Sunday, October 29, 2006
Best X-Prize Video Yet
Found this video at HobbySpace.com. It shows Pixel's flights from four perspectives. (Here.)
-tdr
-tdr
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Getting Busy On And Around The Red Planet.
Ken Edgett of Malin Space Science Systems (here) spoke today at San Diego's Reuben Fleet Science Center (here). He spoke of the various missions at Mars today and showed lots of great pictures of the red planet. His was a general speech for the general public and contained some interesting observations.
* Mars has never been so busy. Just ten years ago there were no active missions at Mars. Today there are two rovers still roaming the surface and four orbiters. NASA is continuing the practice begun under Dan Goldin of sending missions to Mars every 26 months.
* The rovers examine Mars in detail but are confined to small areas because of their limited range. Orbiters cover the whole planet and each new orbiter is capable of viewing more and more detail.
* Malin Space Science Systems has 240,000 photos of Mars taken by its cameras orbiting Mars.
* One of the advantages of long orbiter missions is the ability to do long-term studies of specific areas of Mars. Edgett showed a slide with two different images of the same polar region taken six years apart. The changes to the region were evident, even to the naked eye of a lay observer.
* Mars Global Surveyor has enough fuel to last until 2017. Whether its equipment lasts that long is a different question.
* Asked to provide a possible geological explanation for the presence of methane in the Martian atmosphere, he punted a bit and then talked about a third possible explanation other than life and volcanism. First, he expressed doubt whether the data show the true presence of methane in the atmosphere. Michael Caplinger, also of Malin, has expressed similar doubts at public forums in San Diego. Second, accepting that the date is correct, he said that some scientists "under the radar" are looking at the possibility that certain chemical reactions of minerals in a highly acidic environment with a carbon dioxide atmosphere could generate methane without life or volcanism. That was about as detailed as his answer got.
* He also said that one of the significant findings from the rovers that isn't talked about much is the sulfur content on Mars. He didn't elaborate but he suggested the sulfur could have implications for the history of Mars development, life, and the possibilities for Mars in the future.
Edgett was a very engaging speaker and he showed flashes of a quick and spontaneous sense of humor during his presentation. The Fleet Science Center is also showing the IMAX film, Roving Mars, on its big dome. It's well worth the price of admission just to see that film on the really, really big screen.
-tdr
Technorati: Mars, Astronomy, Science, Space.
* Mars has never been so busy. Just ten years ago there were no active missions at Mars. Today there are two rovers still roaming the surface and four orbiters. NASA is continuing the practice begun under Dan Goldin of sending missions to Mars every 26 months.
* The rovers examine Mars in detail but are confined to small areas because of their limited range. Orbiters cover the whole planet and each new orbiter is capable of viewing more and more detail.
* Malin Space Science Systems has 240,000 photos of Mars taken by its cameras orbiting Mars.
* One of the advantages of long orbiter missions is the ability to do long-term studies of specific areas of Mars. Edgett showed a slide with two different images of the same polar region taken six years apart. The changes to the region were evident, even to the naked eye of a lay observer.
* Mars Global Surveyor has enough fuel to last until 2017. Whether its equipment lasts that long is a different question.
* Asked to provide a possible geological explanation for the presence of methane in the Martian atmosphere, he punted a bit and then talked about a third possible explanation other than life and volcanism. First, he expressed doubt whether the data show the true presence of methane in the atmosphere. Michael Caplinger, also of Malin, has expressed similar doubts at public forums in San Diego. Second, accepting that the date is correct, he said that some scientists "under the radar" are looking at the possibility that certain chemical reactions of minerals in a highly acidic environment with a carbon dioxide atmosphere could generate methane without life or volcanism. That was about as detailed as his answer got.
* He also said that one of the significant findings from the rovers that isn't talked about much is the sulfur content on Mars. He didn't elaborate but he suggested the sulfur could have implications for the history of Mars development, life, and the possibilities for Mars in the future.
Edgett was a very engaging speaker and he showed flashes of a quick and spontaneous sense of humor during his presentation. The Fleet Science Center is also showing the IMAX film, Roving Mars, on its big dome. It's well worth the price of admission just to see that film on the really, really big screen.
-tdr
Technorati: Mars, Astronomy, Science, Space.
Labels: Mars
Friday, October 27, 2006
More X-Prize Cup Videos
The last set of videos from the X-Prize Cup have been uploaded at http://www.youtube.com/user/tdaver and http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=45A09CB7D15D0994. The new videos include a talking robot, an F/A 18 flyby, John Carmack being interviewed, and the beginning of Pixel's 2d and 3d attempt to win the Lunar Lander Challenge on Saturday.
-tdr
-tdr
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Pixel's Lessons Learned Courtesy Of HobbySpace.com
Clark Lindsey at HobbySpace.com links to one of our X-Prize Cup posts and lists several lessons Pixel teaches NASA. It's all about reusability, durability, simplicity, and affordability. He also points out that Pixel actually flew four times in three days, the first time for the FAA to get permission to fly in the competition. We should have mentioned that in our post. Go here to read Lindsey's lessons learned from Pixel.
-tdr
Technorati: X-Prize Cup, Space, NASA.
-tdr
Technorati: X-Prize Cup, Space, NASA.
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
More X-Prize Cup Photos
We uploaded most of the rest of our photos. View them in the "More X-Prize Cup Photos" at http://photos.yahoo.com/tdaver@sbcglobal.net. Some of the captions could use updating as our notes failed us. Please comment if you can identify the pictures.
We promised videos of Armadillo's wild rides in the Lunar Lander Challenge. Unfortunately, those won't be posted. The launch site was so far from the flight line that we simply video'd the giant screen webcast of the flight. It looks like Space.com requires purchase of the flight videos at their site. Rather than risk copyright infringement we're not going to publish ours. We do have two videos of John Carmack being interviewed and another video of a talking robot that will probably go up within the next few days.
-tdr
Technorati: X-Prize Cup, X Prize, Space.
Republished once to fix link.
We promised videos of Armadillo's wild rides in the Lunar Lander Challenge. Unfortunately, those won't be posted. The launch site was so far from the flight line that we simply video'd the giant screen webcast of the flight. It looks like Space.com requires purchase of the flight videos at their site. Rather than risk copyright infringement we're not going to publish ours. We do have two videos of John Carmack being interviewed and another video of a talking robot that will probably go up within the next few days.
-tdr
Technorati: X-Prize Cup, X Prize, Space.
Republished once to fix link.
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
Videos From X-Prize Cup 2006
Thousands of people showed up at Las Cruces, New Mexico last weekend to see a rocket show. Rockets they wanted and rockets they got. Rockets that flew into the sky, rockets that pushed a bicycle, rockets on a man's back, oh yeah, and a space elevator.
View the videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/tdaver or http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=45A09CB7D15D0994.
-tdr
Technorati: X-Prize Cup, X Prize, Space.
View the videos at http://www.youtube.com/user/tdaver or http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=45A09CB7D15D0994.
-tdr
Technorati: X-Prize Cup, X Prize, Space.
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006
Pictures At A Rocket Exhibition: X Prize Cup 2006
We attended this year's X Prize Cup and took lots of photos and videos. The photos can be seen in the "X-Prize Cup 2006" and "Lunar Lander Challenge 2006" folders at http://photos.yahoo.com/tdaver@sbcglobal.net. (Be sure to view the slideshow to read the descriptions.) The videos, most are of Armadillo's wild rides, haven't been uploaded yet. If we ever figure out where to host them, we'll put them online.
The X-Prize Cup was a lot of sizzle promising the meat to come. There were many static exhibits of spaceships that the so-called New Space companies hope to build and fly in the near future. Burt Rutan's company, the only private space program so far to successfully fly a human being into space, sent a mockup of SpaceShipOne but didn't otherwise participate in the event. Robert Bigelow's company (here), which has an inflatable prototype space station in orbit right now, didn't appear to be represented either. If it was there, it was behind the scenes.
One little company that hopes to build the rockets of the future, the Texas-based Armadillo Aerospace, launched a small, reusable rocketship 50 meters up, and then 100 meters over to a landing pad in a failed attempt to win $350,000 from NASA. Armadillo's ship, Pixel, flew well three times but had trouble with landings. The fourth launch ended in diseaster when little Pixel crashed on takeoff. (Here.)
After Pixel's first flight on Friday, Armadillo's owner John Carmack, admitted that nothing on his rocket is useful for NASA's plans to return to the moon. Instead, Carmack said that the lesson of his company's building of Pixel should be to shame those who build for NASA because Armadillo spent only $250,000 with a small group of part time employees working for 6 months.
Carmack has a good point but the point has already been made by Rutan's SpaceShipOne, and if COTS and NASA's other prize competitions are any indication, the lesson has already been learned. SpaceShipOne's flights proved that a smaller company working under the financial constraints of private funding can do more with less than large contractors spending public money under government contracts. Rutan, however, employed a full-time professional work force and had millions of dollars to spend.
To give Armadillo its due, the company's part-time work force did make a reusable rocket that flew three times in two days before it crashed. Armadillo's attempts at the prize were inspiring to see and it was heartbreaking when little Pixel finally fell to its doom. On the other hand, Armadillo is competing for a NASA funded prize but is making nothing that NASA can use and in the end, the company failed to win the prize. It's not clear from that how NASA or its contractors should be shamed. Nor is it clear just what NASA hopes to get from this particular prize competition.
For an event promoting private space ventures, NASA was a dominating presence at the X-Prize Cup. All day Saturday NASA astronauts and scientists gave talks in the Northrup Grumman tent. Armadillo's flights were done to win NASA money. The other big event at the Cup, the Space Elevator Games, had teams of college and high-school students trying to win NASA prizes. (Here.) NASA's F/A 18 did a fly-by as did a U.S. military stealth fighter. The only other private flights were done by amateur rocketeers launching small rockets, and by the Rocket Racing League's Lear jet, which flew by in order to demonstrate how the RRL's rockets will compete when the league gets going.
The overall impression one takes away from this year's X-Prize Cup is of future possibilities not present-day realities. As more money finds its way into the industry and more people work on making space affordable to the average person, that future may happen sooner rather than later. Right now, however, the industry remains in its infancy.
-tdr
Technorati: NASA, Space, X Prize, X-Prize Cup.
The X-Prize Cup was a lot of sizzle promising the meat to come. There were many static exhibits of spaceships that the so-called New Space companies hope to build and fly in the near future. Burt Rutan's company, the only private space program so far to successfully fly a human being into space, sent a mockup of SpaceShipOne but didn't otherwise participate in the event. Robert Bigelow's company (here), which has an inflatable prototype space station in orbit right now, didn't appear to be represented either. If it was there, it was behind the scenes.
One little company that hopes to build the rockets of the future, the Texas-based Armadillo Aerospace, launched a small, reusable rocketship 50 meters up, and then 100 meters over to a landing pad in a failed attempt to win $350,000 from NASA. Armadillo's ship, Pixel, flew well three times but had trouble with landings. The fourth launch ended in diseaster when little Pixel crashed on takeoff. (Here.)
After Pixel's first flight on Friday, Armadillo's owner John Carmack, admitted that nothing on his rocket is useful for NASA's plans to return to the moon. Instead, Carmack said that the lesson of his company's building of Pixel should be to shame those who build for NASA because Armadillo spent only $250,000 with a small group of part time employees working for 6 months.
Carmack has a good point but the point has already been made by Rutan's SpaceShipOne, and if COTS and NASA's other prize competitions are any indication, the lesson has already been learned. SpaceShipOne's flights proved that a smaller company working under the financial constraints of private funding can do more with less than large contractors spending public money under government contracts. Rutan, however, employed a full-time professional work force and had millions of dollars to spend.
To give Armadillo its due, the company's part-time work force did make a reusable rocket that flew three times in two days before it crashed. Armadillo's attempts at the prize were inspiring to see and it was heartbreaking when little Pixel finally fell to its doom. On the other hand, Armadillo is competing for a NASA funded prize but is making nothing that NASA can use and in the end, the company failed to win the prize. It's not clear from that how NASA or its contractors should be shamed. Nor is it clear just what NASA hopes to get from this particular prize competition.
For an event promoting private space ventures, NASA was a dominating presence at the X-Prize Cup. All day Saturday NASA astronauts and scientists gave talks in the Northrup Grumman tent. Armadillo's flights were done to win NASA money. The other big event at the Cup, the Space Elevator Games, had teams of college and high-school students trying to win NASA prizes. (Here.) NASA's F/A 18 did a fly-by as did a U.S. military stealth fighter. The only other private flights were done by amateur rocketeers launching small rockets, and by the Rocket Racing League's Lear jet, which flew by in order to demonstrate how the RRL's rockets will compete when the league gets going.
The overall impression one takes away from this year's X-Prize Cup is of future possibilities not present-day realities. As more money finds its way into the industry and more people work on making space affordable to the average person, that future may happen sooner rather than later. Right now, however, the industry remains in its infancy.
-tdr
Technorati: NASA, Space, X Prize, X-Prize Cup.
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
White Sands Missile Base Near Las Cruces, New Mexico.
The White Sands missile base is about 20 minutes from Las Cruces, New Mexico on Highway 70. (The picture at left is taken from a nearby rest stop.) The base is at the end of a road a few miles off the highway.The public is allowed to enter the base and visit a museum and field display of every missile system ever tested at White Sands. We drove to the base after the X-Prize Cup on Saturday. The musuem was closed but we were able to roam the missile display. (View photos in the "White Sands Missile Range" folder at
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdaver@sbcglobal.net.)
NASA has a test center a few miles closer to Las Cruces along the same highway. The facility is at the end of NASA Road. In contrast to White Sands, visitors aren't welcome at the NASA facility. So don't bother trying to drive it unless you're authorized. A warning sign on the road tells drivers to turn around right off the freeway exit.
-tdr
Technorati: NASA, White Sands, X Prize, Space.
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
New US Space Policy Emphasizes National Interest.
President Bush has signed a new space policy for the United States. Unclassified portions of the policy are available in a PDF document at the Office of Science and Technology Policy website. (Here.) Spacedaily.com publishes a story that leads with the news that the new space policy "rejects the development of arms control agreements that could restrict or limit U.S. access to or use of space. It also calls for the development of space capabilities that support U.S. defense and intelligence initiatives." (Here.) Well, let's hope so.
Here are the relevant passages from the new policy:
The current international legal regime for space pretends that space is a place where national conflicts will not occur. Space is supposed to be a place for international cooperation and peaceful coexistence and exploration. This is all nonsense, of course. Space may be above the sky but it's not heaven and when people go there we don't become angels.
The new US space policy pays lip service to the current legal regime but it is clear that the Bush Administration views space as a place just like any other where the United States will assert and protect its national interests and where the nation will seek to retain its dominance. This is refreshing, actually. The United States depends on space for national defense and it had better be able to protect its assets up there.
-tdr
Technorati: Bush, War, Space, NASA.
Here are the relevant passages from the new policy:
"• The United States considers space capabilities -- including the ground and space segments and supporting links -- vital to its national interests. Consistent with this policy, the United States will: preserve its rights, capabilities, and freedom of action in space; dissuade or deter others from either impeding those rights or developing capabilities intended to do so; take those actions necessary to protect its space capabilities; respond to interference; and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile to U.S. national interests;
• The United States will oppose the development of new legal regimes or other restrictions that seek to prohibit or limit U.S. access to or use of space. Proposed arms control agreements or restrictions must not impair the rights of the United States to conduct research, development, testing, and operations or other activities in space for U.S. national interests;" (See pp. 2-3 of OSTP pdf.)
The current international legal regime for space pretends that space is a place where national conflicts will not occur. Space is supposed to be a place for international cooperation and peaceful coexistence and exploration. This is all nonsense, of course. Space may be above the sky but it's not heaven and when people go there we don't become angels.
The new US space policy pays lip service to the current legal regime but it is clear that the Bush Administration views space as a place just like any other where the United States will assert and protect its national interests and where the nation will seek to retain its dominance. This is refreshing, actually. The United States depends on space for national defense and it had better be able to protect its assets up there.
-tdr
Technorati: Bush, War, Space, NASA.
Labels: Leviathan
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
X-Prize Cup 2006
We'll be driving from San Diego to Las Cruces for this year's X-Prize Cup. We hope to post pictures and stories of the rocket show. For more information on the X-Prize Cup go here.
-tdr
-tdr
Labels: X-Prize Cup 2006
Monday, October 16, 2006
Beautiful Saturn
If for no other reason, the space program is justified because it reveals the beauty of the universe we live in. These photos (here) of Saturn remind us why the ringed planet is the most beautiful in The Heliosphere.
-tdr
-tdr
Labels: Aesthetics
Monday, October 09, 2006
One Cylon's Terrorist Is Some Human's Freedom Fighter.
Webomatica has a thoughtful take on season three's first episode of Battlestar Galactica. (Here.) Some of it seems off the mark, some is spot on, but all of it is worth reading. He argues that BSG has always been a political show and he welcomes this season's obvious comparison to Iraq. He also argues that the episode has something universal and important to say to viewers, especially American viewers.
BSG has never been a political show about today's society. In the first two seasons the show did use current events for plot and themes but the series has always been about the BSG universe not about Earth in the 21st Century. Whatever similarities there might be between the BSG universe and our own are superficial. For example, the Cylon's sneak attack on the humans is not like 9/11. The 9/11 terrorist attacks were tactical strikes against discreet targets. The Cylon attack on the human planets destroyed many planets and killed billions of people and was the first blow in a genocidal war. The war we fight today is a war between ideologies not a genocidal war.
What has made BSG excellent so far is that the producers have resisted the urge to turn the series into a thinly veiled version of Earth today. There is a whole genre of TV shows that gives viewers stories "ripped from today's headlines" as the advertising puts it. To be blunt about it. Those shows are plain unadulterated crap lacking the creativity to tell original stories and lacking the wisdom to really add much of anything to the debate about whatever issue the producers decided to hijack into their series.
The concern that arises from BSG's third season premiere is that the situation in the series is set up so carefully to match the situation in Iraq. This was a deliberate choice as this review (here) in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer makes plain. A series producer explains their use of the word "insurgency" in the episode:
No doubt it's true that all three situations mentioned by Eick involved an insurgency. The American revolutionaries were insurgents who but for their victory would have been hung as traitors. The Iraqi revanchists are insurgents but they do that little beheading and suicide bombing thing that the American colonists didn't do. And the BSG humans are insurgents too. But beyond that there is little similarity between the three and the situation in BSG is so extreme that it can tell us nothing about the wisdom or not of the bumper sticker adage "one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter."
The human situation on New Caprica is probably one of the few situations where the kind of terrorism practiced today might be moral. The humans are fighting for their survival against an enemy embarked on a war of genocide against them. The situation in BSG is so extreme that it probably justifies an eventual genocidal counter-offensive with the goal of killing every Cylon down to the last android. About all the show can tell us about the morality of terror tactics is that when you are one of about 50,000 human survivors fighting android overlords who began a genocidal war by destroying a dozen or so planets and killing billions and billions of other humans, a suicide bombing here and there will not make your just cause unjust. It says nothing about whether terror tactics in a lesser cause turns a just cause into one that is unjust.
All that being said, the series deserves watching. The producers have maintained a high level of quality in the first two seasons and, to give them their due on this issue, there is a lot of room for moral exploration. Besides, the series has way cool spaceships and totally hot androids.
-tdr
Technorati: Battlestar Galactica, Science Fiction, War.
BSG has never been a political show about today's society. In the first two seasons the show did use current events for plot and themes but the series has always been about the BSG universe not about Earth in the 21st Century. Whatever similarities there might be between the BSG universe and our own are superficial. For example, the Cylon's sneak attack on the humans is not like 9/11. The 9/11 terrorist attacks were tactical strikes against discreet targets. The Cylon attack on the human planets destroyed many planets and killed billions of people and was the first blow in a genocidal war. The war we fight today is a war between ideologies not a genocidal war.
What has made BSG excellent so far is that the producers have resisted the urge to turn the series into a thinly veiled version of Earth today. There is a whole genre of TV shows that gives viewers stories "ripped from today's headlines" as the advertising puts it. To be blunt about it. Those shows are plain unadulterated crap lacking the creativity to tell original stories and lacking the wisdom to really add much of anything to the debate about whatever issue the producers decided to hijack into their series.
The concern that arises from BSG's third season premiere is that the situation in the series is set up so carefully to match the situation in Iraq. This was a deliberate choice as this review (here) in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer makes plain. A series producer explains their use of the word "insurgency" in the episode:
"'That's the phrase that we use to apply to all the violence taking place in this part of the world that we're so neck deep in,' co-executive producer David Eick said earlier this week in a conference call. 'It's that old adage: One person's freedom fighter is another person's terrorist. It all depends on what your frame of reference is, and on what side of the ledger you're on.O spare us.
"'The nature of how we interpret the actions of our characters is, for sure, informed by what's going on in Iraq. ... But I think we also relate to these actions in a different way because, ironically, yes, that's the way this country was born too. So what does it really mean to be an insurgent?'"
No doubt it's true that all three situations mentioned by Eick involved an insurgency. The American revolutionaries were insurgents who but for their victory would have been hung as traitors. The Iraqi revanchists are insurgents but they do that little beheading and suicide bombing thing that the American colonists didn't do. And the BSG humans are insurgents too. But beyond that there is little similarity between the three and the situation in BSG is so extreme that it can tell us nothing about the wisdom or not of the bumper sticker adage "one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter."
The human situation on New Caprica is probably one of the few situations where the kind of terrorism practiced today might be moral. The humans are fighting for their survival against an enemy embarked on a war of genocide against them. The situation in BSG is so extreme that it probably justifies an eventual genocidal counter-offensive with the goal of killing every Cylon down to the last android. About all the show can tell us about the morality of terror tactics is that when you are one of about 50,000 human survivors fighting android overlords who began a genocidal war by destroying a dozen or so planets and killing billions and billions of other humans, a suicide bombing here and there will not make your just cause unjust. It says nothing about whether terror tactics in a lesser cause turns a just cause into one that is unjust.
All that being said, the series deserves watching. The producers have maintained a high level of quality in the first two seasons and, to give them their due on this issue, there is a lot of room for moral exploration. Besides, the series has way cool spaceships and totally hot androids.
-tdr
Technorati: Battlestar Galactica, Science Fiction, War.
Labels: Science Fiction
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Battlestar Galactica Finds Earth.
Battlestar Galactica's two hour episode last night struck very close to home. After a year of occupation by their Cylon overlords the human insurgency is now resorting to suicide bombers, blowing up police graduation ceremonies, and targeting civilians. The Cylons are rounding up suspected insurgents, transporting the "detainees" in shackles and canvas hoods, and torturing them in prison while the human puppet president denies it happens.
Hmmmm. Does any of that sound familiar?
BSG, or the best show on TV, as we fans refer to it, has flirted with contemporary wartime events over the past two seasons. This was successful in the past because the writing hinted at current events more than paralelling them. With this new season it looks like the writers may have decided to tell stories "ripped from today's headlines" as those awful unoriginal shows on broadcast television do.
It's too soon to tell from one episode whether the show will turn preachy and convey an overt message about the war. To date the show has avoided that temptation and that's one reason it is so good. Good fiction doesn't preach. Good fiction tells stories that let the viewers or readers come to their own moral conclusions. Time will tell if the writers remain committed to producing good fiction or if they have decided to produce sermons.
-tdr
Technorati: Battlestar Galactica, Science Fiction, war.
Hmmmm. Does any of that sound familiar?
BSG, or the best show on TV, as we fans refer to it, has flirted with contemporary wartime events over the past two seasons. This was successful in the past because the writing hinted at current events more than paralelling them. With this new season it looks like the writers may have decided to tell stories "ripped from today's headlines" as those awful unoriginal shows on broadcast television do.
It's too soon to tell from one episode whether the show will turn preachy and convey an overt message about the war. To date the show has avoided that temptation and that's one reason it is so good. Good fiction doesn't preach. Good fiction tells stories that let the viewers or readers come to their own moral conclusions. Time will tell if the writers remain committed to producing good fiction or if they have decided to produce sermons.
-tdr
Technorati: Battlestar Galactica, Science Fiction, war.
Labels: Science Fiction
