Category Archives: Technology and Society

Popular Culture, Space, Technology and Society

The Pima Air (And Space) Museum

7 Comments

OK, since I have to check out of my room, and I have a few hours to kill before my flight, I’m going to check it out, since I’ve never actually been there. Like Aviation Week (and space technology) I expect the “Space” part to be an afterthought.

[Update, waiting at the airport]

As I expected, the emphasis was on the “Air,” but there were a lot of pretty neat aircraft there. It was 104 degrees, but didn’t seem that bad to me (as it generally doesn’t in the desert, particularly in the shade). I was more put off from wandering far out in the field by the sun for which I had no sunblock than the heat itself. I pointed out to a docent that Gene Kranz never said “Failure is not an option,” at least while he was a NASA mission controller. He said he’d talk to the curator.

I also showed the book to the space docents, and they all wanted a copy. The gift-shop manager was out for the day, but I’ll email her. But it would look pretty lonely amidst the other books. Almost nothing about space –mostly aviation. But I did put it up on the shelf to see how it stood out. It did, a lot. I think we’ll be glad we spent extra time on the cover design.

[Update a while later, before boarding]

I forgot to mention that it happened to be Orville Wright’s birthday. There were remnants of a cake (I had a small piece). I got a picture of it, but not on my phone — on my good camera, and I don’t have a card reader with me, so I’ll have to post it later.

[Bumped]

Political Commentary, Social Commentary, Space, Technology and Society

Mike Griffin: The Spoiled Generation

9 Comments

Asked by Jeff Greason why we as a society stopped pushing the technologies we needed to be pre-eminent in civil and military space, the former administrator blamed it on “My Generation,” the Baby Boomers. He prefaced the statement with the caveat that he had thought long and hard about it, and didn’t have a good answer, and that it was only his opinion, and that it might be wrong. Obviously many of us are exceptions (and he obviously thinks himself one) but that was the only answer that he could come up with.

In response to a question from Greg Sullivan, he noted that when we feel threatened (e.g., being attacked with IEDs) we throw the acquisition book out the window to solve the problem. Clearly, we don’t currently feel threatened enough to do that with space technology development and acquisition.

[Update a while later]

Jeff’s answer: We don’t want game-changing technologies, because they upset the Russians, and arms-control regimes. They don’t like game changers, because they like and are comfortable with the game. Reagan administration was rare exception. Not surprised that we do not attain that which we do not want.

In commercial market, the market will drive things. If Brilliant Pebbles had gone forward, we’d have much cheaper launch today. If there was a market, we’d have satisfied it by now. If assured market, he could go to the bank and get the money for reusable vehicle.

Demand is key. Airmail-like things would help (already starting this with COTS). Could buy payloads and capability, rather than resources. Isn’t as concerned about tech development for launch vehicles, except things that allow SSTO. But it’s important to learn how to integrate two-stage stage system, and that would be productive area.

Business, Economics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society

Shale Gas

28 Comments

…is Rearden metal:

Rand’s fictional progressives don’t want Reardon Metal to succeed any more than their modern, real-life equivalents want shale gas to succeed.

Why not? For the same rag-bag of made-up, disingenuous reasons which progressives have used to justify their war on progress since time immemorial: it’s unfair, it uses up scarce resources, it might be dangerous. Rand doesn’t actually use the phrase “the precautionary principle.” But this is exactly what she is describing in the book when various vested interests – the corporatists in bed with big government, the politicised junk-scientists at the Institute of Science (aka, in our world, the National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society), the unions – try to close down the nascent technology using the flimsiest of excuses.

It was supposed to be a cautionary tale, not an instruction manual.

Business, Economics, Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Science And Society, Technology and Society

The Current Crop Of Computer Models

17 Comments

…are close to useless:

…here we see a major problem with IAM-based climate policy analysis: The modeler has a great deal of freedom in choosing functional forms, parameter values, and other inputs, and different choices can give wildly different estimates of the SCC and the optimal amount of abatement. You might think that some input choices are more reasonable or defensible than others, but no, “reasonable” is very much in the eye of the modeler. Thus these models can be used to obtain almost any result one desires.

How (politically) convenient.

As I retweeted, they’re worse than useless to the degree that people trust them for policy decisions.