Author Antarctic Shenanigans  (Read 3380 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #90 on: February 25, 2017, 04:06:46 PM »
Isn't Antartica about the worst place to launch from?  I understood that the nearer to the equator the better is the deal for space launches?  Something about using the Earth's rotational velocity to your advantage?

Or is this where THEY are launching and testing laser propulsion spacecraft?  Makes sense to do that at the poles, easier to aim the laser at the spacecraft, sort of the opposite of using the Earth's rotation to your advantage.

Yes, laser propulsion is a real thing, check out this video for a real-world scaled down test of the proposed technology:



Not Sure how old that footage is, but I imagine the idea still gets funding.  Almost a no-brainer, don't have to waste payload/mission mass carrying fuel and a propulsion system.

Would be easiest right at the South Pole, perhaps that is why Goggle-Earf not do twerk when attempting to view the S. Pole?

Although, with the spin the craft needs to have a stable flight path, I imagine manned flight is out of the question, unless they use a big "spinner tire" type thing on the ass-end of the ship.

Sumtheen's a-goeen on?!?


Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #91 on: February 25, 2017, 07:38:08 PM »
Isn't Antartica about the worst place to launch from?  I understood that the nearer to the equator the better is the deal for space launches?  Something about using the Earth's rotational velocity to your advantage?

Yes, any rocket launch from Antarctica would limit what could be launched from the Cape or Equator several percent. The real disadvantage though would be logistics. Transport of hundreds of thousands of gallons of propellants, creation of facilities and a launch pad would make any conventional space rocketry exponentially more expensive. Easier to launch a secret payload from Vandenberg AFB into a polar orbit for the same results.

However, in the "Black World" it is understood the cost for secrecy exceeds the cost of actual work on a project. If one wanted to have a test site for testing a field propulsion craft - a remote polar region could make sense. (limited satellite flyovers, limited and very controlled radar, and all personnel are already vetted and have signed non-disclosure agreements. The ones non essential to a test could be ordered to go here or there and make themselves scarce)  So it comes down to what is cheaper and more secure even with logistics expenses.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #92 on: February 25, 2017, 08:20:37 PM »
As for the laser propulsion craft, it holds some promise, the trick is to keep the thrust chamber from melting - and the more obvious problem of flying at night or on cloudy days in the atmosphere for the solar cells that power the laser. In Antarctica polar summer would be great for testing - the other months not so much.

There could be other methods to keep a craft stable besides spin - could mount many smaller laser "thrusters" on the side, for instance in a large version of the craft that are computer controlled. (A person could not fire them fast enough to keep such a device stable) Another way would be with a computer gimballed parabola mirror  in the thrust chamber that would fine tune the direction of the pulses.

The one that has always intrigued me is electrostatic propulsion - Biefeld-Brown.  I would not be surprised if the first non-rocket spacecraft used a hybrid of methods for both energy generation and propulsion.


Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #93 on: February 25, 2017, 08:42:57 PM »
No reason to limit yourself to solar power for the energy to run the laser, why not a nuclear power plant?  I imagine the amount of energy needed to run a laser or bank of lasers sufficient to lift a orbital or inter-planetary type craft would exceed that generated by current solar power technology.

As to the thrust chamber melting, weren't there plans for another alternate propulsion system called ORION back in the 50s/60s (not to be confused with the current Orion rocket) that was essentially powered by small nuclear bombs ejected underneath/inside a thick cone mounted underneath the payload/mission/command sections?



Seems to me that the technology is there for either, both or a hybrid propulsion system.

Not Sure...

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #94 on: February 25, 2017, 09:11:27 PM »
As to the thrust chamber melting, weren't there plans for another alternate propulsion system called ORION back in the 50s/60s (not to be confused with the current Orion rocket) that was essentially powered by small nuclear bombs ejected underneath/inside a thick cone mounted underneath the payload/mission/command sections?

Seems to me that the technology is there for either, both or a hybrid propulsion system.

There was also a concept project called Daedalus - an interstellar probe powered by nuclear pulse detonation. The NERVA project at the Nevada Test site had some hardware made along with a nuclear mess to cleanup.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA

I'm not sure which type of tech will ultimately take the lead, but I'm sure some of these old projects could be revisited with new tech and materials science. There is no way in heck space will be accessible to the average person until a more efficient propulsion is found.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #95 on: February 25, 2017, 09:44:13 PM »
Back to Antarctica, one clue might be offered by the Polar Services Contract. It used to be Raytheon - but now its Lockheed-Martin. Besides a more competitive bid - what can Lockheed-Martin do better than Raytheon? Aerospace! What is Buzz Aldrin's PhD in? Astronautics. Then VP Kerry handled a certain amount of space policy - Newt Gingrich - various defense and pro-space committees over the years.

So a likely explanation to me is exotic space propulsion testing or a crashed saucer of the others (way less likely).

The Corey Goode stuff including Atlantean remains is obviously fodder or "three huge crashed saucers" is likely disinformation as  it mixed in with info about Blue Avians. Poor MK Ultra controlled puppy....

Its also safe to drop the Planet X and Niburu sightings - as I explained in another post if you could see this from the Antarctic, you could also see it from the rest of the Southern Hemisphere. Distinctive fear fodder.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #96 on: February 25, 2017, 10:32:35 PM »
Back to Antarctica, one clue might be offered by the Polar Services Contract. It used to be Raytheon - but now its Lockheed-Martin. Besides a more competitive bid - what can Lockheed-Martin do better than Raytheon? Aerospace!

interesting.  I noticed that switch also. Hmmmm. Velly interesting, as Charlie Chan might say.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #97 on: February 25, 2017, 10:44:07 PM »
A possible white world academia liason and decoy - Virginia Tech
makes arrays in Antarctica (conveniently) - but mostly involved in spacecraft design and plasma physics (field propulsion anyone?) Also Stephen Bannon's old school...I wonder if he will be the next to go there.

http://space.vt.edu/research.html


Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #98 on: February 25, 2017, 11:18:01 PM »
A possible white world academia liason and decoy - Virginia Tech
makes arrays in Antarctica (conveniently) - but mostly involved in spacecraft design and plasma physics (field propulsion anyone?) Also Stephen Bannon's old school...I wonder if he will be the next to go there.

http://space.vt.edu/research.html
Hmmm. "Fourteen Words" for space exploration and settlement?  ;) From a very white environment....the Antarctic?  This also means a reassessment of the VA Tech shooter/murderer.   :o

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #99 on: February 25, 2017, 11:26:56 PM »
And more!
The USN is the prime US military arm in Antarctica. (Operation High Jump)...also another Bannon connection, LOL!
might be some ONI counterintelligence and disinfo in the last layer of the onion for those not sufficiently distracted by Corey Goode or Planet X
http://www.ufointernationalproject.com/latest-news/navy-engineer-i-saw-ufos-aliens-and-top-secret-bases-in-antarctica/'

If there is an underground base it no doubt would have been carved by CH2MHill (officially Logistics support in Antartica now) Type in CH2MHill and underground bases and all kinds of stories come up.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #100 on: February 25, 2017, 11:35:24 PM »
Hmmm. "Fourteen Words" for space exploration and settlement?  ;) From a very white environment....the Antarctic?  This also means a reassessment of the VA Tech shooter/murderer.   :o

 ;D - but might not be a joke.  A project going on down there of this sensitivity could generate all kinds of shenanigans, blackmail, counterintelligence with all the makings of a good spy movie even if there are no ETs there. Spy who came in from the cold can have a whole new meaning :)

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #101 on: February 25, 2017, 11:56:09 PM »
;D - but might not be a joke.  A project going on down there of this sensitivity could generate all kinds of shenanigans, blackmail, counterintelligence with all the makings of a good spy movie even if there are no ETs there. Spy who came in from the cold can have a whole new meaning :)
And, although the opposite end of the earth...good land for Nordics; real Nordics due to cold clime and "Nordics" of ET or NAZI variety wanna-be Nordic Germans with their alleged missions and/or base there.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #102 on: February 25, 2017, 11:58:13 PM »
Back to Antarctica...

Where better than the pole to test an "exotic propulsion system" i.e. one that uses a ground-based laser?  By test the system, I mean the full sized pay-load to orbit vehicle.

I never left...

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #103 on: February 26, 2017, 12:18:13 AM »
Where better than the pole to test an "exotic propulsion system" i.e. one that uses a ground-based laser?  By test the system, I mean the full sized pay-load to orbit vehicle.

I never left...

Must be getting cold by now.  ;D Seriously, this may well be an Area 51 on ice complete with the ol' Skunkworks contractor Lockheed, and "Brian" as its Lazar to tell alien stories (both worked as ONI operatives.)

Lasers and plasma go hand in hand in some propulsive concepts - to figure out which the are using will take more digging. A dream come true if they can reach orbit with one of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_propulsion

Geeze, the same antarctic research tools for are pretty analgous to works like this. What a slick cover!
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2009/new-laser-to-probe-antarctic-atmosphere


Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #104 on: February 26, 2017, 12:40:25 AM »
Must be getting cold by now.  ;D Seriously, this may well be an Area 51 on ice complete with the ol' Skunkworks contractor Lockheed, and "Brian" as its Lazar to tell alien stories (both worked as ONI operatives.)

Lasers and plasma go hand in hand in some propulsive concepts - to figure out which the are using will take more digging. A dream come true if they can reach orbit with one of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_propulsion

Geeze, the same antarctic research tools for are pretty analgous to works like this. What a slick cover!
http://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2009/new-laser-to-probe-antarctic-atmosphere

Ok, I'm convinced you're not Dr. Falkov now.  :) Forgive me?  :-[

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #105 on: February 26, 2017, 01:13:14 AM »

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #106 on: February 26, 2017, 01:14:48 AM »
Speaking of lasers, something that bugs me on this one.
It seems the antarctic might not be melting/calving for the reasons stated...are they melting it?
What are we looking at here?

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #107 on: February 26, 2017, 01:34:58 AM »
Ok, I'm convinced you're not Dr. Falkov now.  :) Forgive me?  :-[
Forgiven.

I think we are getting screwed to the wall by so many institutions (scientists included) that this friggin' planet has become one.
Therefore, time for a drink...wanna join me? Cheers!

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #108 on: February 26, 2017, 07:06:01 AM »
Forgiven.

I think we are getting screwed to the wall by so many institutions (scientists included) that this friggin' planet has become one.
Therefore, time for a drink...wanna join me? Cheers!

And not in the good way either. Cheers!

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #109 on: February 27, 2017, 12:03:02 PM »
Isn't Antartica about the worst place to launch from?  I understood that the nearer to the equator the better is the deal for space launches?  Something about using the Earth's rotational velocity to your advantage?





You got it Pontiac.  Launching from the poles gets you absolutely zero assist so far as orbits that travel from West to East. The land at the equator is moving 1670 km per hour, and land halfway to the pole is only moving 1180 km per hour.
Now if we are talking about Polar orbits, or obits that either go from North to South or South to North, launching at the poles could be made to work.

Remember back in 1986 when STS-51L Challenger launched? Just a few months later, there was scheduled launch to occur from the West Coast.  It never occurred because of the Challenger incident.
STS=Space Transportation System
The 1st digit is a 5 which means the launch was scheduled for fiscal year 1985
The 2nd digit will either be a 1 or a 2. 1 is for Kennedy Space Center-East Coast launches, "2" is for Vandenburg West Coast Launches
The 3rd digit is the sequence that the mission was scheduled within the fiscal year. A is the 1st mission, B is the2nd, C is the 3rd, so L=12th launch scheduled.

So the launch scheduled to launch from the West Coast was STS-62-A.
6 is fiscal year 1986
2= West Coast Launch
A=1st launch from SLC-6 West Coast


 There was a mission named STS-62-A Discovery was scheduled to launch from Vandenburg AFB from SLC-6 (Space Launch Complex Six-pronounced Slick Six) down towards the South for the SSP(Space Shuttle Program) first Polar Orbit launch.


 Because the West to East launches from Kennedy Space Center allowed for a roughly 55,000lb payload inside the Orbiter.  In order to provide 29,600 payload capabilities for a Polar Orbit launch, the Shuttle required different Solid Rocket Boosters, which were the same size as the KSC East to West Orbit launches, except that instead of 1/2" wall steel casing, the Vandenburg Polar Launch SRB's were made of Filament Wound Casings(FWC).  In addition, instead of running the SSMEs(Space Shuttle Main Engines) at the typical 104.5% Rated Power Level(RPL)
Here is a pic from Vandenburg AFB SLC-6 with Orbiter Enterprise installed on the launch pad in October 1985.



Performance for intermediate inclinations can be estimated by allowing 660 pounds for each degree of plane change between inclinations of 68 and 98 degrees.

Here is a pic of a display Shuttle Stack with the Vandenburg Filament Wound Cases.


During the downtime when Shuttle was grounded from 1986-1989, it was determined that Polar West coast launches would NOT occur, so the 4 billion dollar investment was wasted, and all useable components were taken to KSC for use and SLC-6 was mothballed.


Here is a pic of Enterprise sitting atop SLC-39A(Space Launch Complex 39-A in Florida) checking out the fitment of the pad with the Orbiter 20 months before the first Shuttle launch.  Enterprise was never built to go into space, but it was the first Orbiter to actually take flight and land, as it was used in the 1979 ALT(Approach/Landing Tests).  It was 1st taxied at various speeds atop the 747 SCA(Shuttle Carrier Aircraft) to test the 747's acceleration and braking with the 250,000 pound Orbiter on top of it.  Then the SCA and Enterprise took flight with the Orbiter unpowered, then flights took place with the Enterprise powered with Pilots, then finally flights took place with pilots in Enterprise, with Enterprise actually being cut loose from a rapidly descending SCA 747.


Both Shuttle Carrier Aircraft, SCA-911(background)  SCA 905(foreground)


And SCA 905 midflight with Orbiter Challenger on her back from 1982.


Oh those were the days.

peace
Hog


Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #110 on: March 04, 2017, 02:35:21 PM »
You got it Pontiac.  Launching from the poles gets you absolutely zero assist so far as orbits that travel from West to East. The land at the equator is moving 1670 km per hour, and land halfway to the pole is only moving 1180 km per hour.
Now if we are talking about Polar orbits, or obits that either go from North to South or South to North, launching at the poles could be made to work.

...

peace
Hog

"...made to work."  As in kludging it together to making Polar Orbit, or there is a benefit to achieving Polar Orbit from either of the poles?

Are Polar Orbits useful in any specific applications?  I would imagine that communications satellites would not benefit, I would think the geosynchronous or that weird orbit that the Sirius(?) radio satellites use to keep them over a specific region is more useful, and there really aren't many folks at the poles to service.

Why would THEY be interested in Polar launches to Polar Orbit (assuming that is the best place to get something to Polar Orbit)?  Surveillance?  Mind Control?  Weather Control?  Some sort of Space Shield against Illegal Space Aliens using Earth's magnetic field and some weird 90 degree satellite magnetronic intar-axion?

Clearly, since there is an absence of anything in the Fake News about an Antarctic Launch Facility, there must be one.  As the caveat of no evidence to support a conspiracy theory is the first indicator of a conspiracy, this follows logically.

I hope there is a planned boarding mission for the "Dark Knight" object, with film crews and space Marines.  That's what I would be doing if I was THEM...


Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #111 on: March 04, 2017, 02:45:25 PM »
"...made to work."  As in kludging it together to making Polar Orbit, or there is a benefit to achieving Polar Orbit from either of the poles?

Are Polar Orbits useful in any specific applications?  I would imagine that communications satellites would not benefit, I would think the geosynchronous or that weird orbit that the Sirius(?) radio satellites use to keep them over a specific region is more useful, and there really aren't many folks at the poles to service.

Why would THEY be interested in Polar launches to Polar Orbit (assuming that is the best place to get something to Polar Orbit)?  Surveillance?  Mind Control?  Weather Control?  Some sort of Space Shield against Illegal Space Aliens using Earth's magnetic field and some weird 90 degree satellite magnetronic intar-axion?

Clearly, since there is an absence of anything in the Fake News about an Antarctic Launch Facility, there must be one.  As the caveat of no evidence to support a conspiracy theory is the first indicator of a conspiracy, this follows logically.

I hope there is a planned boarding mission for the "Dark Knight" object, with film crews and space Marines.  That's what I would be doing if I was THEM...

Polar orbits are used when you want to view the entire earth. Like surveillance satellites or Landsat type satellites. That is why the NRO satellites are usually launched from Vandenburg.

When a satellite is in polar orbit, the spin of the earth on its axis below allows the satellite to eventually see all of the globe.

Not good for communication satellites which are generally at geosync above the equator. There are some communication satellites at lower orbit, like Iridium, but threat takes a large network of satellites to provide continuous coverage.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #112 on: March 06, 2017, 05:31:25 AM »
Any benefit launching from one or the other pole for extra-orbital trajectories?


Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #113 on: March 07, 2017, 11:23:21 PM »
Any benefit launching from one or the other pole for extra-orbital trajectories?
None. Any rocket is still going to need at least 25,000 miles per hour velocity no matter the location of the launch site.



Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #116 on: March 11, 2017, 06:47:14 PM »
Any M Δv?

http://www.rense.com/general30/yrb3.htm


The energy required to produce the required ∆v to escape a gravity well would be significantly reduced if all the mass just went on vacation interminably for a couple weeks every couple of weeks, like the Belgians and Spanish do.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #117 on: March 11, 2017, 06:48:06 PM »
None. Any rocket is still going to need at least 25,000 miles per hour velocity no matter the location of the launch site.

Ceres.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #118 on: March 11, 2017, 06:59:22 PM »
Clearly, since there is an absence of anything in the Fake News about an Antarctic Launch Facility, there must be one.  As the caveat of no evidence to support a conspiracy theory is the first indicator of a conspiracy, this follows logically.

Man I must be fucking high 'cause I totally get that.

Re: Antarctic Shenanigans
« Reply #119 on: March 11, 2017, 07:33:18 PM »
http://www.rense.com/general30/yrb3.htm


The energy required to produce the required ∆v to escape a gravity well would be significantly reduced if all the mass just went on vacation interminably for a couple weeks every couple of weeks, like the Belgians and Spanish do.

And the Italians take three weeks. Re-compute, its bound to skew the calculations.