotage of military space assets.

OK, let's assume it becomes cheap for an Osama Bin Laden of 2025 to destroy GPS as described. Wouldn't our military have the brains enough to see such a possibility -- and plan for it? I mean, it's now possible for the OBLs to take out a helicopter. Does the military wring their hands about helicopters? Or make contingency plans for when they get shot down?

If it's cheap for terrorists to reach orbit, it's cheap for the military to reach orbit -- and the military has vastly more resources than the terrorists.

Posted by Chuck Divine at March 22, 2004 06:27 AM

Chuck, that is why I used the orbital debris model. Denial of access to LEO may be far easier to accomplish than cleansing LEO of debris.

Posted by Bill White at March 22, 2004 09:33 AM

Post a comment