Asteroids may be a bigger problem than we thought.
One thought: Weave a giant net out of space-sourced materials and consolidate it, then tow with a gravity tractor. Or hell, a gravity tractor would probably work without the net.
Asteroids may be a bigger problem than we thought.
One thought: Weave a giant net out of space-sourced materials and consolidate it, then tow with a gravity tractor. Or hell, a gravity tractor would probably work without the net.
Last week’s Beyond Earth Institute seminar is on line.
No, we don’t know more about the moon than the sea bottom. We haven’t even started to drill it.
Thoughts from Joel Kotkin:
…to thrive and evolve, these firms need a more positive business climate, Sadeghi says. Attempts to impose a wealth tax would not fit into the plans of aspiring entrepreneurs, some of whom have already exited the state.
The Legislature is also mulling over a proposal to reduce the workweek to four days or 32 hours, and has already passed a host of bills meant to regulate small businesses, such as fast-food outlets. This will not help encourage entrepreneurs to start businesses here.
Essentially, California can go one of two ways. It can continue on its current path, toxic for its middle and working classes, driving away even long-established businesses, and hope that another tech bubble will come around to pay the price for immiseration. Or it can focus, as it has before, on improving basic infrastructure such as roads and water, and on creating opportunities for entrepreneurial ventures that will benefit the state’s citizens and communities.
Unfortunately, my money’s on continuing on the current path.
Leonard David interviews Tim Dodd.
Wayne Hale is going to republish some of his blog posts leading up to this year’s anniversaries (it will be the twentieth anniversary of the loss of Columbia).
I left a comment over there. Perrow was right.
Withdrawing from the Moon Agreement is a pretty big deal. Let’s hope it leads to a stampede.
This is a couple weeks old, but I just noticed it.
The airline analogy is fundamentally flawed. Barring catastrophe (or skydiving), when you take off in an aircraft, you remain in it for the entire flight, until after landing, so it makes sense for a unitary entity to regulate the process. But in spaceflight, once we have orbital destinations, the “launch” ends when the destination is reached. So (setting aside the fact that the FAA should never have been involved in regulating launches) there is no reason for the same agency to regulate safety on orbit as the one that regulates trips to and from space. The project on which I’m currently working proposes that the Department of Commerce regulate on-orbit activity, and while I’m open to discussions whether or not that’s the right place for it, the notion that it should be the FAA is absurd.
[Update a while later]
I’ve been reliably informed that this isn’t just an op-ed; DOT is apparently actively lobbying Congress for this role. I’ll be in DC next week, and trying to find out more about what’s going on.
Read the whole Twitter thread. His long-time staffer is his successor, but at least she won’t be chair or ranking member of the Appropriations Committee.
[Wednesday noon update]
So long, Shelby, and thanks for all the pork.
[Bumped]
RIP.
He did a great service to the nation in Apollo 7, but less so in his opposition to commercial spaceflight.
[Update a while later]
Speaking of commercial spaceflight, John Krauss has some great photos of the Polaris Dawn crew at JSC.