Sputnik-4, the Controversial Manned Spaceflight Pathfinder

By | |
Comments Off on Sputnik-4, the Controversial Manned Spaceflight Pathfinder

Fifty years ago today — May 15, 1960 — the Soviet Union launched Sputnik-4 from the Baikonur Cosmodrome.

The mission was designed to test the systems for launching men into space, but sources conflict about the design and operational details. It is clear that Sputnik-4 was launched by a modified SS-6 ‘Sapwood’ intercontinental ballistic missile, the same rocket that would become known (if it wasn’t already) as the Vostok. But spacecraft details vary.

Sputnik-4’s mass is listed on the National Space Science Data Center page (above) as 1477 kg, but this fascinating page, complete with detailed illustration, lists its mass as over 4500 kg. Some sources say the spacecraft carried a pressurized cabin in which sat an instrumented mannequin, others that it only carried a mock-up of the manned cabin.

The sources agree that the orbiting spacecraft malfunctioned when its retro rockets fired while the vehicle was oriented incorrectly. Instead of descending into the Earth’s atmosphere, it was actually boosted into a higher orbit. The effect of the malfunction became the subject of some controversy, as the spacecraft did not re-enter the atmosphere where it was supposed to. It is said to have de-orbited in October 1965, but this Wikipedia page mentions that debris from the spacecraft impacted in Manitowoc, Wisconsin in September 1962.

But the biggest controversy about this launch is the theory that it contained a living person rather than a mannequin or mock-up. Radio calls were apparently overheard between the spacecraft and the ground that had the character of distress calls, but they were attributed to taped transmissions meant to test the communications equipment.

This final controversy also includes an unlikely witness: author Robert A. Heinlein, the science fiction Grand Master.

This Wikipedia page about the so-called ‘lost cosmonauts’ reminded me that Heinlein had been touring the Soviet Union in the same timeframe as this launch (and of Francis Gary Powers’s crash in his U-2). Of course I pulled my copy of Expanded Universe down off the shelf to find this tidbit in the article “‘Pravda’ Means ‘Truth'”:

I am sure of this: At noon on May 15 a group of Red Army cadets were unanimously positive that the rocket was manned. That pravda did not change until later that afternoon.

You must decide on your own, of course, if you believe the official version.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Bell X-1, Chuck Yeager, and Salad

By | |
Comments Off on Bell X-1, Chuck Yeager, and Salad

This is more “air and space” than “space” history, and it’s as much of a curiosity as anything, but 60 years ago today — May 12, 1950 — Chuck Yeager flew the first Bell X-1 rocket plane (serial number 46-062, or X-1-1) on its final flight.


(Bell X-1 in flight. USAF photo from NASA image collection.)

The aircraft, the first to be flown faster than the speed of sound, was retired and sent to the Smithsonian Institution, where it is on display at the National Air and Space Museum. If you’ve never been, you should go. (And the new Udvar-Hazy annex to the museum is very nice, too.)

Semi-related personal recollection to explain the title: I remember seeing General Yeager in the Officers Club at Edwards AFB when we were stationed there. I didn’t talk to him — what’s a brand-new second lieutenant non-pilot going to say to someone like that, especially standing next to him at the salad bar? But it seemed pretty cool at the time … and pretty okay even now.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Forthcoming Fiction

By | |
Comments Off on Forthcoming Fiction

A brand-new electronic magazine, Redstone Science Fiction, plans to publish my short-short story “Memorial at Copernicus” in an upcoming issue.

How new is Redstone Science Fiction? Their first issue will be June 2010. I love their tagline: “Get us off this rock.”

It will come as no surprise to anyone who knows me and has followed my efforts to sell my novel that “Copernicus” in the story’s title refers to Copernicus Crater on the Moon.

What is it with me and stories that take place on the Moon? I don’t know … except that I’ve always wanted to go there,* and since I can’t go for real I have to settle for going in my imagination. And it’s very nice when I can take a few people along with me.

They tell me my story may appear as early as the August issue.

___
*Yes, I know I’d be leaving a very comfortable rock for a not-so-comfortable one. But I look at it from the humanity-and-the-galaxy standpoint: it’s not the ultimate destination … just a stepping-stone.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

New Writers! Pay Attention to SFWA's Writer Beware, Etc.!

By | |
Comments Off on New Writers! Pay Attention to SFWA's Writer Beware, Etc.!

(Warning: This will be something of a rant.)

Yesterday I went through a handful of query letters submitted to Baen, several of which were from literary agents or people posing as agents. One of the agents is on the “Writer Beware” list maintained by the Science Fiction & Fantasy Writers of America (SFWA) — the “Thumbs Down Agency List” — and two of the others are probably vying for their own spots on the list.

Why don’t writers research these agencies before they submit to them? In addition to Writer Beware, the Absolute Write Water Cooler forum has lengthy threads warning of substandard agents, including all of the agents in question, and Preditors & Editors has very clear and succinct evaluations, and lists all three agencies as “not recommended.” (Okay, it actually lists one of them as “highly not recommended.”)

Why didn’t you pay attention, new writer?

  • Did you think the agency’s efficiency would impress us, if they sent three different queries in the same envelope? Especially if the query for your story told us next to nothing about the story?
  • Did you think the agency’s attention to detail would inspire us, if they didn’t proofread their letter?
  • Did you think the agency’s approach would intrigue us, if they didn’t include YOUR OWN NAME in the letter?

That last one is not a joke: one of the agencies used the first line of the query letter to plug themselves (really) and went on to include the title of the book, a brief description of the book, and an offer to send the manuscript, all WITHOUT MENTIONING THE AUTHOR’S NAME. (I’ll admit, that was one way to get the query letter read more than once: I had to make sure I wasn’t just missing it somewhere.)

So, bottom line: if you’re reading this blog post on a computer, rather than a friend having printed it out for you, then you have access to all of the sites I mentioned above. Use them. Take their recommendations to heart.

Oh, and you might want to check out potential publishers’ sites, too. They have these things called “guidelines” that you might want to read.

For instance, the Baen guidelines clearly state that we want to see a full manuscript and a synopsis, not just a query letter. Yes, I look at your query letters, but when I do I ask myself: did this person not read our guidelines, or did they read and ignore our guidelines?

As for me, I will wait until something I’ve written is attractive enough that a good agent wants to represent me, because after three years of reading submissions I’m convinced that a bad agent is far worse than no agent at all.

Do you have any related stories to tell? I’d love to hear them.

(And if you’re reading this post on Facebook, think about popping over to the actual blog to leave a comment.)

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Challenger Launches with Spacelab, and a Titan-IV Farewell

By | |
Comments Off on Challenger Launches with Spacelab, and a Titan-IV Farewell

Twenty-five years ago yesterday* — April 29, 1985 — the Space Shuttle Challenger lifted off from Kennedy Space Center on mission STS-51B.


(STS-51B launch. NASA image.)

Astronauts Robert F. Overmyer, Frederick D. Gregory, Don L. Lind, Norman E. Thagard, William E. Thornton, Lodewijk van den Berg and Taylor G. Wang launched the student-built Northern Utah Satellite (NUSAT-1) and spent a week in space with the European Space Agency’s Spacelab-3.

And on April 29, 2005 — 5 years ago yesterday — the last Titan-IV to be launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station blasted off with a classified National Reconnaissance Office satellite aboard. Titan rockets had been launching military and civil payloads for nearly five decades, and this launch left one final Titan-IV in the inventory, which launched from Vandenberg AFB in October 2005.

___
*Apologies for the tardy space history entry. As Poppa says, I’m “a day late and a dollar short.”

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Two Space Anniversaries: a First for China, and Hubble Reaches Orbit

By | |
Comments Off on Two Space Anniversaries: a First for China, and Hubble Reaches Orbit

Forty years ago today — April 24, 1970 — China joined the “space club” by launching its first satellite, appropriately named China-1. China was the fifth nation to launch its own satellite.

And 20 years ago — on this date in 1990 — the Space Shuttle Discovery launched from the Kennedy Space Center on mission STS-31 to deploy the Hubble Space Telescope.


(STS-31 mission patch. NASA image. Click to enlarge.)

The STS-31 crew consisted of astronauts Loren J. Shriver, Charles F. Bolden (the current NASA Administrator), Steven A. Hawley, Bruce McCandless and Kathryn D. Sullivan. The HST had more than its share of problems, given its blurred optics and the need to mount a repair mission, but its launch was still a momentous occasion for space science. It has brought us remarkable images year after year, more than I can count.


(Hubble Space Telescope deployment from STS-31. NASA image.)

It was momentous for yours truly, also: when it landed on April 29th at Edwards AFB, I was once again on duty as part of the AF Flight Test Center shuttle recovery team. It really doesn’t seem like so long ago, yet it seems like another lifetime ….

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

First Molniya Satellite — Highly Elliptical Orbit for High Latitude Communications

By | | ,
Comments Off on First Molniya Satellite — Highly Elliptical Orbit for High Latitude Communications

Forty-five years ago today — April 23, 1965 — the Soviet Union launched Molniya-1 on a Soyuz rocket from Baikonur.

The satellite was placed in a very particular orbit: highly elliptical, with perigee (the lowest altitude) very close to the Earth’s southern hemisphere and apogee (the highest altitude) far above the northern hemisphere. By carefully selecting the angle of inclination (how “tilted” the orbital plane is from the equatorial plane), they produced a situation in which the satellite’s apparent motion over the northern hemisphere was very small, providing extended communications coverage in the polar regions where geosynchronous satellites could not.

The orbit soon became known as a Molniya orbit, after the Molniya satellites that were first inserted there. “Molniya,” itself, means “lightning.”

Here’s a wonderful YouTube video showing how the Molniya orbit works:

— BREAK, BREAK —

And, congratulations to the Air Force’s X-37B team for their successful launch last night. (Head to the Space Warfare Forum if you want to discuss it.) Well done!

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Why are Terrorists' Grievances More Palatable than Conservatives' Opinions?

By | |
Comments Off on Why are Terrorists' Grievances More Palatable than Conservatives' Opinions?

(Disclosure, or Caveat: I don’t have hard evidence to back this up, and I presume many of my friends on the left side of the political aisle would deny it. This is supposition on my part, grounded in my own perceptions of news stories, Internet postings, and conversations. I suspect I could find some documentary evidence if pressed to do so.)

My question in this blog post stems from the vehemence with which the Tea Parties have been excoriated by left-leaning elements of the press and the populace. Interesting in the first place is that the groups took their name from a pivotal event in U.S. history, and were quickly branded with a homosexual slur that many on the left still seem not to recognize.* Perhaps it should not be surprising, since those leaning left consider themselves “progressive” and wish only and always to “move on” to something new and different (even if not demonstrably better), that they would disdain a movement that looked back to an example of revolutionary protest by Colonial patriots.


(U.S. Flag image by Elaron, via Flickr, under Creative Commons. Click to enlarge.)

But even more interesting and appalling is that the same people who went to great lengths after September 11 to ask why terrorists would attack us — who characterized the terrorists’ concerns as legitimate and presumably still believe them worthy of serious consideration by the very people they attacked — won’t spare even a moment to consider why their political opponents differ from them. They asked about the terrorists, “Why do they hate us?” Do they ask of those at a Tea Party rally, “Why do they disagree with us?” From what I have seen, they do not ask and would not be interested in the answer. In a life-and-death struggle with radicals who would prefer them (and the rest of us) dead if we refuse to convert, they want to meet around the table and listen to grievances; but in a political debate, they refuse to listen to differences of opinion.

People on the right and the left used to agree on one thing: that they would defend each other’s right to express their opinion, even when they disagreed. No more, it seems.

Pogo was right: “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”**

___
*First pointed out by James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal. In effect, their use of vulgar slang in the pejorative sense equates to a slur in both directions, i.e., against the homosexuals as well as Tea Partiers.

**From a 1971 cartoon by Walt Kelly. A play on US Navy Captain Oliver Hazard Perry’s message to Major General William Henry Harrison after the Battle of Lake Erie (War of 1812), “We have met the enemy, and they are ours.”

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

A Space DART That Hit Its Mark Too Hard

By | |
Comments Off on A Space DART That Hit Its Mark Too Hard

Five years ago today — April 15, 2005 — the “Demonstration of Autonomous Rendezvous Technology” (DART) spacecraft was launched by a Pegasus-XL rocket from Orbital Sciences Corporation’s L-1011 carrier aircraft flying out of Vandenberg AFB.


(Technicians prepare the DART spacecraft for flight. Orbital Sciences Corporation image from http://www.msfc.nasa.gov/news/dart/. Click to enlarge.)

The DART spacecraft was meant to rendezvous with and maneuver around the Multiple Paths, Beyond-Line-of-Sight Communications (MUBLCOM) satellite; however, the mission was not successful.

From the mishap investigation report,

DART performed as planned during the first eight hours through the launch, early orbit, and rendezvous phases of the mission, accomplishing all objectives up to that time, even though ground operations personnel noticed anomalies with the navigation system. During proximity operations, however, the spacecraft began using much more propellant than expected. Approximately 11 hours into what was supposed to be a 24-hour mission, DART detected that its propellant supply was depleted, and it began a series of maneuvers for departure and retirement. Although it was not known at the time, DART had actually collided with MUBLCOM 3 minutes and 49 seconds before initiating retirement.

I don’t know if they characterized it as a “successful failure,” in that they learned something useful from it, but it’s important to try these things, even if some of them fail. As I heard Howard Hendricks say many years ago, “If you’re not falling down, you’re not learning to ski.”

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

RavenCon Recap

By | |
Comments Off on RavenCon Recap

(Another version of this recap is on the Feature page of my website.)

Last weekend’s trip to RavenCon went very well. The con was in a more spacious hotel this year, and as usual was superbly organized and the con staff was excellent. It felt good to be immersed in science fiction and fantasy again, even for a short time.

I was pretty busy during the con, as you can see from the list below:

  • Making the Science Fit the Story — This was an enjoyable panel with a surprisingly large audience, very well moderated by John Cmar and featuring the multiple Nebula Award nominee Bud Sparhawk.
  • Pitching Your Work and Writing a Query Letter — This was a mini workshop with Michael Kabongo and Kalayna Price, and it took a slightly different direction from the original intent. The three of us did, however, take the opportunity to drill into the participants what it takes to write a professional cover/query letter.
  • The Pen is Mightier Than The … — I called this panel the “Baen Books World Domination Panel”, since the panel opened with an entire slate of Baen people: authors Julie Cochrane and Steve White, plus me. Later we were joined by Barbara Friend Ish, publisher of Mercury Retrograde Press. I moderated this panel, which explored the selection and treatment of weapons in science fiction.
  • Will there be BBQ’s in Space? — This panel turned out to be much more interesting than we imagined it would. Julie Cochrane, Chuck Gannon, and Hugo Award nominee Lawrence M. Schoen were my fellow panelists, and we discussed cultural celebrations and how writers incorporate them into various types of science fiction stories.
  • What does the future hold for space travel? — For a 10 p.m. science panel, this one was well-attended and we had a lot of fun with it. Laura A. Burns moderated, and Chuck Gannon, John Cmar, and Butch Allen were the other panelists. We covered everything from the current state of affairs at NASA to some far-out propulsion possibilities, and Dr. Yoji Kondo provided some expert commentary from the audience. (Afterward, I talked for awhile with Dr. Kondo about our work at Edwards AFB, and about science fiction luminaries such as Dr. Robert L. Forward and Charles Sheffield.)
  • Blogging, Twittering, ___ings: Are They Productive Time or An Addiction? — I moderated this panel, which had the widest variety of people on it: Nebula Award-winning Baen author Catherine Asaro (sitting in for her keyboard accompanist Donald Wolcott), literary agent Michael Kabongo, and artists Chris Flick and Bryan Prindiville. We had quite a lively discussion, despite the fact that we outnumbered the audience (one of the dangers of a late-day Sunday panel).

In addition, I also attended a few panels, including “Not Your Mommy’s Star Trek, or is it?” and “The Rise of Young Adult Dystopias.” More important and more enjoyable, I enjoyed some long and fruitful discussions with Lawrence M. Schoen, Bud Sparhawk, and Amy Sturgis, and even made some time to work on a short story.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmailby feather