CTH
Comment:
People say Trump is a unlikable guy. The crap he puts up with contradicts that. If he was as big a dick as these others are, then they MIGHT have a point.
The Canucks are just being primo a-holes. Plain and simple. Actually, the US side made an offer that was quite generous. And now this. But somehow Trump is the bad guy.
The above goes for these Democrats, too. Hmm. Stop calling them Democrats. They've gone full blown commie pinko fags. But to say so would make ME a bad guy. Say what?!? Me a "bad guy"? You gotta be kidding me.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Sunday, August 23, 2026
Saturday, August 22, 2026
A launch pad located on the moon
8/22/26:
Fiddling around with idea to use beamed energy to get a lander/ascender to/from the lunar surface. It would be about the size of the lunar module from the Apollo Era. To guide me in the calculations, I used the link below:
Here's a link to calculate the energy
g for moon is 1.622 meters/sec2
PE = (1 kg) x (100,000 m) x ( 1.622 meters/sec2 ) equal 162200 joules
KE for escape velocity moon 2.38 km/s equal 5664400 joules
KE for 2/3 escape velocity 1271375 joules, added together to get total energy required: equal 1,433,575 joules
Therefore to roughly approximate, to launch 1 kg in lunar orbit at 100 km is equal to 1,433,575 joules / 3,600,000 Joules or about 0.4 kilowatt hour per kg.
That equals 1810 kilowatt hours energy for lunar orbit approximately for a mass about the size of the lunar module ascent stage which was 10000 pounds or 4500 kg.
Now guessing that to deliver 20 megawatt/hr of power for .1 hr or 6 minutes would be enough energy to get to lunar orbit--- to deliver that much energy would require 200 fuel cell units that could deliver 100 kilowatts each.
The idea here is to use Parkin's concept of microwave beam energy to land and take off from the moon. It would have a performance ISP equal to a nuclear thermal rocket, about 850 sec., which would save mass in landing and taking off. You would have to have a fuel supply on hand for taking off, of course. Having the fuel depot located on the moon obviates the need to bring the landing fuel with you, simplifying matters greatly.
To execute this idea, you would need a crash landing trajectory that would be interrupted by the beamed energy to slow the spacecraft down to a soft landing. That is to say, there would be no orbiting first. That would require even more energy than the calculations above--- but not too much more.
You would place a microwave unit on the moon with an energy source to run it. The energy would be beamed to the incoming lander as it gets into range. You would have to slow down from about 5000k mph to zero in less than a few minutes ( without doing the calculations). That's true because the beam may not have a range more than say 150 miles. At 5000k mph, you will cover that distance quickly.
Taking off, just reverse the process. After filling up the fuel tank of course.
The next question is: how big must the microwave unit(s) be to deliver say 30 Megawatts of power? The current guess is that you could deliver these microwave dishes in a number of landings to a yet to be determined location on the lunar surface. Each unit itself would be about the size of the lunar lander in the Apollo Era. The microwave dish would be on top instead of the ascent stage. Each dish would be an integrated unit complete with power source.
How many dishes to deliver the required power?
The rest of the topic is for later discussion.
Update:
You may need multiple launches of a the new big ass rocket being developed for a pretty penny.
Source: SPACE.com: All about our solar system, outer space and exploration
Or, you could use SpaceX's new family of Super Heavy Lifters.
The calculations were a bit foolish of me to post. It's embarrassing. I'm not trained in the physics, obviously.
Nevertheless, one does not need to know too much about it in order to see that that delta-v from the lunar surface to lunar orbit is rather low in comparison to Earth.
The lunar lander during the Apollo Era used about half the wet mass of vehicle in order to touch down on the surface. Thus, if the lander masses at about 35,000 lbs, then the mass on the surface would be 17,500 approx.
Likewise, the return to lunar orbit requires that the vehicle have approx 1/2 of its mass as propellant.
In the case of the lunar modules ascent stage, that was about 10k for the upper part of the LEM, for a propellant load requirement of about 5k lbs.
Using different propellants would change the numbers a bit, but it's a good approximation. That is, unless you start doing things like the Parkin concept. Then it would require much less propellant to get to lunar orbit. That's because the ISP would be comparable to a nuclear thermal rocket, which was around 900.
It makes a lot of sense to use the moon as a waystation on the journey to Mars. Perhaps that's why Elon Musk is going to go to the moon.
Of course, that means a lot of preparation first.
Fiddling around with idea to use beamed energy to get a lander/ascender to/from the lunar surface. It would be about the size of the lunar module from the Apollo Era. To guide me in the calculations, I used the link below:
Here's a link to calculate the energy
Potential energy (PE) is just weight multiplied by distance upward; this is the same weight multiplied by distance upward, which is the same as mass multiplied by acceleration of gravity, multiplied by distance:g for earth is about 6 times that of the moon
PE = w * h = m * g * h
g for moon is 1.622 meters/sec2
Kinetic energy is just half the mass, multiplied by the square of the velocity:calculations for 100 km above moon:
KE = ½ * m * v2
PE = (1 kg) x (100,000 m) x ( 1.622 meters/sec2 ) equal 162200 joules
KE for escape velocity moon 2.38 km/s equal 5664400 joules
KE for 2/3 escape velocity 1271375 joules, added together to get total energy required: equal 1,433,575 joules
A Kilowatt-Hour is 1000 Watts for one hour, which is 1000 Joules per second for 3600 seconds, or 3.6 million Joules.
Therefore to roughly approximate, to launch 1 kg in lunar orbit at 100 km is equal to 1,433,575 joules / 3,600,000 Joules or about 0.4 kilowatt hour per kg.
That equals 1810 kilowatt hours energy for lunar orbit approximately for a mass about the size of the lunar module ascent stage which was 10000 pounds or 4500 kg.
Now guessing that to deliver 20 megawatt/hr of power for .1 hr or 6 minutes would be enough energy to get to lunar orbit--- to deliver that much energy would require 200 fuel cell units that could deliver 100 kilowatts each.
The idea here is to use Parkin's concept of microwave beam energy to land and take off from the moon. It would have a performance ISP equal to a nuclear thermal rocket, about 850 sec., which would save mass in landing and taking off. You would have to have a fuel supply on hand for taking off, of course. Having the fuel depot located on the moon obviates the need to bring the landing fuel with you, simplifying matters greatly.
To execute this idea, you would need a crash landing trajectory that would be interrupted by the beamed energy to slow the spacecraft down to a soft landing. That is to say, there would be no orbiting first. That would require even more energy than the calculations above--- but not too much more.
You would place a microwave unit on the moon with an energy source to run it. The energy would be beamed to the incoming lander as it gets into range. You would have to slow down from about 5000k mph to zero in less than a few minutes ( without doing the calculations). That's true because the beam may not have a range more than say 150 miles. At 5000k mph, you will cover that distance quickly.
Taking off, just reverse the process. After filling up the fuel tank of course.
The next question is: how big must the microwave unit(s) be to deliver say 30 Megawatts of power? The current guess is that you could deliver these microwave dishes in a number of landings to a yet to be determined location on the lunar surface. Each unit itself would be about the size of the lunar lander in the Apollo Era. The microwave dish would be on top instead of the ascent stage. Each dish would be an integrated unit complete with power source.
How many dishes to deliver the required power?
The rest of the topic is for later discussion.
Update:
You may need multiple launches of a the new big ass rocket being developed for a pretty penny.
Source: SPACE.com: All about our solar system, outer space and exploration
 |
| Falcon XX would have lift capacity equivalent to Saturn V or new SLS rocket |
Friday, August 21, 2026
DNI Tulsi Gabbard Gives Update Following Surgery for Husband Abraham Williams
8/21/26:
The Conservative Treehouse
Comment:
Same thing I was diagosed with--sacral chordoma.
He had a surgery, I elected to have proton therapy, which is a type of radiation.
He seems rather young. But I suppose this condition can crop up at any age, but most likely than not, at an older age than what he appears to be.
Chordomas can happen at young ages, but those who get it in younger ages tend to get it closer to the skull according to age. That is to say, a young person gets it in the skull, someone older, perhaps the neck, and someone OLD like me, in the sacrum.
Every case is different, I suspect. I have survived mine by nine years so far. The average lifespan after diagnosis back when I got it was five years. Let us hope Mr. Williams will have a lot of life left.
Mrs. Gabbard gives an update on her husband's progress in recovering from this disease. He must have a tremendous pain tolerance to avoid painkillers. I'd like to think I'm not that big of a wuss. By the way, I kinda wonder why they refused radiation. Was proton therapy not an option? Hard to see that it wouldn't have been. If he had chosen radiation, he would've had a lot easier time of it. Tough guy, eh?
The Conservative Treehouse
Comment:
Same thing I was diagosed with--sacral chordoma.
He had a surgery, I elected to have proton therapy, which is a type of radiation.
He seems rather young. But I suppose this condition can crop up at any age, but most likely than not, at an older age than what he appears to be.
Chordomas can happen at young ages, but those who get it in younger ages tend to get it closer to the skull according to age. That is to say, a young person gets it in the skull, someone older, perhaps the neck, and someone OLD like me, in the sacrum.
Every case is different, I suspect. I have survived mine by nine years so far. The average lifespan after diagnosis back when I got it was five years. Let us hope Mr. Williams will have a lot of life left.
Some favorable political news for the GOP
8/21/26:
Folks have not caught on to what Trump is doing for the country. Other countries have been living off our generosity. Trump is changing that. What does this do? It makes life more affordable, which the Democrats claim that they want to do. One thing that will show up soon, but maybe not soon enough to get the message out, is to reduce prescription drug prices.
The left-wing noise machine is making out the inflation as out of control, but it isn't really. Even with higher gasoline prices, the CPI is not showing those kind of increases. Inflation is still well-controlled, and it will get better and better.
The Democrats have no answers. Just complaints, fear, and loathing.
President Trump doesn't enjoy great favorability numbers. So he needs a boost where he can find one. Even though Trump is not on the ballot, a popular president cannot hurt the party in control. An unpopular president might well hurt the GOP's chances.
Here's some good news for the GOP: There's a manufacturing boom that isn't getting much attention. That's not surprising, since the media won't report anything that might help the president.
Another snippet of good news for the midterms: Prescription drug prices have seen the largest drop in more than 60 years. Since Democrats are running on affordability, this should blunt their message.
The rise of the wacko element of the lunatic-fringe-left doesn't hurt either. The down side to that news is that there may be too many who no longer think these people are bad news. But they are.
I guess this explains a few things
8/21/26:
It seems that Barnhardt has always been against Donald Trump. He's a crypto-Jew, or something like that.
I never got it, so I must be from Rio Linda.
Maybe the press will ax him if he's a crypto-Jew. That is, if the press actually gave a flip one way or the other.
One has to ax oneself this one: What if he IS Jewish? The one thing that MIGHT get me a bit riled is if he expected me to worship his ass.
I think he's a good president, maybe even the best we've had since I've been around. But I don't worship anybody, including him.
That's all for me on this subject.
There's a follow-up on Barnhardt on this crypto-Jew business.
I spent about an hour listening to this, and decided that's enough.
At some point, a person can jump the shark. It may be too early to say, but Miss Barnhardt may have really done it this time.
But maybe not. I kinda doubt that anybody can take over in the manner she is saying UNLESS there is a curtailment of free speech.
If Trump ever does anything like that, I'd say it is a red flag.
But get this: Even if this was the case, and everything she says is right, he cannot do it without essentially wiping out the checks and balances in the Constitution. But she knocks the founding of America, too. Trump cannot be the Devil that casts himself out of hell. A Kingdom Divided against itself cannot stand.
In other words, you cannot "save" America by destroying it.
It seems that Barnhardt has always been against Donald Trump. He's a crypto-Jew, or something like that.
I never got it, so I must be from Rio Linda.
Maybe the press will ax him if he's a crypto-Jew. That is, if the press actually gave a flip one way or the other.
One has to ax oneself this one: What if he IS Jewish? The one thing that MIGHT get me a bit riled is if he expected me to worship his ass.
I think he's a good president, maybe even the best we've had since I've been around. But I don't worship anybody, including him.
That's all for me on this subject.
SpaceX Starship Towed Near Christmas Island
8/21/26:
Which is a territory of Australia, if memory serves. Is that the plan? Or what's the plan now?
AI discussion of the joint:
please give information about christmas island
**Christmas Island** is an Australian external territory in the Indian Ocean, located approximately 224 miles (360 km) south of Java and 870 miles (1,400 km) northwest of Australia. The island covers 135 square kilometers (52 square miles) and is administered by Australia, with its capital at **Flying Fish Cove**.
**Naming and History**: The island was first sighted by Europeans in 1615 but was officially named on **Christmas Day, 1643**, by Captain William Mynors. It was annexed by Great Britain in 1888 due to its rich phosphate deposits, administered by Singapore until 1958, when it became an official Australian territory.
**Geography and Environment**: Christmas Island is the summit of an underwater mountain, with its highest point being **Murray Hill** at 1,184 feet (361 meters). The island is covered largely by tropical rainforest, with two-thirds designated as a **National Park**. It is often called the "**Galapagos of the Indian Ocean**" due to its high level of endemic species and minimal historical human disturbance.
**Wildlife**: The island is world-famous for the annual migration of the **Christmas Island red crab** (*Gecarcoidea natalis*), with populations estimated in the tens of millions. These crabs migrate from the rainforest to the coast to breed. The island also supports unique seabirds, reptiles, and insects, though the Christmas Island shrew was declared extinct in 2025.
**Accessibility and Culture**: Travel is primarily via **flights from Perth, Australia**, which take about three hours, or by yacht/cruise ship. The population is approximately 1,700–2,200 people, consisting mainly of ethnic Chinese, European, and Malay communities. The official language is English, though Malay and Chinese dialects are widely spoken. The economy relies on phosphate mining, government services, and growing tourism.
There's not much there. Maybe there's a harbor?
Yes, **Christmas Island** has a harbor located at **Flying Fish Cove**, which serves as the territory's main settlement and primary port.
### Harbor Facilities and Operations
The harbor is the only safe anchorage on the island, characterized by a steep underwater drop-off and deep-water approaches. It does not feature traditional alongside wharf berths for general docking; instead, it utilizes a **catenary buoy mooring system** with three main berths:
* **Phosphate Loading Jetty:** The main berth, capable of accommodating vessels up to 180 meters in length for exporting rock phosphate.
* **General Cargo Berth:** Located inshore, used for importing supplies and general goods.
* **Fuel Berth:** Situated at Smith Point for refueling operations.
### Accessibility and Limitations
Access to the harbor is **weather-dependent** and can be restricted by swell and surge, as the cove is open to the north.
* **Commercial Shipping:** The port handles bulk mineral exports and containerized imports, with a maximum vessel draft of approximately 6.1 meters for general cargo operations.
* **Yachts and Visitors:** Visiting yachts are welcome but must use designated mooring buoys (fees apply); **anchoring is prohibited** to protect coral formations. There is no marina, haul-out facility, or significant repair yard, making the harbor suitable only for short stopovers.
* **Cruise Ships:** Large cruise vessels cannot dock and must anchor offshore, tendering passengers to a basic cargo pier near London Village (note: this refers to Kiritimati/Christmas Island in Kiribati; for the Australian territory, facilities are similarly limited to cargo jetties).
Comment:
What's going on with shipping guy again...
If SpaceX can get it into the Harbor at Christmas Island, then perhaps a semi-submersible ship can be slid underneath the ship and thus placed aboard the re-floated ship for shipment back to the States. This is how the USS Cole was retrieved after a terrorist attack on Columbus Day 2000.
Yesterday:Which is a territory of Australia, if memory serves. Is that the plan? Or what's the plan now?
AI discussion of the joint:
please give information about christmas island
**Christmas Island** is an Australian external territory in the Indian Ocean, located approximately 224 miles (360 km) south of Java and 870 miles (1,400 km) northwest of Australia. The island covers 135 square kilometers (52 square miles) and is administered by Australia, with its capital at **Flying Fish Cove**.
**Naming and History**: The island was first sighted by Europeans in 1615 but was officially named on **Christmas Day, 1643**, by Captain William Mynors. It was annexed by Great Britain in 1888 due to its rich phosphate deposits, administered by Singapore until 1958, when it became an official Australian territory.
**Geography and Environment**: Christmas Island is the summit of an underwater mountain, with its highest point being **Murray Hill** at 1,184 feet (361 meters). The island is covered largely by tropical rainforest, with two-thirds designated as a **National Park**. It is often called the "**Galapagos of the Indian Ocean**" due to its high level of endemic species and minimal historical human disturbance.
**Wildlife**: The island is world-famous for the annual migration of the **Christmas Island red crab** (*Gecarcoidea natalis*), with populations estimated in the tens of millions. These crabs migrate from the rainforest to the coast to breed. The island also supports unique seabirds, reptiles, and insects, though the Christmas Island shrew was declared extinct in 2025.
**Accessibility and Culture**: Travel is primarily via **flights from Perth, Australia**, which take about three hours, or by yacht/cruise ship. The population is approximately 1,700–2,200 people, consisting mainly of ethnic Chinese, European, and Malay communities. The official language is English, though Malay and Chinese dialects are widely spoken. The economy relies on phosphate mining, government services, and growing tourism.
There's not much there. Maybe there's a harbor?
Yes, **Christmas Island** has a harbor located at **Flying Fish Cove**, which serves as the territory's main settlement and primary port.
### Harbor Facilities and Operations
The harbor is the only safe anchorage on the island, characterized by a steep underwater drop-off and deep-water approaches. It does not feature traditional alongside wharf berths for general docking; instead, it utilizes a **catenary buoy mooring system** with three main berths:
* **Phosphate Loading Jetty:** The main berth, capable of accommodating vessels up to 180 meters in length for exporting rock phosphate.
* **General Cargo Berth:** Located inshore, used for importing supplies and general goods.
* **Fuel Berth:** Situated at Smith Point for refueling operations.
### Accessibility and Limitations
Access to the harbor is **weather-dependent** and can be restricted by swell and surge, as the cove is open to the north.
* **Commercial Shipping:** The port handles bulk mineral exports and containerized imports, with a maximum vessel draft of approximately 6.1 meters for general cargo operations.
* **Yachts and Visitors:** Visiting yachts are welcome but must use designated mooring buoys (fees apply); **anchoring is prohibited** to protect coral formations. There is no marina, haul-out facility, or significant repair yard, making the harbor suitable only for short stopovers.
* **Cruise Ships:** Large cruise vessels cannot dock and must anchor offshore, tendering passengers to a basic cargo pier near London Village (note: this refers to Kiritimati/Christmas Island in Kiribati; for the Australian territory, facilities are similarly limited to cargo jetties).
Comment:
Not sure what's the plan here, but there's bound to be one, right?
Anyway, here's a video:
Don't look now, but Trump may win in a landslide
8/21/26:
What is the basis of such a speculation? It comes from none other than the 538 site that I linked to awhile back. Also, a poll, which claims that Trump could get 40% of the black vote and 45% of the latino vote.
That seems like a big stretch, but maybe not. Considering that Trump is running something of a populist campaign, his appeal could result in a big victory that includes non-college educated whites, blacks, and latinos.
Testing that theory, I plugged in turnout numbers and voting percentages that came close to the poll. What the poll didn't indicate is turnout, so I played with that number a bit. The numbers I used were the following:
Doggone! There wasn't a landslide in the popular vote, but he did get about the same number of electoral votes in the actual election. He didn't get the number of black and Latino voters, but he got more than the usual GOp nominee gets.
Looking back on this, the left has managed to hold on to their voters just enough to avoid catastrophe. But how they did it is something that should worry patriots. All the phony scandals and lawfare. The disappointing part is that people fall for the nonsense.
Trump has got the be the best president in my lifetime. Better than Reagan. So what's the deal with Trump?
He's a constant promoter. Perhaps that turns people off. Well, there's that abrasive quality about him, too. If he was like Reagan in the Teflon coating department, there's no telling what he could have accomplished.
As for yours truly, I am of a practical bent. I don't give a hoot's hell about somebody's STYLE. I look for results. Which reminds me of what Lincoln was supposed to have said about General Grant. When folks objected to Grant's drinking, Lincoln replied that he understood that it was no longer a problem. But if he was still drinking, he'd inquire around and see what he was drinking and he'd give a barrel of it to the rest of his generals. Lincoln liked Grants results. He didn't give a flip about his drinking. I'm with Lincoln in that regard.
What is the basis of such a speculation? It comes from none other than the 538 site that I linked to awhile back. Also, a poll, which claims that Trump could get 40% of the black vote and 45% of the latino vote.
That seems like a big stretch, but maybe not. Considering that Trump is running something of a populist campaign, his appeal could result in a big victory that includes non-college educated whites, blacks, and latinos.
Testing that theory, I plugged in turnout numbers and voting percentages that came close to the poll. What the poll didn't indicate is turnout, so I played with that number a bit. The numbers I used were the following:
- college educated whites vote in same percentage, but turnout falls to non-college educated whites
- non-college educate whites vote in same percentage, but turnout rises to college educated whites
- blacks 61-39% in favor of Dems, but with turnout of college educated whites
- latinos 57-43% in favor of Dems with turnout the same
- asians unchanged
results Trump wins with 53.3% of the vote and 322 electoral votes.
Thus, a populist campaign can win. It would rely upon the demographic breakdowns that were in the poll, and a smattering perhaps of wishful thinking. The wishful thinking relates to how this poll stacks up to anything in the real world.
If Trump is actually doing better than this poll, especially amongst whites, it's a landslide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)