IntenseDebate - jedswift

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Unli... · 3 replies · +1 points

Interesting that the FCC claims that the SSN is unable to track a 10cm x 10 cm x 2 cm object. Really? The Haystack radar observatory (one of several systems that surveil near-Earth space) operates at 10, 95 & 150 GHz, with the corresponding wavelengths of 3, .32, & .2 cm. 10 cm objects should be capable of reflecting these frequencies. So is the system unable due to sensitivity or noise to sense these returns?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haystack_Observator...

When they launched there were reports that Swarm would not energize their transmitters until they secured approval, now the FCC is speaking for the Air Force concerning SSA issues. What is really going on here?

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Equi... · 5 replies · -2 points

Not sure about your hypothesis that nobody wants trouble. There are a number of instances in history were a sovereign entity has gone out of their way to start an armed conflict. Germany into Poland in 1938 comes to mind.

I guess I am skeptical that a loose federation of sovereign entities will not continue resort to violence if there is competition of something valuable. Just read the news.

Whoever is capable of defending by force a region of value will be the one who controls the wealth generated by that region, whether or not it is on this planet or not.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: The ... · 0 replies · +3 points

It certainly would be a strange work pattern; 10 or 40 minutes of intense search, compare, decide/prioritize with very tight time limitations, followed by 50 or more minutes of review, communication, preparation and every other operation including hygiene and sleep(?). With only two crew on board, and high density target fields requiring both to be actively observing the schedule would likely be grueling.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Bomb... · 0 replies · +1 points

The term "orbit" is certainly key here. One could argue that anything in ballistic flight is "in orbit". Admittedly this concept is mucked up a bit by interaction with the air with something like a base ball, but for a moment (ideally) even its flight is ballistic and is in a highly elliptical trajectory that we just approximate as a parabola. If its flight is uninterrupted interrupted by the ground (or the glove of a player) the ball would progress through a highly elliptical orbital path. The difference would be the arbitrary density of the Earth, not the two line ephemeris that could be generated.

By this definition, all nuclear ballistic weapons would be in violation, right down to the Davy Crocket. With out a definition or additional adjectives, the agreement is not even useful to accuse each other of wrong-doing.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Bomb... · 0 replies · +4 points

Your report is certainly one of the most in-depth presentations I have seen with more than enough information to generate one or more articles here. As with Old Egg, I, for one would be most interested in reading a authored and edited article by you on this subject!

Space science, juxtaposed with space mythology make for very human stories.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: The ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Seems like you may have enough info to write, not one, but two articles for this publication! Add your personal info with open source historical data and weave some very interesting narratives indeed.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Move... · 1 reply · +4 points

The second image appears to be an image of the one recovered vehicle. note the scorched appearance and the deployed recovery parachute. I saw this article at the AF museum in Dayton.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Why ... · 0 replies · +1 points

The Kessler syndrome is ongoing as we speak. No one said it as going to happen quickly, but it is known that the number of dangerous objects will continue to increase without any additional objects being launched. Check out the plots on page 6 of the NASA Orbital Debris Quarterly News.
https://www.orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/quarterly-...

Seems to show the hallmarks of an exponential.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Mari... · 0 replies · +1 points

Very interesting presentation on some of the effects beyond "the tragedy of the commons" aspect of near Earth space.

The commercial operation acting as an "agent" of the State reminds me of the Letters of Marque awarded to and carried by the privateers in the 17 and 18 hundreds to act as military agents of the State.

6 years ago @ The Space Review: essa... - The Space Review: Why ... · 2 replies · +2 points

My understanding is that NASA has paid SpaceX for technology development, including progress payments for meeting contract performance milestones. Admittedly, these have been augmented and incorporated into their own development programs. NASA would not extend these contracts to SpaceX unless there was some benefit for NASA to be gained.

One SpaceX effect that has not been discussed much is the manufacture of highly talented engineers and managers. SpaceX has a reputation for working people so hard that they are burnt out in the magic 3-5 year experience, despite the technically sweet subject matter. These people go on to work for other firms, aerospace and other, or start their own. The effects of this should become very evident in a few years. It would be interesting to tally the background of the folks behind Orbital, Stratolaunch, Virgin, Bigalow, and Blue et.al.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Description

Connect with jedswift

People I'm following

jedswift