Some Sober Thoughts on Artemis II

And I have to agree with the author linked below on the matter: Glad everyone made it back in on piece, but using rehashed Shuttle components probably isn't the way forward into a financially viable future for lunar exploration.

Now that that's over with at Silicon Graybeard's blog.  Go, read the whole thing, it's short.

Finally, note that this is a pre-scheduled post, I'm really not up at 6:30 again this morning.  At least my 10 pm previous evening self is intending not to be up then.  Actual events may prove otherwise.

Picture Perfect

From today's APOD:

That is all for today.  It's a rocket to the moon, what, you want something more?

Can't Wait Until Next Christmas...

... when this book comes out.  Here are a couple of teasers:

• A New Christmas Fable
• Joyous Noel!

Because this is how you get new scientists, engineers, and innovators.

It Never Gets Old

Watching boosters fall out of space for a soft landing and reuse never gets old.  Routine, yes, but old, never.  Article at The Daily Galaxy.

BTW, we don't know what the heck the NROL-77 super-secret payload is, and we'll probably never know.  And that's OK too, kind of the nature of these launches.  But watching the booster come back, man oh man.

BTW2: Marginal cost per pound for Falcon 9 launches is estimated at $389.  For the older, partially reusable Space Shuttle, inflation adjusted to 2025 dollars, this was $9565.  Draw your own conclusions.

Holman on Deep Tech – Pretty Wild Stuff

Back in September Jim Rutt posted an interview with Pablos Holman on the topic – and his new book – on what he terms deep tech.  Holman's central thesis is that we've gone too far down the software road, and while it's been a good road, we need to concentrate more on hardware and, you know, actually building cool stuff.  Autonomous shipping, mosquito-zapping lasers, safe nuclear reactors, high-speed rail, the list goes on.

And he does have a valid point.  In a 100 trillion dollar world economy, less than 5% is in the computer tech sector.  However it somehow vacuums up the lion's share of talent, venture capital, and press.  [Side note: I think a lot of reason tech has thrived over the last half-century is that it's largely immune to regulation and ignored by regulators.  Try to build a new computer operating system and The Man don't care; try to build a new type of trebuchet or nuclear reactor or choo-choo train and The Man will definitely inquire.  Close rant & back to the subject at hand.]

Some parts of both the interview and book come off as eccentric and out of touch with real developments in the real world these past few decades.  Take shipping for example.  Yes, cargo ships are still largely operated by humans.  However the number of crew required to run a ship is a fraction of what it was 75 years ago.  More importantly, containerized shipping has radically slashed port handling costs.  Overall cargo shipping costs have dropped by something like 90% since 1950.  Yes, there are always optimizations remaining, but come on, apply a generalized version of Amdhal's Law to the situation and give the industry another decade to catch its breath.  Dropping the remaining crew of ten to just one is insignificant when compared to what has just happened.

On the other hand, the guy was there at the start of Blue Origin, which just racked up a major success.  Furthermore, rocket boosters dropping out of the sky and landing on robotic barges has become something of an everyday occurrence.  Clearly it pays to think big, and especially in terms of making a profit.

Well, listen to the podcast interview (link above), read the guy's book, flip through the online footnotes for the book, then make up your own mind.  My take here is that, despite some weird twists and turns, the guy's onto something.

And Then There Were Two

Two successful commercial space launch companies with reusable first stages, that is.  Blue Origin gets one off of and back onto the ground in one piece: Video at the BBC  It's short, under two minutes.  Go and watch the whole thing.

Congrats to Blue Origin!  This is very good news.  SpaceX was the first, but with them there was only one company with this capability.  One is a special number because it shows that a thing can be done.  However, it's also only one corporate failure away from none.  With two, we have some redundancy.  I'm reasonably sure that companies three and four are about to spring into the spotlight.  Exciting times!

"Toward the Unknown" – Surprisingly Good!

I'd heard good things about the 1956 film Toward the Unknown, but face it, I had fairly low expectations.  However, it turns out that it's pretty good in a Top Gun–meets–The Right Stuff way.  Made with the full cooperation and assistance of the USAF, the flight scenes are well done, the few special effects (mostly a practical mock-up of the X-2 rocket plane) hold up to modern viewing, and the tacked-on melodrama isn't too melodramatic.  At least, no worse than either of the Top Gun movies.  And while the historical details of the X-2 program are somewhat different than what is portrayed in this film, in several scenes it's close enough to echo some of the actual tragedies of the real program.

So, what's it about?  Here's the one-line summary from IMDB: A shaken Korean War veteran tests the X-2 rocket plane.  OK, that's the plot summary you get – no spoilers.  Let's move on to my summary:  Did you like Top Gun and The Right Stuff?  Then you'll like this one too.

Next Round: Space via X-15.

Let's Look at That One More Time

SpaceX Super Heavy booster landing last weekend, over at APOD.

It's only 59 seconds of the main landing action.  Even if you've watched it before, go watch again now.  It'll get your blood pumping for the rest of the day.

SpaceX Starship Booster Launch & Landing

Even more spectacular than their Falcon landings.  Eight minutes, WTWT.

It's pretty clear that the era of private space is here.

Two Good Things

With so much going on, two good things have crossed my desk in the last few days.  First up, here's Tuesday's launch of a Falcon 9 ISS resupply ship.  The entire video is 22 minutes, but the good part is all in the first 10.  Watch for the booster's beautiful landing, starting around minute 7.  Go full-screen to watch.

Additional commentary at The Silicon Graybeard's blog about the unusual partnership between SpaceX and Northrop-Grumman for this flight.

Next up, over at Lawdog's blog, Cedar recounts an encounter with a pollster pushing for solar power-friendly results.  Her response: Nuclear Power or Bust!  Smart.  Go & read.

Some of those images of the Falcon 9's landing look like something out of a sci-fi movie, but nope.  This is real life.  There are good things in 2024, as much as we may have to look around for them.

ps: Back to the Falcon 9, here are some screen grabs of the booster landing.  Just.... wow.

And that is how it is done.

Get Yer Red/Blues On!

Your red/blue 3D glasses that is.  Today's APOD is a spectacular view of the Apollo 17 CM from the LEM.

You really ought to keep a pair of red/blue 3D glasses handy at your desk.  If you don't, you miss a lot, like a whole extra dimension.  Don't be a Flatlander.

Skylab at 50

This deserves a mention, Skylab was launched 50 years ago today on the last Saturn V booster.  Well, at least the last one to fly – two remain as museum pieces.  Article at This Day in Aviation with more at Wikipedia.

50 Years Ago, Right About Now

... we left the Moon for the last time in the 20th Century.  Article at This Day in Aviation.

Shouldn't be too much longer until we're back.

Bonus posts in the back catalogue: The Day the 60's Ended and 5 Lessons from Apollo

SLS Explainer

Just in time for tomorrow's planned launch, here're the basics, over at youtube:

Bonus video: Full-up booster core test at Stennis in March 2021.  Skip to the 56 minute mark to get to the actual eight minute (!!!) full duration test.

As usual, click to embiggen.  Big rockets are better that way.

Are we there yet?

As a matter of fact, yes.  The Webb Telescope successfully made its final L2 insertion burn today.  As always, go poke around at NASA's Webb site (*groan*) for details and the latest.

I'm not at all surprised that NASA has pulled this off so smoothly, but I am still amazed.  Probably though, not as amazed as we'll all be when the first clear ultra^3-deep field images start rolling in sometime later this year.

ps, a day later: the senior space editor over at Ars Technica writes To my surprise and elation, the Webb Space Telescope is really going to work.  He puts the delight and, well, relief from a month-long breath-holding session so well.

Link to the Webb Telescope Schedule

 So far, so good, and things are moving along on schedule (as you've probably already heard).  But, in case you missed it, NASA has a pretty good clickable schedule of what's happened and what's next at:

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/deploymentExplorer.html

The really risky parts seem done now, but the rest is far from routine.  Anyway, link to the schedule above.  Also, here's where the telescope is at the moment on its journey to L2, along with some interesting temperature and other stats:

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

All for today.

Target Drone Launching

 I've driven by this site on Hwy 98 many times (in fact just yesterday), but never seen an actual launch.  Mighty impressive.  Additional details at Wikipedia: BQM-167 Skeeter

Of my usual tags, "rockets" seems to fit this one best.  While it's a jet-powered aircraft, it does use a small rocket engine to get off the launch stand.

Satellites Miss Yesterday

 Article at space.com: Phew! 2 big hunks of space junk zoom safely past each other in near miss

Not that I'm disappointed or anything, but a Kessler cascade would have been right at home in 2020.

Dragon on the Way Back

Splashdown (how long since we've used that term – 45 years!) slated for just after 2:45 EDT in the Gulf of Mexico.

There seems to be some confusion in the press as to where in the Gulf the capsule will splash down. According to NPR it's off Panama City, but according to the BBC it's off Pensacola.  Draw your own conclusions.

ps, somewhat later in the day:  Nailed it!  Would it be too NASA retro-futuristic to say that this splashdown went A-OK?  Because, as you can see, it did.

Yes, this is what the future looks like, and it is good.

An Awkward Silence

Why the longer-than-normal pause in comms after Apollo 13's reentry?  Here, watch.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/science-environment-52281273/apollo-13-the-silence-in-the-blackout-from-those-who-were-there
In fact, it was a shallower than normal reentry, just took a minute longer.  A nerve-wracking minute, to be sure.