@Buck @ChaosEngine

Oops. It wasn't my dad who worked that manned flight.

It was his boss.

Dad did unmanned only.

@ChaosEngine @Buck

My dad was in the Air Force. He was chosen for a particular program -- to be a Range Safety Officer on launches.

Once he got his Masters in Engineering at MIT on the government's dime, he was stationed at Cape Canaveral.

His job was to have his hand on the key that would blow up a missile when it went off course. The course was set so that if it went bad, the pieces would fall safely into the ocean. If it started to veer off course, you had to blow it up quick.

He was stationed at Cape Canaveral from something like 1958 to 1966. About that time frame. Early days, when they didn't know quite how to do a successful launch -- and he blew up a lot.

More than any other person -- and no one will catch up with his record, because it is no longer early days.

He got a Saturn. He blew up a Titan. He blew up a lot of Missilemen missiles.

He mostly worked on the unmanned launches. Only one launch (that I know of) was manned -- and he almost had to blow it up. He was sweating that one -- because of the stakes of blowing early or blowing late and no good result if you make the wrong choice. There was a wobble ... and he waited ... and it corrected.

But yeah. A Saturn.

After Cape Canaveral, he was stationed at Vandenberg Air Force Base, NW of Santa Barbara. The west coast equivalent of the Cape.

PM me your email, and I'll send you a SERIOUSLY cool cartoon that was a gift when he left the Cape. Sitting astride a rocket that has obviously been launched from Florida, with silhouettes of all the missiles he blew up -- with HASHMARKS for how many of each.

It is seriously cool.

My dad was part of the unmanned missile program. I'm still email buds with one of his co-workers (now 91 years old!) They do talk amongst themselves and this was forwarded to me:



I was working at Kennedy Space Center for McDonnell Douglas and worked on the launch of this mission. I was a Guidance and Controls Engineer on the console in the firing room (the Launch Control Center). McDonnell Douglas built the S-IVb stage….the upper stage….and the one that restarted when in orbit to send the Command Module and Lunar Module on their way to the moon….



Kim Keller

Okay, folks. History is converging here through six degrees of separation.

Long story. I think it is worth your time.

I grew up with a father who said terribly racist things, the n- word, disparaging remarks about all races. There was much screaming and bitter words from me for a lot of my childhood and well into my 20s.

After he died, I got into a short email exchange with someone I didn't know at all. A former co-worker of my father.

My dad's job, as I have said here before, was Range Safety Officer. His job was to blow up missiles that went off course. (No person has blown up more missiles, and no one will ever catch up to him, since they know how to do it now.)

In my email exchanges with "Teddy", I find out slowly that Teddy is a woman. The first woman in the Range Safety Flight arena. She tells me that she was treated horribly in those early days. Except for three of her co-workers, who mentored and helped her.

One of those men was my father.

Oh.

And then she reveals that she is Hispanic.

Dang.

So my dad talked nasty at home, and acted MORE THAN honorably at work. I wish I had known that when he was alive.

Then she tells me that her daughter became an engineer also, and is currently working in Range Safety.

Wow.

Fast forward to last week. I watch Hidden Figures, the movie about black women helping in the first manned space launches. They were in Langley VA, while my dad was stationed in Cape Canaveral, not NASA but the Air Force, working on unmanned missions. But still. It all came flooding back to me -- how my dad was one of the good guys. (It was also cool to see all the actual news footage of people on the beach and parades and what-all -- I was there with my family, doing those things.)

This reminded me of Teddy. I sent her an email, telling her that I was reminded of her story and how touched anew I was.

Then the Falcon 9 launch happened. This launch on this video.

The next day, I got a response from her. Here is her email to me, lightly edited:

Thank you so much for thinking of me. The 60's were a time quite different than today. This morning It came to me just how far we women have come since then.

I stood on the balcony of my house and watched the launch of a Falcon Rocket take off in all its glory from Vandenberg knowing my daughter was the Lead Flight Safety Analyst on that mission. For the last couple of months I have listened to her tell me about all the problems she has had to deal with in preparing all the destruct lines, impact limit lines and all the other things that go into getting the mission package ready for launch and knowing what she was talking about. Boy, was I jealous. I really miss being in the middle of all that. I was/am very PROUD of my little girl being part of the missions leaving out of Vandenberg and knowing I played a small part in making all that happen just like those ladies in Hidden Figures. I have not seen the movie yet but my friends and I are looking forward to it coming to Lompoc so I can see it

Your Dad would be surprised to learn that most of the new Flight Safety Analysts are now all women.

Yeah, the site I pulled this from insinuated that the planes "spontaneously" flew off unmanned. These planes all had pilots in them trying to navigate the force of the winds. Puts an entirely different spin on the whole situation.

Oops. He says he didn't blow up a Saturn. Never worked on the moon missions, unmanned missiles only.

I asked him why he blew up the Titan. He said it was breaking up so he "sent the destruct signal to disperse the fuel" in the safe zone.

I gotta find out what that other big missile he blew up was. Taller than an Titan. All these years I thought it was a Saturn....

Unmanned Rocket CATO (Catastrophic Accident on Take Off) has been added as a related post - related requested by eric3579.

yes, he is comparing only against manned space craft.

Even though this test flight will be unmanned, Orion is meant to take astronauts into space - a replacement for the retired Shuttle program.

2 things that weren't clear from this video - 1) can it take large payloads, or only what can fit into the capsule? 2) can it dock to the ISS ?

We have boots on the ground in Waziristan, pakistan and Yemen?

What diff does it make to you if it's a missile off an unmanned aircraft or a missile off a manned aircraft?

Drones are looking where there are no other assets. They see a guy planting an IED, they can take care of it right then. But I would imagine the process involves intelligence-gathering, a target, then a trip to the WH to get approval.

I don't believe Obama is just sticking a pin in a map, unless it involves golf courses he hasn't yet played.

Now, if you want to say you don't trust Obama to do the right thing...that we can agree on.

*dead removed by user ... guess he got discovered. From King 5 News in Seattle July 24, 2014:

Seattle's iconic Space Needle is still standing after police received reports of a drone crash at the popular tourist attraction Tuesday night.

The Seattle Police Department Blotter says witnesses reported seeing a small drone buzz around the top of the Space Needle and possibly crash into an observation deck window. Witnesses said the drone - described as a white quad-propeller unmanned aerial vehicle equipped with a camera - then glided to a nearby hotel, where it landed inside a fifth floor room.

Police said no damage was found at the Space Needle.

Investigators tracked the drone to a guest staying at the hotel. The man told police he flew his drone past the Needle, but claims it didn't hit anything. He showed video from the drone's flight, which showed people waving from the observation deck but no collision into the Needle.

The man told police he was an Amazon employee visiting from out of state and had bought the drone at a hobby shop. After police educated the man about Seattle's recent drone-related controversies, the guest agreed to not fly his drone again during his visit to Seattle.

I have the feeling this is more of a worst case scenario or complete exaggeration being used as an enrolment tool for the AMA rather than a plan set in stone. That said, the FAA is required to respond to public input before setting their rulings, and usually actually listens, so comment to them and follow the story is the best advice I've heard. Sending your $60 to AMA does NOT seem like the proper course of action except for the AMA themselves.
The law is already fairly clear about this....
Here's what the statute says about exempting model aircraft from additional regulation.
(https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr658)
"SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law
relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into
Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this
subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model
aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—
(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;
(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-
based set of safety guidelines and within the programming
of a nationwide community-based organization;
(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds
unless otherwise certified through a design, construction,
inspection, flight test, and operational safety program adminis-
tered by a community-based organization;
(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not
interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and
(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator
of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport
air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located
at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft
operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of
an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating
procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic
control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the
airport)).
(b) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall
be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue
enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who
endanger the safety of the national airspace system.
(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model
aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—
(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;
(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating
the aircraft; and
(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes."

I dislike ads like this. I class this in the emotional billy club style of argument and not the informative and persuasive kind.

One side is presenting it's own argument and version of the truth and stating that if they are right, then isn't it obvious that of course they must be right? Boo.

I'm not entirely sold on the pro F-35 counter argument, but the basic statement is that newly developed fighters always show a much higher cost per unit because research costs are so high it takes a long time for production runs to bring cost per unit down.

Truthfully I think both are missing the point, and the future is clearly and unavoidably drones. Whether we like the idea of skies dominated by unmanned aircraft or not is going to become as relevant as whether we like nuclear weapons or not. They both exist and are superior weapons so you either field them or step back and out of the way of the people that DO field them.

There will never be an easy solution, but in discussing drones there are points that deserve deliberation;
The Pakistani government cannot be seen, publicly, to condone drone strikes. However, given the carnage being done by the taliban, which they are finding difficult to contain, behind the scenes they actually do.
Terrorists existed long before drones and to believe that ceasing their use would reduce terrorism is naive and dangerous.
Manned or unmanned - and no matter what care is taken - weapons cause collateral damage. But these weapons can be highly effective, as was demonstrated in the "taking out" of the pakistani taliban leader last week.
If the terrorists had the same technology they would, certainly, use it. At the moment they are restricted to suicide bombers and maniacs with AK's who massacre innocents in schools or shopping malls etc. If/when they acquire chemical, biological, or atomic weapons you will see just how "restrained" in there use they truly are.
All weapons can be used for evil. The difference is, who controls them and how they are used. You just have to ask yourself, who would you prefer to hold the military advantage?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=10f_1188034309

Pile Up on Italian Expressway

Sorry about the quality of this vid, appears to be condensation and rain on the camera lens.
--------------------
After slushy snow re-froze on this expressway in Porto San Georgio, Ascoli Piceno, Italy, it created an ultra-slick driving surface. The result was a multi-car pile-up that was captured by an unmanned traffic camera.

*length=3:57

in short - yes. though the X-47B is unmanned, it is not a drone. instead, it’s an autonomous aerial vehicle, which means that it flies missions according to pre-programmed instructions rather than being under constant control by a ground-based pilot. this first-ever arrested landing was the highlight of three months of shore-based carrier testing, which included precision approaches, touch-and-go landings, and precision landings