When I hear about NASA adding a fifth segment to the SRB, somehow it reminds me of this:

Over the summer of 1930, the R101 lay in the Number 1 shed at Cardington undergoing extensive modifications, which were needed following on from her 1929 and early 1930 trial flights. It was already known that both the R100 and R101 were lacking in the disposable lift originally planned at the outset of the Imperial Airship Scheme in 1925. Those involved in the scheme had already learnt that the R100 and R101 would not be viable for full commercial operations to Canada and India, and these intentions were later to be passed on to the new ship, the R102 class. To achieve the additional lift, R101 had a new central bay and gas bag installed.

It was expected that the new gas bag would give her another nine tons of disposable lift bringing her up to some 50 tons. The alterations were completed by Friday the 26th September and the R101 was gassed up and floated in the shed. The “new” ship, R101c, had disposable lift calculated at 49.36 tons, an improvement of 14.5 tons over the original configuration. Pressure was on for the ship to leave for Karachi on 26th September to carry the Air Minister, Lord Thompson of Cardington. Although the target date was on course to be met, wind was to keep the modified R101 in the shed until the morning of 1st October.

Not sure why, though.

Actually, I think that “Sliderule” should be required reading for every NASA employee.

I finally just got around to reading the report that Colonel “Coyote” Smith (that’s Michael Valentine Smith–no kidding) and company came up with on Space Based Solar Power, and will be commenting on it, but I should note for now that the January issue of Popular Mechanics has this as its cover story. I haven’t read it yet, but may post some thoughts after I do.

On a related note, while a ten buck per ton carbon tax on coal probably would be good for the nuclear industry, as Randall Parker notes, it wouldn’t hurt SBSP, either.

[Update a few minutes later]

OK, not much to the Pop Mechanics piece. I think it’s quite an overstatement to say that powersats are “all the rage” at either the Pentagon or in private industry. I would think that something that was “all the rage” would be getting significant funding, and so far the amount that’s been appropriated to this recently is…zero. In fact, one of the significant things about the Pentagon report was that it was done with no DoD budget, entirely by volunteers, other than the Colonel’s time. It might be a useful model for future such studies that have trouble otherwise finding government champions, but it hardly justifies the notion that this is now a major priority, either within the five-sided building, or in the government in general.

As for the article itself, my only quibble is to note that the seventies studies were jointly by DoE and NASA, not just DoE. It’s been noted many times in the past (and Coyote’s report notes as well) that one of the reasons that this concept has had trouble getting acceptance and ownership within the government is that it’s had no natural home. DoE thinks it’s a space program, and NASA thinks it’s an energy program, and both agencies consider it to be outside their charters. I do like the idea of the establishment of a quango, perhaps using COMSAT as a model, to provide a government-blessed (and at least initially, funded) focus for this.

[Update a couple hours later]

I see from his comments that Monte Davis now has a blog, which I’ll be adding to the sidebar.

Jesse Londin has a nice roundup of space links. She also notes the other legislative barrier to space entrepreneurs–not ITAR, but SOX. I’m working with a company that has been chased off shore by this.

Alan Boyle has a story and link roundup about the the Rocket Racing League, X-Racer, and Xerus.

Tim Oren has a wrap up of the DARPA Urban Challenge, about which he’s been reporting (go to the November archive page and scroll down to early in the month for earlier reports). Here’s hoping that Red Whittaker can be as successful on the lunar prize.

From Ferris Valyn, whose laptop I almost accidentally stole at the X-Prize Cup (I briefly mistook his rollaway case for mine). Fortunately, he pointed it out to me before I got far.

This post has been up at Space Politics for over a week now, and this is the first time I’ve linked to it, but there’s a lot of interesting commentary from “anonymous” in the comments section. I think that the analysis of Griffin and the origins of (and continuing support of) ESAS is right on.

From Clark Lindsey, and from John Carmack himself:

There isn

Andrew Smith is worried about “plundering the moon.”

It’s a theme that I’ve discussed (and shot down) in the past. And read the comments section in his Guardian piece–it’s chock full of anthrophobic moon battery.

Wretchard comments:

Today, for the first time in human history, man can look forward to spreading into truly virgin territory. To go where no man has ever gone before; and consequently where no man ever need be displaced from his abode. The words “we come in peace for all mankind” may have fallen unheard upon the lunar rocks. But the words still have meaning to a mankind trapped not only upon Earth but within his history. If Marxism was a project to bring History to an end in the near future, Environmentalism is an attempt to freeze History in the distant past. Not for the benefit of mankind, nor even when you come to think of it, for Nature — unless man is excluded from the account — but for the sake of having the power to end history on their terms.

They will not succeed and man will go on. No less than the trees and stars we have a right to be here.

Speaking of Marx, here’s an interesting theory on how he came up with such an inhuman philosophy:

Sam Shuster, professor of dermatology at the University of East Anglia, believes the revolutionary thinker had hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) in which the apocrine sweat glands — found mainly in the armpits and groin — become blocked and inflamed.

“In addition to reducing his ability to work, which contributed to his depressing poverty, hidradenitis greatly reduced his self-esteem,” said Shuster, who published his findings in the British Journal of Dermatology.

“This explains his self-loathing and alienation, a response reflected by the alienation Marx developed in his writing.”

Of course, it doesn’t explain why so many less dermatologically challenged people bought (and continue to buy) into it.

[Via Thomas James, who has some additional thoughts]

EADS repeated that it is hoping to close funding for a suborbital rocket in early 2008. I’ve decided I wasn’t harsh enough with my last post. For $1.3 billion, one could probably buy at least seven of the following companies: Rocketplane, XCOR, The Space Ship Company, Armadillo Aerospace, Masten Space Systems, Benson, TGV and Blue Origin. That would leave enough money to send all their suborbital vehicle programs through test flights. One might even be able to use the left over money to also pick up Virgin Galactic, Incredible Adventures and Space Adventures. If you are funding the EADS suborbital rocket, consider putting out an RFP instead. Even if you are a government. You might get seven to ten local new space companies with more than one successfully entering a viable vehicle into commercial service for the price of one old-space program.