Oh, by the way, we forgot to tell you…
Single-Event Upsets
Marcia Smith has a report on the anomaly analysis for the SpaceX station resupply mission:
Several other problems also arose during the mission. While berthed to the ISS, one of the three computers on the Dragon spacecraft failed. Dragon can operate with only two computers, and SpaceX chose to proceed with the two functioning units rather than trying to fix the faulty unit while on orbit. According to Suffredini’s charts, Flight Computer-B “de-synched” from the other two “due to a suspected radiation hit” and although it was rebooted successfully, it was “not resynched.” Dragon experienced other anomalies because of radiation as well. One of three GPS units, the Propulsion and Trunk computers and Ethernet switch all experienced “suspected radiation hits,” but all were recovered after a power cycle. Suffredini said that SpaceX is considering whether it needs to use radiation-hardened parts instead, but noted that “rad-hardened” computers, for example, not only are more expensive, but slower. He speculated that the company would ultimately decide to use rad-hardened components in the future unless it is cost-prohibitive.
I had heard that there were also SEUs on the first ISS flight. It’s a young system, with very few actual flights, which is how you learn about things like this. But clearly it has enough redundancy for mission success (including in its ascent propulsion system). There’s a trade between using rad-hard components and utilizing more shielding. I assume that SpaceX is doing that trade right now (and perhaps has been doing so for months).
Obama’s Three Strikes
What we learned from yesterday’s news conference (which isn’t what the president wanted us to learn):
Add up these comments and it seems the president’s second-term foreign policy will not change at all. Never admit error, obfuscate, change the subject, talk and talk and talk, “engage,” and claim all is well. Mr. Obama noted that in Syria the situation has “deteriorated” since he demanded that Assad go — in the summer of 2011. That’s the truest thing he said: There are now 40,000 dead, 400,000 refugees, many more displaced persons, and a really dangerous jihadi presence. As Mr. Obama might say, that’s not optimal — and he remains unable to draw the connection between his own policies and those disastrous developments.
And the great thing is, we now get over four more years of it.
The Book Business
What does equilibrium look like?
This is a topic of increasing interest to me, as I’m trying to figure out how to publish my space safety book.
A CommercialPrivate Lunar Base
Well, this is intriguing:
…source information acquired by L2 this week revealed plans for a “game-changing” announcement as early as December that a new commercial space company intends to send commercial astronauts to the moon by 2020.
According to the information, the effort is led by a group of high profile individuals from the aerospace industry and backed by some big money and foreign investors. The company intends to use “existing or soon to be existing launch vehicles, spacecraft, upper stages, and technologies” to start their commercial manned lunar campaign.
The details point to the specific use of US vehicles, with a basic architecture to utilize multiple launches to assemble spacecraft in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). The details make direct reference to the potential use of propellant depots and fuel transfer technology.
Additional notes include a plan to park elements in lunar orbit, staging a small lunar lander that would transport two commercial astronauts to the surface for short stays.
The architecture would then grow into the company’s long-term ambitions to establish a man-tended outpost using inflatable modules. It is also understood that the company has already begun the design process for the Lunar Lander.
If this is true, it’s going to make it harder for NASA to justify SLS. Or even being in the human spaceflight business at all. We’ll soon see, perhaps. December isn’t far off.
[Update a while later]
I decided to change the post title, because it isn’t clear that this is intended as a money-making venture.
Silencing Petraeus
The official government version, like the official government story on Benghazi, makes no sense:
In the modern era, office-holders with forgiving spouses simply do not resign from powerful jobs because of a temporary, non-criminal, consensual adult sexual liaison, as the history of the FDR, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, and Clinton presidencies attest. So, why is Petraeus different? Someone wants to silence him.
If there were national security implications to Petraeus’s affair, they existed when it remained unknown, and he wanted to keep it that way. That is when the president should have been informed as soon as Holder knew, not after he’d been outed, and was no longer blackmailable. It’s very simple, really.
But of course, I don’t believe that the president didn’t know from the get go. It’s a shame that no one asked him in the press conference yesterday when he found out.
My question: who will be the John Dean of this administration?
[Update a few minutes later]
Related thoughts from VDH:
…anyone in these circumstances would also be advised that any future testimony had the potential to be at odds with past testimonies and statements, which might argue for a darker scenario in which after the election someone in the administration felt that Petraeus could now safely resign and fade quietly into retirement — all of which makes the role of any future statements by Ms. Broadwell quite dynamic.There are all sorts of different speculations, but the above is perhaps the most generous explanation we are hearing and reading and it must be dispelled by the Congress and administration as quickly as possible. It does no good simply to cry “conspiracy theorist” when these speculations are natural and logical.
There are all sorts of important ramifications: from the proper role of the FBI stealthily examining the private e-mails of top officers, to the issue of what exactly does the FBI do with the results of these probes and who oversees its findings, to the coordination of the State Department, administration, and CIA — and of course, most importantly, the question of why and how did our government put Americans in unsafe conditions, refuse pleas for increased security, not lend assistance in extremis, and then mislead the country about the circumstances of their deaths — and why were so many Americans in Libya in the first place and what were they doing that was worth putting them in such grave danger and from whom?
For some reason, I don’t think that the White House wants us to find that out, even with the election safely behind them.
The Discussion That’s Been Lost
This:
Memo to the New York Times, New York publishers, and other morally clueless individuals scratching their heads over the Petraeus scandal: If you are writing a biography and either you or your subject are married to a third person, and you have sex, you have done something wrong. No mystery, no dilemma, no agonizing introspection needed.
Of course, knowing what is right is the easy part. Doing it can be hard. But if you are genuinely confused about the morality of what presumably happened in this relationship, it’s time to get your moral compass reset.
The problem is that we’re not allowed moral compasses any more. It’s too judgmental.
And of course, what they did was wrong even if there was no biography involved. But we’re not supposed to talk about that, just as we’re not supposed to criticize women who have children out of wedlock. Because, you know.
Terms Of Service
I wonder if Google has thought this through? I fear that they have.
Soak The Rich
Now, anyone can play.
Everyone Above Average
A failing school rates everyone working in it as highly effective. Well, they’re certainly highly effective at fleecing the taxpayers while subverting our youth.