Page 44 of 55 - Previous page

Taking a cue from several other Open Source projects, RocketForge has setup a wiki space for anyone who needs a space in which to collaberate on a rocket project. A 'wiki' is a set of web pages in which anyone can edit anything. Essentially it is a whiteboard where everyone has both a marker and an eraser.

This particular wiki engine does have authentication but this is simply for tracking of who said what. All changes are also archived so even if someone accidentally changes something important, it can be recovered. Links in a wiki take the form of a WikiWords which are simply capitalized words stuck together LikeThis. The wiki engine recognizes those and creates links automatically.

To get a feel for it go directly to the ArocketWiki and add something!

---

0 Comments

News Statement

For release: July 29, 2003

Enzi decries hobby rocket opposition

Washington, D.C. -U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo. disagreed with two senators' efforts to block legislation introduced by Enzi that would shield some model rocket enthusiasts from Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) regulations that have threatened the hobby.

U.S. Sens. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. held a news conference today promoting regulation of hobby rocketry.

Enzi made the following comments after the news conference.

“It's a sad state of affairs when we see a government agency and senators go to such lengths to squash efforts to preserve a constructive, educational and important hobby enjoyed by millions of Americans. This kind of opposition to my legislation serves to discourage innovation and darken spirits. It doesn't make Americans that much safer, but it does make us more fearful and less free.

"When I introduced this bill I hoped it would pass quickly. I thought that surely it was not Congress' intent when it passed the Homeland Security Act to make it more difficult for young people to enjoy model rocketry and hobby shop owners to make a living, but it appears this was the intent of at least two members.

"You can drag out all the dressed-up props you want, high-powered rockets are already regulated and this would not change under my bill. My legislation, after modification and passage by the Judiciary Committee, represents a compromise that takes into account the concerns of other senators regarding potential terrorist activity even though there is no known pattern of attempts by terrorists to use unguided hobby rockets as weapons. My bill would simply allow rocketeers to transport and purchase rocket motors that contain less than .9 pounds (409.5 grams) of APCP rocket propellant without being required to obtain a permit from the ATF.

"My bill is not a license to build bombs and the senators know it. A National Research Council study, Containing the Threat from Illegal Bombings, listed the top 29 common explosive and precursor chemicals with demonstrated potential and history of criminal use. It did not list APCP or recommend controls on it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts.

"My colleagues must be hearing complaints from back home about their holdup of my bill. I hope rocketeers will continue to educate their elected leaders about the merits of my legislation. I will continue to work to pass this common sense bill.”

-end-

---

0 Comments

from ARSAnews

July 26, 2003 - Today, ARSA revealed a compromise version of S724 for the United States Congress to consider. The compromise bill was reviewed and fine tuned by a “focus” group drawing members from a wide cross section of people in the various groups of rocketry. Members of this “focus” group are affiliated with TRA, NAR, hobby shops, university rocket programs, amateur rocketry and high power rocketry. While maintaining that original S724 goal, a compromise bill was developed that should satisfy most Senators and Representatives who are concerned about rocketeers stockpiling propellant or purchasing large rocket motors without government oversight.

to learn more, visit ARSA's Congress page

---

0 Comments

A few months ago I published a link to a Laughing Wolf article on space commercialization. At the time “Laughing Wolf” was anonymous. Since then he has revealed himself as C. Blake Powers who,until last year was the Director of Outreach for the NASA Space Product Development Program. Thus he has a few authoritative things to say about space commercialization. Since then he as posted several articles worth reading:

Towards A New Star, Part II

Towards A New Star

Flavors and Fragrances

Yet Another Problem

Bone Replacement Materials

Metal Casting

Microbial Fermentation and Microbes

Structure-Based Drug Design

What Are the Opportunities?

---

0 Comments

spacetoday.net has an article on this Zogby poll about public attitudes toward NASA and the shuttle fleet. While most of the questions never asked the fundamental questions of why we're up there in the first place, the one that initially depressed me was the one on Civilian Space Travel:

65% agreed with this statement: “Putting civilians into space is a bad idea because of the costs involved in the additional training and the dangers involved. Space travel should only involve highly trained and highly skilled professionals.”

33% agreed with this statement: “Putting civilians like teachers, politicians, and paying tourists into space is a good idea because it generates public interest, helps to create awareness of the space program in our children, and should be open to all Americans.”

3% said Neither or that they weren't sure

My hope is that they were making the distinction in their own minds about the fact that NASA shouldn't be carrying tourists. But part of me doubts it. The other depressing one was questions 15 which asked what the top priority of the space program should be. The leader with 49% was “Basic research on our solar system and the universe”.

We've got a long way to go before the average Amercian's concept of space gets anywhere close to where I think the majority of us want it to be. NASA isn't going to be the one to do it though. Those results couldn't have been more perfect for NASA. Maybe we need to write our own poll.

---

0 Comments

There is an excellent new blog by Chris Hall in which he mentions work by one of his students (Andrew Turner) on an open source project for simulation and modeling of spacecraft. The project page is on SourceForge. The documentation is sparse, but that will improve once the full thesis is available online.

---

0 Comments

p. Many in the industry/hobby/cause have followed the likes of John Carmack of Id Software and Armadillo Aerospace and Elon Musk of PayPal and SpaceX. We see a model that is apparently working: figure out how to make a lot of money at another business so you can afford to make space happen for yourself in your own way. The interesting thing is how young they both are (even Jeff Bezos is considered young by most entrepreneurial types).

p. As one who is in the same age bracket as both Elon and John I often ask myself why I'm not doing the same thing they are? What are they doing that I'm not? Do they have extra contacts? Knowledge? Lack of fear? The book Young and Successful attempts to answer that question. As far as business books are concerned it doesn't contain anything new. But from the point of view of a 'life evaluation' moment for 30-somethings its pretty good. Its definitely going on my list of “books to re-read with a few beers and a blank piece of paper once a month” list (up there with Atlas Shrugged and Good to Great). Go get it and read it.

---

0 Comments

I've posted more of my notes from this year's International Space Development Conference over at SciScoop:

• The National Space Society - Roadmap to Space Settlement
• Space Solar Power for Moon and Earth
• Lunar Bases on the Roadmap to Space
• Raising Funds for a Space Elevator, And Other Projects

Enjoy!

---

0 Comments

from the ARSA news

July 5, 2003 - MSNBC and Fox News have written stories for their web sites on the current situation of rocketry in America. The MSNBC story combined its coverage of how the Safe Explosives Act affected rocketry with its affect on fireworks. Their story further documented the financial ruin facing small businesses due to ATFE regulations. Both news organizations pointed out the inadequacy of the Hatch-Kohl amendment to Senate bill S724. Fox News reported on how ridiculous the ATFE claims were of using rockets as terrorists weapons.

Terror fallout dims rocketsÂ’ red glare

at MSNBC

By The Rockets' Red Glare..

at FOX news

---

from the ARSA congress page:

July, 4 2003 - Senator Hatch and Senator Kohl amended S724 in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The effects of the amendment are discussed in the preceding section. It is important to note that this amendment was written with the approval and participation of the ATFE. That should tell you a lot. There are three land mines buried in the amendment. The first is that the exemption only applies if the APCP is used in model rocket motors. Nowhere are “model rocket motors” defined in the bill. Guess who defines them? The ATFE. Will it be defined as “rocket motors made of cardboard tubes and clay nozzles” or “with an impulse not to exceed 160 Newton-seconds” or “single use applications only”. We don't know. The second land mine is the term “recreational model rockets”. Again, it is not defined in the bill and will be defined by the ATFE. Will that definition be “made of cardboard tubes, wood fins and plastic nosecones” or “not to exceed a lift off weight of 3 lbs” or “not to exceed a diameter of 3 inches and length of 48 inches”? We do not know. However, no one expects the ATFE to write definitions that will be favorable to the future of rocketry.

The last land mine in the amendment is that the 0.9 lb of propellant applies to both non-detonable 1.3 APCP and detonable 1.1 APCP as the phrase “ammonium perchlorate composite propellant” is used with no distinction between classes. You will notice that the same phrase is used in the ATFE proposed rocketry regulation with no distinction in classes. So what is the big deal? Why is it important in one and not the other? The difference is that in one case the phrase is used in a federal regulation and in the other United States Code. The federal regulation can be changed at will by the ATFE, but only Congress can change the United States Code. If a distinction between classes of APCP in the US code is not made and 1.1 class APCP 0.9 lb motors start floating around out there, the ATFE can only revoke the exemption by going to Congress and having the law changed, which is a time consuming process. This land mine was placed in the amendment for Senator Kohl to point out should the amendment come to the Senate floor for a vote. The purpose was to sink it on a floor vote.

The amended S724 is an empty bag and political ploy to make it look like the Judiciary committee did something for rocketry. It is a political illusion and a cruel hoax on the rocketry community that sought legitimate legislative relief.

---

0 Comments

Armadillo Aerospace had a fairly successful drop test of their crew cabin plus crush cone.

---

0 Comments

Next page