Today is the sixty-fifth anniversary of the German invasion of Poland, which set off the greatest conflict of the twentieth century. The beginning and (especially) end of this war won’t seem quite so clear cut to history. I agree with John Hillen that:
The president should define the goals in the war on terrorism ad nauseum – it will lend strategic and moral clarity to the debate – in much the way that FDR’s Cassablanca conference declaration of unconditional surrender put a cap on what was then a murky WWII alliance strategy. In the meantime, Republican policy makers should grab a copy of Reagan defense official Fred Ikle’s “Every War Must End” and start figuring out how this applies to the war on terror and the way in which this should be put to the public.
Paul Dietz points out (in comments) that if Frances hits the cape as a Cat 4 or greater, none of the major facilities are designed to take it. If the VAB, OPF and LC-39 are significantly damaged, it could mean that the Shuttle will retire even sooner than the current plan (i.e., it will never fly again). It would be a strange end to the current trajectory of our four-plus-decade manned space program, but it might be an opportunity for a clean start, since there won’t be an opportunity for a rear-guard action to save the Shuttle (and it may even finally put to rest notions of Shuttle derivatives, though that’s probably asking too much).
[Update a few minutes later]
As Paul mentions, he found the info at the new and improved NASA Watch, now with an infinite percent more permalinks.
Paul Dietz points out (in comments) that if Frances hits the cape as a Cat 4 or greater, none of the major facilities are designed to take it. If the VAB, OPF and LC-39 are significantly damaged, it could mean that the Shuttle will retire even sooner than the current plan (i.e., it will never fly again). It would be a strange end to the current trajectory of our four-plus-decade manned space program, but it might be an opportunity for a clean start, since there won’t be an opportunity for a rear-guard action to save the Shuttle (and it may even finally put to rest notions of Shuttle derivatives, though that’s probably asking too much).
[Update a few minutes later]
As Paul mentions, he found the info at the new and improved NASA Watch, now with an infinite percent more permalinks.
Paul Dietz points out (in comments) that if Frances hits the cape as a Cat 4 or greater, none of the major facilities are designed to take it. If the VAB, OPF and LC-39 are significantly damaged, it could mean that the Shuttle will retire even sooner than the current plan (i.e., it will never fly again). It would be a strange end to the current trajectory of our four-plus-decade manned space program, but it might be an opportunity for a clean start, since there won’t be an opportunity for a rear-guard action to save the Shuttle (and it may even finally put to rest notions of Shuttle derivatives, though that’s probably asking too much).
[Update a few minutes later]
As Paul mentions, he found the info at the new and improved NASA Watch, now with an infinite percent more permalinks.
I predict a movement for a Constitutional amendment to allow non-native born to be president, jointly pushed by fans of both Governor Schwartzenegger and Governor Granholm.
Blogging may be light–I moved to southeast Florida just in time to have a hurricane pointed straight at me (don’t know how long that link will be informative…). Out looking for storm shutters (or plywood) for the sliding-glass doors.
I’m curious about the VASIMR engine, its performance and maturity. I understand you are working on Prometheus via JIMO and was wondering if the VASIMR technology is going to be used on that mission. For that matter how close to an actual space engine is this? What I’ve seen in print indicates that it has performance throttleable between ion engine efficiency and thrust like a chemical rocket. How does this compare to, say, a Spaceshuttle engine? Could it be used in a launch vehicle for instance? How big a breakthrough is it really?
JIMO is planned to use ion propulsion, a technology that is currently in use (in communications satellites and in Deep Space 1), and only requires scaling up. VASIMR is an entirely different kind of electric propulsion. Both types work by accelerating charged particles with electromagnetic fields, but ion propulsion is driven by electrostatic forces, whereas VASIMR accelerates a plasma using electromagnetic forces. It has the potential for much higher thrust (though lower specific impulse, so the fuel efficiency isn’t as good), but it’s only in the preliminary development stages. Neither type of engine would have high enough thrust/weight ratio to be used as an engine on a launch system–they’re only useful in space. There’s a good tutorial on the subject here.
…for the masses. Astronauts have always had coolant loops in their clothes when performing extravehicular activity, to carry away the heat in the only way possible, but now it’s becoming an off-the-shelf item, thanks to Israeli ingenuity. Expect to see the space startups employ it.