Clark Veterans Cemetery, Angeles City, Philippines: Reality Check

The Clark Veteran's Cemetery, along with quite a bit more acreage around Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, got covered by volcanic ash in 1991, during a series of eruptions.

The Lemming is pretty sure that facts in the following Associated Press story are accurate - as far as they go. There's more going on than what AP apparently decided we should know, though.

'The Government Oughtta Do Something?

"U.S. Reportedly Ignoring Veterans' Graves in Philippines"
Associated Press, via FoxNews.com (July 3, 2011)

"Walking along the rows of tombstones here offers a glimpse of the wars America has fought and the men and women who waged them. But most of the grave markers have been half-buried for 20 years, and there is little hope that the volcanic ash obscuring names, dates and epitaphs will be cleared any time soon.

"Clark Veterans Cemetery was consigned to oblivion in 1991, when Mount Pinatubo's gigantic eruption forced the U.S. to abandon the sprawling air base surrounding it. Retired U.S. soldiers, Marines and sailors volunteer to keep watch, relying on donations to try to maintain the grounds, but they lament that they're helplessly short on funds to fix things, and that Washington is unwilling to help....

"... 'People celebrate on the Fourth of July but they forgot the 8,600 who helped make that freedom happen,' said former Navy Capt. Dennis Wright, who saw action in Vietnam and is now a business executive.

" 'We're trying to get the U.S. government to assume responsibility for maintaining the cemetery so we can get it up to standards ... not on nickels and dimes and donations and gifts,' said retired Air Force Chief Master Sgt. Larry Heilhecker, who served as cemetery caretaker for five years until last month...."

Should the United States government "assume responsibility for maintaining the cemetery?"

Ideally, in the Lemming's opinion, yes. The Lemming also thinks that the United States Congress, and every administration during the last half-century and more, has done a miserable job of mismanaging the government's finances.

With any luck, we won't have to auction off parts of the country to cover expenses. And that's almost another topic.

'It's the Fault of [insert villain]?'

The Lemming's been over this before: this isn't a political blog. The Lemming doesn't think that one party's always right, and that everybody who won't say so is stupid.

In this case, there's quite enough blame to go around.

The fact is that right now America's national government is in debt up to it's virtual eyeballs: and Congress is actually talking about discussing means of deliberating on a solution.

It's a start.

The financial situation being what it is, a smallish (17 acres) cemetery in the Philippines may not be really high on the list of priorities: for the American Congress, or for folks in the Philippines. Some of whom are buried in Clark Veterans Cemetery.

Besides dumping ash on Clark Veterans Cemetery, Mount Pinatubo's 1991 eruptions did more than a little damage to homes and businesses. The AP article quotes someone who recognizes the potential for tourism in connection with a revitalized (if that's the right word) Clark Veterans Cemetery.

But - right now, with Congress finally going to the trouble of appearing to be interested in fixing part of the federal government's financial mess? The Lemming doesn't think that the folks inside the beltway will be all that inclined to throw cash at Clark Veterans Cemetery.

Besides, there are other solutions.

And Now, a Little Sentiment

Since this sort of account customarily includes a certain amount of pathos, here's more from that article:

"...Workers at the cemetery north of Manila recently dug to fully expose a gravestone for an Army sergeant who died in World War II in the Philippines. They discovered his wife's name engraved under his and a long-hidden tribute: 'Daughter, sister, wife and mother of veterans.'

"It's impossible to say what else remains hidden at the 17-acre (seven-hectare) cemetery. It holds the remains of 8,600 people, including 2,200 American veterans and nearly 700 allied Philippine Scouts who saw battle in conflicts from the early 1900s to the resistance against brutal Japanese occupation troops in WWII...."
(Associated Press, via FoxNews.com)

Hey, there's nothing wrong with sentiment - particularly if it motivates a person to do something sensible.

like not giving money to some scam artist.

Charitable Contributions: Useful and Otherwise

Let's say there's this fellow in America: he reads about the plight of the cross-eyed mud hens of Piskalooska Point - both of which are, the Lemming assures you, quite fictional.

This fellow is, quite sensibly, concerned about environmental stuff. And, not quite so sensibly: Googles "Piskalooska Point cross eyed mud hens," clicks on the first link he sees, and uses his credit card to donate $10.00 USD.

Nothing wrong with Google, the Internet, credit cards, or charitable donations. And the Lemming's posted about being careful before:

• "Citibank Card Data Hacked!! (but keep reading)"
  (June 9, 2011)
• "Giving: From the Heart, and Other Vital Organs"
  A Catholic Citizen in America (March 17, 2011)
• "Counterfeit Postage Stamps: No Kidding"
  (December 6, 2010)
• "Credit Card Fraud: A Few Cents Here, a Few Dollars There"
  (June 28, 2010)

Bottom line? Giving to a bogus charity may make a person feel good - for a while - but that's about it.

Finding a charity that's not a scam? It's not all that hard, and the Lemming thinks it's worth the extra effort.

Now, about Clark Veteran's Cemetery, Philippines.

The Lemming found a very nice-looking website, right at the top of Google's list, written in coherent English. It looked like a nice place to suggest.

The Lemming did a little checking - pure routine, using a fairly high-profile WHOIS lookup service. That nice-looking website's URL was registered to a fellow with a very 'American' name, and a physical address - - - about halfway between the Philippines and the contiguous 48 states.

Names, Identities, and Getting a Grip

'American' name? Make that an 'Anglo' name. Not everybody whose name suggests ancestry in the United Kingdom is an American - quite a few live in the United Kingdom, for starters. And not all Americans are WASPs. Most of us aren't, by now, and that's another topic.

That website may be legitimate - and just happens to be run by someone with a name that's foreign to the continent where it's registered. Or, it may not be. The Lemming might be able to work out who and what's actually running that show - but that could take time.

Another quick search found that there's a VFW post (VFW Post 2485, Angeles City, Philippines www.vfwpost2485.com) They're actively maintaining the Clark Veterans Cemetery, and willing to accept donations to help them get the job done.

They're also not mentioned in the AP article. Understandably, since VFW Post 2485, Angeles City, Philippines is apparently

• Trying to restore and maintain the cemetery themselves
• Not waiting until a government agency spends money
• Quite willing to accept financial help
  • From folks who aren't from the government

The Lemming checked - the person who registered VFW Post 2485's URL is with Post 2485, and the registration contact information matches Post 2485's. Looks like VFW Post 2485 exists, runs the website in question, and is actually doing something about Clark Veterans Cemetery.

So, does the Lemming think you have to give them money? That's up to you. Before you do, check them out yourselves. Just a suggestion, of course.

Now, a few pages at VFW Post 2485's website:

• VFW Post 2485 - Clark Cemetery
  Cemetery Personnel
• VFW Post 2485 Clark Veterans Cemetery Burials and Other Memorials
• VFW Post 2458
  home page

Not-entirely-unrelated posts:

• "Lemming Tracks: Inflatable Sharks? Swell!"
  (June 28, 2011)
  • No, really
• "It's Mother's Day in the Philippines - 'Read All About It' "
  (May 9, 2009)
  • The link's outdated
  • The content isn't
• "Swine Flu 2009 on World Tour"
  (April 28, 2009)
• "Memorial Day 2008: This isn't 1965"
  (May 26, 2008)
• "The Life of an Oregano Addict: An Unexpected Blog"
  (April 22, 2008)

Railgun: From the 1933 Electric Machine Gun to 2010 Cannon

---

Preface: It would be nice, in the Lemming's opinion, if everybody would always be nice. That doesn't happen. I've discussed niceness, war, and reality, in "War is Not Nice," Another War-on-Terror Blog. The Lemming will omit the customary hand-wringing in this post, regarding the need for weapons.

---

A railgun is a staple science fiction weapon. Unlike guns that use a small explosive charge, or compressed gas, to accelerate a projectile; a series of electromagnets in a railgun's 'barrel' act on a projectile, one after another.

As the projectile reaches each electromagnet, it shuts off and the next one is turned on.

Theoretically, very high muzzle velocities should be possible.

This isn't a new idea. A 1933 patent application describes a machine gun that uses magnetic flux instead of "gun powder or the like." We don't have electric machine guns today: quite likely because back in 1933 we didn't have high-output portable generators.

As David S. Zondy said, in his Tales of Future Past page on railguns, "...Mr. Virgil Grigsby of San Augustine Texas went for the small-scale version of what today is known as a "railgun" when he patented his electric machinegun, which would have revolutionised warfare if the extension cord had stretched a bit further...." ("Railgun," Tales of Future Past)

That was then. This is now:


(U.S. Navy video by John Williams, via FoxNews.com, used w/o permission)

"Navy Sets World Record With Incredible, Sci-Fi Weapon"
John R. Quain, Military Tech, FoxNews.com (John R. Quain)

"A theoretical dream for decades, the railgun is unlike any other weapon used in warfare. And it's quite real too, as the U.S. Navy has proven in a record-setting test today in Dahlgren, VA.

"Rather than relying on a explosion to fire a projectile, the technology uses an electomagnetic current to accelerate a non-explosive bullet at several times the speed of sound. The conductive projectile zips along a set of electrically charged parallel rails and out of the barrel at speeds up to Mach 7.

"The result: a weapon that can hit a target 100 miles or more away within minutes.

" 'It's an over-used term, but it really changes several games,' Rear Admiral Nevin P. Carr, Jr., the chief of Naval Research, told FoxNews.com prior to the test.

"For a generation raised on shoot-'em-up video games, the word 'railgun' invokes sci-fi images of an impossibly destructive weapon annihilating monsters and aliens. But the railgun is nonetheless very real.

"An electromagnetic railgun offers a velocity previously unattainable in a conventional weapon, speeds that are incredibly powerful on their own. In fact, since the projectile doesn't have any explosives itself, it relies upon that kinetic energy to do damage. And at 11 a.m. today, the Navy produced a 33-megajoule firing -- more than three times the previous record set by the Navy in 2008...."

33 Mega-whats?!

The energy involved, 33 megajoules, may not seem like much: although "mega" is an impressive syllable. Briefly, a joule is a measure of energy. A megajoule is, what else? - 1,000,000 joules. A joule is the energy involved in moving one meter with the force of one newton. A newton is the force it takes to accelerate one kilogram at 1 meter per second per second.

Another way of putting it is that the energy in one kilowatt-hour is about 3.6 megajoules. On the unlikely chance that you want more of that, Australian Academy of Science and GCSE.com websites define these and other terms.

33 Megajoules: How Bad Can That Be?

If the Lemming did the math right, at typical American energy costs, that 33 megajoules of energy costs between 20 cents and two dollars. That's according to EnergyVortex.com. We're apparently supposed to feel guilty about the power grid, by the way. Destroying the environment and all that.

The FoxNews.com article translates the railgun's destructive potential in a less geeky, more readily understood way. In the Lemming's opinion.

"...A single megajoule is roughly equivalent to a 1-ton car traveling at 100 mph...."
(FoxNews.com)

So: let's say one of those semitrailers that carries maybe a dozen cars is barreling down a freeway at 100 miles an hour. And hits a bridge piling. It's going to be bad for the driver: also anybody driving nearby; the bridge piling; and quite possibly the bridge.

33 megajoules is a lot of energy.

Why Railguns?

The Lemming could insert the conventional hand-wringing about the not-niceness of violence here: but you've heard it all before. Moving on.

Since railgun projectiles are essentially solid pieces of metal, with no explosives: if one is dropped, it won't explode. Navy crews who handle munitions would have one less thing to worry about. The railguns themselves don't use explosives to accelerate the projectiles: so that's another worry gone.

There are logistical and tactical advantages, too - discussed briefly in the article.

Impossible? In 1933, Yes

Navy ships with railguns won't be around for several years. There are still very serious technical issues to be ironed out. Back to that article:

"...The projectile is no cannon ball, either. At speeds well above the sound barrier, aerodynamics and special materials must be considered so that it isn't destroyed coming out of the barrel or by heat as it travels at such terrific speeds.

"Then there's question of electrical requirements. Up until recently, those requirements simply weren't practical. However, the naval researchers believe they can solve that issue using newer Navy ships and capacitors to build up the charge necessary to blast a railgun projectile out at supersonic speeds. Ellis says they hope to be able to shoot 6 to 12 rounds per minute, 'but we're not there yet.'

"So when will the railgun become a working weapon? Both Ellis and Carr expect fully functional railguns on the decks of U.S. Navy ships in the 2025 time frame...."
(FoxNews.com)

Video, and the Boom Explained

A Wired article's video includes USN footage of the recent railgun test:
"Video: Navy's Mach 8 Railgun Obliterates Record"
Spencer Ackerman, Danger Room, Wired (December 10, 2010)

"There wasn't much left of the 23-pound bullet, just a scalded piece of squat metal. That's what happens when an enormous electromagnetic gun sends its ammo rocketing 5,500 feet in a single second.

"The gun that fired the bullet is the Navy's experimental railgun. The gun has no moving parts or propellants — just a king-sized burst of energy that sends a projectile flying. And today its parents at the Office of Naval Research sent 33 megajoules through it, setting a new world record and making it the most powerful railgun ever developed.

"Reporters were invited to watch the test at the Dalghren Naval Surface Warfare Center. A tangle of two-inch thick coaxial cables hooked up to stacks of refrigerator-sized capacitors took five minutes to power juice into a gun the size of a schoolbus built in a warehouse. With a 1.5-million-ampere spark of light and a boom audible in a room 50 feet away, the bullet left the gun at a speed of Mach 8.

"All that energy was 'dump[ed] in 10 milliseconds,' says Charles Garrett, project manager at Dahlgren for the railgun.

But since there no explosion powering the projectile, why should the railgun have made any noise at all? Answer: the bullet went so fast it released a sonic boom."

The video's been making the round: on usnavyresearch's YouTube channel and cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com, for example.

Here's that YouTube video reduced to fit in this blog. The full-size display is on YouTube:

"Electromagnetic Railgun world record setting event"

usnavyresearch, YouTube (December 10, 2010)
video, 0:50

"The Office of Naval Research Electromagnetic Railgun located at the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division, fired a world-record setting 33 megajoule shot, breaking the previous record established January, 31, 2008."

Related posts:

• "Spaceships Launched on Rails: Not-So-New Idea Proposed"
  (September 15, 2010)
• "Ray Guns are Science Fiction: Energy Weapons? Not So Much"
  (July 22, 2010)
• "Set PHASERs on Stun: Koloc's Kugelblitz Research is For Real"
  (February 20, 2009)
• "Binder Clips and #2 Pencils: Deadly Weapons?!"
  (September 2, 2008)
• "Boeing Building Laser Gunship: No, Really"
  (December 15, 2007)

Like this post? Tweet it: Tweet Or, not: your choice.

Ray Guns are Science Fiction: Energy Weapons? Not So Much

"Laser weapon system shoots down UAV"
R&D Magazine (July 20, 2010)

"Raytheon has just publicly revealed its next-gen directed energy weapon at the Farnborough Air Show in Australia, and has released a video showing its Laser Weapons System (LaWS) -- a six-laser weapon that focuses on a single target -- engaging and then destroying an unmanned aerial vehicle from the deck of a Navy vessel at sea.

" 'These engagements validate the operational viability of the Phalanx-LaWS combination at sea,' said Dr. Taylor W. Lawrence, president of Raytheon Missile Systems. 'The Raytheon- Navy team demonstrated the systems' capability to detect, track, engage and defeat dynamic targets at tactically significant ranges in a maritime environment.'

"The tests, conducted in May and June, show the LaWS illuminating and then heating the underside of a drone aircraft shortly before it goes up in flames and loses trajectory, plummeting into the ocean below. Guided by Raytheon's Laser Close-in Weapon System (CIWS), a sensor suite that locks onto and guides the energy weapon, LaWS shot down three similar drones during the tests, which mark the first time a solid-state laser has shot down an aircraft on the wing over open seas...."

Solid-state lasers are a sort of good news/bad news matter. Good news, they're smaller and don't require toxic chemicals and are smaller than their chemical cousins; bad news, they don't generally produce as much power.

Still, it looks like Raytheon worked the bugs out of surface-to-air energy weapons. No small feat, considering the knack our atmosphere has for absorbing energy: particularly if there's a lot of water vapor present.

Related posts:

• "Set PHASERs on Stun: Koloc's Kugelblitz Research is For Real"
  (February 20, 2009)
• "Boeing Building Laser Gunship: No, Really"
  (December 15, 2007)

More:

• "Raytheon's Phalanx Sensors Used in Laser Shoot Down of Airborne Targets"
  News Archive, Raytheon (July 19, 2010)

American Military Language: Sometimes a Shower Shoe isn't a Shower Shoe

"list of military terms, acronyms and expressions"
Marines staff, MRE Soup (October 7, 2009)

"Sea dust: Naval term used for table salt.

"SLRP: Acronym used for Survey, Liaison & Reconnaissance Party – an organization formed from a Marine air-ground task force and Navy support element, which is introduced into an objective area prior to arrival of the fly-in echelon.

"And a wake-up: Expression used when counting down the days before leaving an assignment or duty station.

"Shower shoe: A nickname of endearment given to junior Marines fresh from boot camp… before they reach the nickname of 'boot.'

"FEBA: Acronym used for the Forward Edge of the Battle Area, the line of departure where a unit enters enemy territory...."

It's not a complete list - by far - of "military terms, acronyms and expressions." This short post does, though, go beyond the official terminology, with terms from Marines culture, like "shower shoe."

I'm fascinated by language - the way people express ideas, feelings, relationships and more. And, by the way language reflects the culture that is using it.

For a more buttoned-down look at American military terminology, check out:

• "DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms"
  DTIC Online (2001, amended April, 2010)
  • pdf version of JP 1-02, "DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms"

Then, there's the slightly less official - but apparently well-documented:

• "U.S. Military Abbreviation and Acronym List"
  George Edw. Seymour, George Edw. Seymour, Ph.D., Systems Information Resources (SIR)

Posts about words, what they mean and how they're used:

• "How do You Pronounce "Eyjafjallajökull," or "Eyjafjallajokull:" You Know, Iceland's Volcano?"
  (April 24, 2010)
• "Sesquipedalian!"
  (April 3, 2010)
• "What's a Vook about Hopping Rotochutes with Gigavision, Spying on a Shootout?"
  (January 14, 2010)
• "Squab! Who Would Want to Eat a Soft Padded Sofa?!"
  (January 14, 2010)
• "At Last: Mother Carey's Chickens, Explained"
  (December 15, 2009)

---

A tip of the hat to USMC, on Twitter, for the heads-up on the MRE Soup post.

Programmable Matter: Today, Robotic Origami; Tomorrow, Claytronics

"Video: Pentagon's Shape-Shifting Bot Folds Into Boat, Plane"
Danger Room, Wired (June 29, 2010)

"Even for the Pentagon's science-fiction division, it seemed like a stretch. But in 2007, Darpa really did launch an effort to build programmable matter that could reconfigure itself on command. Then, two years later, Harvard and MIT researchers really did make progress building “self-folding origami” that just might be able to twist themselves into different shapes. Yesterday, Darpa-backed electrical engineers at the two schools released the stunning results: a shape-shifting sheet of rigid tiles and elastomer joints that can fold itself into a little plane or a boat on demand...."


video, 0:57

There's another copy video on YouTube: the same thing, except it loads faster:

"Shape-shifting sheets automatically fold into multiple shapes .flv"

suchitaher9, YouTube (June 29, 2010)
video, 0:57

"...A programmable sheet self-folds into a boat- and into a plane-shape
Credit: Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, and MIT/CSAIL."

That little sheet of motorized triangles may not look very practical: unless you have a need for tiny boats and airplanes. The Lemming is impressed that DARPA and all have made a sheet of material that folds into different shapes - on its own.

It's one thing to have a cool idea for some new technology.

Making a working prototype: that's another step. And, sometimes, a big one.

Another Approach to Programmable Matter: Claytronics

This YouTube video gives a pretty good look at what we'll probably be seeing in - five years? a decade? Depends on how difficult it is to make the technology user-friendly, and what sort of market there is for it: mostly the latter, I suspect.

"NEXT WORLD - Intel Claytronics (Programmable Matter)"

suhelbrar, YouTube (April 05, 2009)
video, 3:14

" 'Claytronics' is an emerging field of engineering concerning reconfigurable nanoscale robots ('claytronic atoms', or catoms) designed to form much larger scale machines or mechanisms. Also known as 'programmable matter', the catoms will be sub-millimeter computers that will eventually have the ability to move around, communicate with other computers, change color, and electrostatically connect to other catoms to form different shapes. The forms made up of catoms could morph into nearly any object, even replicas of human beings for virtual meetings.

The "Claytronics" video emphasizes the technology's potential for communications. Maybe this time, the predictions will be right. I remember the videophone of the sixties, and predictions that we'd all be talking to each other on the things by now.

Well, some of us are: via the Internet and webcams. But the videophone/picture phone never really took off, apart from a little videoconferencing now and then.

I think that's partly because a whole lot of people don't want to be seen when they pick up the phone. Here's what I look like - and I had time to get ready for the photo:



Think about it: would you like to get a call while you were cleaning out the grease trap, or waking up - and have someone see you, as-is?

I could be wrong, of course.

Where I think Claytronics has real possibilities is shown in that video, too: cellphones that become laptops - or anything else with a manual user interface; furniture that morphs to fit what you want at that moment; pictures on the wall that change - use your imagination! Forget 2D pictures.

Think about a sculpture that's what you want it to be - with (how many?) variations. My guess is that if the manufacturer is smart, they'll do what some ballpoint pen companies have done - sell the basic unit at a loss, and make their profit by selling/renting/leasing virtual modules with new and different art.

Then there's what can be done to streamline research and development of complex machines like automobiles and industrial robots.

The 21st century is starting to look like, well, the 21st century.

Related posts:

• "Programmable Matter: Next-Generation Morphing Technologies"
  (June 8, 2009)
• "The Future: Just Like Today, Only Different"

More:

• "Claytronics—Objects of Imagination"
  Carnegie Mellon University (2007)

Space Shuttle Atlantis Launch: Aerial Snapshot

"Space Shuttle Launch Seen From Jet Fighter "
Space.com (June 25, 2010)

"It's an amazing scene: A NASA space shuttle rocketing into space while U.S. Air Force pilots watch from their airborne F-15E Strike Eagle jet fighter. The stunning snapshot was taken May 14 as NASA's shuttle Atlantis soared into orbit on its final scheduled mission...."


(United States Air Force photo by Captain John Peltier, via Space.com, used w/o permission)
"Lt. Col. Gabriel Green and Capt. Zachary Bartoe patrol the skies over Kennedy Space Center, Fla., in an F-15E Strike Eagle as the Space Shuttle Atlantis launches into space for the last time. During the patrol, Strike Eagle aircrews identified and redirected five aircraft that inadvertently violated the airspace restriction put in place for the launch. Colonel Green is the 333rd Fighter Squadron commander and Captain Bartoe is a 333rd FS weapons system officer. Both aircrew members are assigned to Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, Goldsboro, N.C. Full Story...."

The Lemming doesn't, as a rule, copy this much of an article's text - but there wasn't all that much text with the article to begin with. Besides, I wanted to be sure that the names got passed along. And you'll probably want to follow the links to the Space.com article for the full-size photo. And the fuller-size photo.

That should be "more-full-size" or "bigger" photo. You get the idea.

Let's see, the Lemming's reaction: spectacular? wow? Yeah, I think that just about covers it.

Antibiotic-Resistant Superbugs and Military Research

"Pentagon to Troop-Killing Superbugs: Resistance is Futile"
Danger Room, Wired (May 24, 2010)

"A super-germ that's become a lethal threat to troops in Iraq and Afghanistan may have met its match in a novel technique that kills entire bacterial colonies within hours.

"Today's troops have a 9 in 10 chance of surviving their battle injuries. But wounds and amputation sites leave them vulnerable to infection, especially by Acinetobacter — an opportunistic pathogen (somewhat-misleadingly) nicknamed 'Iraqibacter' for its prevalence in war-zone medical facilities. As Wired Magazine reported in 2007, the bacteria has infected at least 700 American troops since 2003, and killed at least 7 people exposed to it in military clinics.

"Iraqibacter was once treated with common, easy-to-access antibiotic drugs. But in the last few years, the bacteria have developed a powerful resistance to all but one medication, called Colistin, that's got a bit of a nasty side effect: potentially fatal kidney damage.

"And since the illness afflicts relatively few people, Big Pharma companies aren't exactly lining up to develop new drugs...."

So far, nothing remarkable: This article looked like it was going to be another one of those hand-wringing specials about heartless big corporations, and all that.

Here's the next paragraph. Get ready for a surprise:

"...But a Pentagon-funded research team at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, along with small biotech firm PolyMedix, are making rapid strides toward a new line of Iraqibacter treatments — and the medications could spur the development of antibiotics that can fend off other drug-resistant ailments.

" 'We didn't set out to create a mechanism that could be applied to other illnesses,' Dr. Gregory Tew, the UMass scientist behind the project, told Danger Room. 'But it's an impressive and exciting bonus that's come of our work.'

"The scientists have already used the new type of antibiotics to effectively treat Staph infections, which kill thousands of Americans each year. Common antibiotics work by attaching to a specific molecule (like an enzyme) inside bacterial cells. With some minor adaptive changes, bacteria can alter their cell structure to prevent antibiotic binding, thereby becoming resistant to the drugs. Some infections even develop 'persister cells,' which stop growing when the antibiotics are administered, and then turn back on once a round of meds is completed.

"But Tew and co. have developed antibiotics that work from the outside to quickly destroy bacterial cells...."

Essentially, the new drugs don't make small-scale changes in the bacteria: they poke holes in the cell membranes, killing them instantly. And, short of growing the microbial equivalent of chain mail, there doesn't seem to be much the germs can do about it.

Given the resilient nature of disease organisms, I suspect that eventually there may be a super-duper-superbug that'll have that 'chain mail.' But that's another issue.

Right now, it looks like a whole lot of people will be living, who would have died otherwise. And, incredible as it may seem for someone immersed in America's dominant culture, we have the American military to thank.

Whaddaya know.

A slightly longer version of this post appeared in another of my blogs:

• "Antibiotic-Resistant Superbug: The American Military Did Something Right?!"
  Another War-on-Terror Blog (May 24, 2010)

Secret X-37B Space Plane and Amateur Astronomers

"Secret X-37B Space Plane Spotted by Amateur Skywatchers"
Space.com (May 22, 2010)

"While the U.S. Air Force is mum about the orbital whereabouts of its X-37B mini-space plane, a dedicated band of amateur skywatchers has got its cross-hairs on the spacecraft.

"The unpiloted X-37B Orbital Test Vehicle 1 was lofted on April 22 atop an Atlas launcher. It is being flown under the auspices of the U.S. Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office.

"In U.S. military tracking parlance, when the space plane reached orbit it became identified as Catalog Number 36514, 2010-015A, OTV-1 (USA 212)...."

"...But thanks to a worldwide eyes-on-the-sky network of amateurs, the spacecraft is reportedly in a 39.99 degrees inclination, circling the Earth in an orbit 401 kilometers by 422 kilometers. This data may change slightly as the vehicle's orbit is better refined, said Greg Roberts of Cape Town, South Africa, a pioneer in using telescopic video cameras to track spacecraft, chalking up exceptional results over the years...."

Looks like the X-37B launch went off on schedule. The Space.com article gives a pretty good set of information on the test flight, and what the robotic spaceplane will probably be used for.

Some of the article's written, I think, more for the amateur astronomer - or for folks who are interested in amateur astronomy. The Lemming fits into that category. I've been out on observing sessions: but I'd much rather read about using telescopes than stand out in a Minnesota field, trying to use one.

It's a pretty good writeup of this test flight of a 'secret' Air Force vehicle. Although for a 'secret' project, there's been an awful lot of publicity. I've posted about this before. Fairly often, I see.

Related posts:

• "X-37B Test Flight Scheduled For Tomorrow: Robots, Spaceships, and Feeling Safe"
  (April 21, 2010)
• "X-37B / Orbital Test Vehicle Robot Spaceplane Now an Air Force Project"
  (April 5, 2010)

More:

• "Humanity in Space: The Next Few Decades"

Fists, Eggs, and a Smoke Bomb: Ukraine's - Colorful? - Parliament

---

Note: The Lemming doesn't post about politics as a rule: but this was just too weird to ignore.

---

"Fists fly in Ukraine parliament punch up"
CNN (April 27, 2010)
(Includes video)

"Lawmakers in Ukraine scuffled with each other, throwing punches and eggs, as parliament met Tuesday to ratify a treaty with Russia that extends the latter's navy presence in the Ukraine's Crimean peninsula until 2042.

"The ruling Regions party eventually ratified the treaty but not before howls of protest from the opposition.

"Someone set off a smoke bomb inside the building, while Speaker Volodymyr Lytvyn sought refuge behind an umbrella as he was pelted with eggs...."

I suppose the MPs who didn't like the deal have a point. Russia is (bribing?) Ukraine to keep that base.

"...The deal extends Russia's lease of a major naval base in the Black Sea port of Sevastopol for an additional 25 years, in exchange for a 30 percent cut in the price of natural gas that Russia sells to Ukraine...."

I won't pretend that this is a simple situation, or that the Russian Federation is a 100% wonderful country with absolutely no imperfections. But those dudes in the Ukrainian parliament: I suppose I should remember that not all cultures have the same standards of conduct.

Maybe Members of Parliament throwing eggs and setting off smoke bombs is a cherished cultural tradition for Ukrainians. Or, not.

"Smoke grenades, eggs & tomatoes turn Ukraine parliament into battlefield"

RussiaToday, YouTube (April 27, 2010)
video, 9:34

"Ukraine's parliament has turned into a battlefield with politicians setting off smoke grenades and throwing tomatoes over the ratifying of extending the lease to Russia's Black Sea Fleet of Sevastopol's naval base. The same ratification process is underway in Russia's State Duma - but it is passing through a lot more quietly."

That video gives quite a bit of background. For example, Russia has had a naval base in Ukraine for about three centuries.

(Historical note: The Soviet Union is a strictly 20th-century phenomenon. (see "Timeline: Soviet Union," BBC) Russia, as a nation, is a whole lot older. And Russia is, except for a few less-than-ideal ports, a landlocked country.)

There's more. And, yes: It's RussiaToday. And despite the British accents - here's how RT describes itself: "...The channel is government-funded but shapes its editorial policy free from political and commercial influence. Our dedicated team of news professionals unites young talent and household names in the world of broadcast journalism...."

I'm hardly one of those folks who saw Commies behind every door, and I realize that "Russia" isn't the "Soviet Union." Also, I remember 1991.

On the other hand, I apply that proverbial pinch of salt when there's a financial connection between a news service and whatever's being covered by them.

Smoke Bombs in Congress?

What really got my attention was the smoke bomb(s).

Of course, I'm applying American standards to Ukraine's legislative body. Over here, if members of one party set off smoke bombs in Congress - after the Department of Homeland Security, FBI and possibly CIA got through with them, there'd be consequences.

Never mind the rather dim view American courts sometimes take of setting off pyrotechnic devices in (or near) federal buildings. Come the next election - we'd likely see a major shakeup in the political landscape.

Maybe Ukrainians are more laid-back about the sort of nonsense they'll put up with, when it comes to their national leaders. Me? I expect some bombast. Smoke bombs: not so much.

X-37B Test Flight Scheduled For Tomorrow: Robots, Spaceships, and Feeling Safe

---

Update (December 4, 2010)

• "X-37B Back on Earth: Photos, Facts, and the Lemming"
  (December 3, 2010)

---

"Experimental X-37B Robot Space Plane to Launch Thursday "
Space.com (April 20, 2010)

"The United States Air Force plans to launch its first robotic X-37B space plane Thursday on a mission that is a forerunner of things to come. A second mini-space plane is already under contract and is projected to be launched next year.

"New details regarding the mini-space plane and its upcoming Thursday liftoff atop an Atlas 5 booster were discussed today during a U.S. Air Force-held media press briefing.

"The X-37B vehicle's history stretches back to the late 90s, with NASA kick-starting the project. It was later picked up by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and ultimately found a home within the Air Force. The project is now under the wing of the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office. [X-37B spacecraft photos.]..."

Back in the fifties and sixties, quite a few people predicted that we'd have spaceships by the 21st century. What just about everybody missed was how many of those spaceships would be robots. Not piloted by robots, or with robots in the crew: spacecraft that were robots.

The X-37B is more of a reentry vehicle than a spaceship, but I think you get the idea.

The Space.com article does a pretty good job of summarizing what the XB-37B project is, and how it got to being ready for a test flight.

It's a test vehicle for a larger space plane: one that could carry people. But the XB-37B is also designed to get a little work done while developers learn what works- and what doesn't.

"...The small X-37B spacecraft resembles a miniature space shuttle and is equipped with its own payload bay about the size of a pickup truck bed – ample space to hold a couple of small satellites that are a few hundred kilograms each, [U.S. Air Force Deputy Under Secretary for Space Programs Gary] Payton noted.

"According to released specifications, the X-37B space plane weighs about 11,000 pounds and is just over 29 feet in length. It stands slightly more than 9 1/2 feet in height and has a wingspan just over 14 feet across.

"The initial X-37B flight is designed to loiter in space up to 270 days. After retracting its solar array and closing payload doors, the space plane would re-enter in automated mode...."

I don't have the fear that some folks had, of robot vehicles with no human hand at the controls. There are circumstances where I'd feel a lot safer, knowing that my life wasn't in the hands of some dude in the front.

Personal Reminiscence: Which Has a (Very) Little to do With the XB-37B

The automated BART trains made the news while I was living in San Francisco. The BART system pays guys to stand in the control room that's currently at at the 'front' of the train. Mostly, I suspect, to help nervous passengers feel safer.

Anyway, the 'driver' is supposed to let the train know when he's leaving the cab.

This dude noticed some kids playing with the doors of the train. So he left the cab, and the train, walked back and asserted his authority with the kids. (That's one reason for having a human around, BTW: but someone on the platform could have done the job.)

Then the train, not realizing that a token human wasn't in the cab, left the station. With the 'driver' running along the platform, trying to catch up.

No, I do not necessarily feel safer with a human at the controls.

Related posts:

• "Space Marines: Really"
  (April 18, 2010)
• "X-37B / Orbital Test Vehicle Robot Spaceplane Now an Air Force Project"
  (April 5, 2010)
• "X-51 Waverider, Bullet Trains: Change Happens"
  (March 11, 2010)
• "Crew-Optional Dragon Cargo Ship Ready for Testing Soon"
  (December 16, 2009)
• "Flight 188, Distracted Pilots, and Dangerously Impractical Software?"
  (November 27, 2009)
  • The autopilot was fine
    • But not authorized to land
  • At issue was software on the pilot's laptops
• "NASA's X-37 Project, New Technologies, and - EEEK! the Military!!"
  (October 23, 2009)
• "When it's Time to Build Spaceships, People Will Build Spaceships"
  (October 4, 2009)
• " 'Hot Eagle:' the Space Marines Are Coming"
  Another War-on-Terror Blog (October 19, 2008)

More:

• "Space Shuttle Jr."
  Air & Space, Smithsonian (January 1, 2010)
• "X-37 MSP Integrated Tech Testbed"
  Space, GlobalSecurity.org
• x37-facts.pdf
  NASA Facts (May 2003)
• x37-historical.pdf
  NASA Facts (September 2003)

Space Marines: Really

"The Very Real Plans to Put Marines in Space"
Popular Mechanics (undated, probably on or shortly before April 15, 2010)

"When then Marine Lieutenant Colone Roosevelt Lafontant first started pushing the idea of a space plane for the U.S. Marine Corps in 2002, skeptics didn't even bother to suppress their laughter. But now, with a Concept of Operations (CONOPS)—a formal military document that lays out how a particular weapon system would be used—and a completed, but not yet released Pentagon road map for the technology, people are beginning to take note of the Small Unit Space Transport and Insertion, or SUSTAIN, the notional concept of a Marine space plane.

" 'Then the laughing subsided,' says Lafontant, who now works at Schafer Corporation. 'People were really talking about it, and then it got serious. Then we finally got a CONOPS; the laughter stopped completely, and people started jumping on the technology bandwagon.'

"After decades of unsuccessful development, military space planes are finally getting some respect. On April 19 the U.S. Air Force plans to launch the X-37B, an...."

As one of the comments on this article pointed out, the X-37B is old news. What's new is that bureaucratic business-as-usual has given way to serious development.

This is idle speculation on my part: but I wonder if someone cornered a brass hat and explained that it was either a matter of backing development of something like the X-37B, or renting spaceships from Virgin Galactic or Bigelow Aerospace when the things were needed.

I've suspected, from time to time, that some of America's senior military - and civilian - leaders are still adjusting to a world where the cavalry has wheels. And sometimes flies.

That's an exaggeration, I hope: but not, I sometimes fear, by much.

Anyway: the Popular Mechanics article gives a pretty good 'behind the scenes' look at what promoters of the X-37B project deal with. I see it as a sort of confrontation between people who think that moving the Marines into the 21st century is a good idea: and folks who don't realize that things have changed in the last several decades.

It's probably hard to keep up with things, when you're a busy executive. There is, seriously, an incredible amount of fiddling detail that people in leadership positions have to deal with. That can, I think, be a distraction.

Take me, for example: I'm pushing sixty, so if I'd pursued a 'success track,' I might have lost track of what's current, back in the early seventies.

That 'career-minded' alter ego of mine might be very surprised to look up from his desk today, and see that America has seven spaceports (so far). (January 19, 2010) And that a mid-seventies proposal for orbiting solar power stations is finally getting serious attention. (December 2, 2009)

Can't I'm sorry I made the choices I did.

Related posts:

• "X-37B / Orbital Test Vehicle Robot Spaceplane Now an Air Force Project"
  (April 5, 2010)
• "X-51 Waverider, Bullet Trains: Change Happens"
  (March 11, 2010)
• "Blue Origin: Another Company Building Spaceships"
  (February 27, 2010)
• "Humanity in Space: Looking at the Big Picture"
  (January 29, 2010)
• "Power Stations in Space: No Panacea; But No Kidding, Either"
  (December 2, 2009)
• "They're Birds! They're Planes! No, It's the SWAT Team!"
  (December 4, 2009)
• "NASA's X-37 Project, New Technologies, and - EEEK! the Military!!"
  (October 23, 2009)
• "When it's Time to Build Spaceships, People Will Build Spaceships"
  (October 4, 2009)
• " 'Hot Eagle:' the Space Marines Are Coming"
  Another War-on-Terror Blog (October 19, 2008)
• "Dubai Architecture: A Photo Gallery"
  (October 25, 2008)

---

More:

• "The Future: Just Like Today, Only Different "

---

A tip of the hat to USMC, on Twitter, for the heads-up on this article.

EEEK! Synthetic Organisms From DARPA!

"Pentagon Looks to Breed Immortal 'Synthetic Organisms,' Molecular Kill-Switch Included"
Danger Room, Wired (February 5, 2010)

"The Pentagon's mad science arm may have come up with its most radical project yet. Darpa is looking to re-write the laws of evolution to the military's advantage, creating 'synthetic organisms' that can live forever — or can be killed with the flick of a molecular switch.

"As part of its budget for the next year, Darpa is investing $6 million into a project called BioDesign, with the goal of eliminating 'the randomness of natural evolutionary advancement.' The plan would assemble the latest bio-tech knowledge to come up with living, breathing creatures that are genetically engineered to 'produce the intended biological effect.' Darpa wants the organisms to be fortified with molecules that bolster cell resistance to death, so that the lab-monsters can 'ultimately be programmed to live indefinitely.'

"Of course, Darpa's got to prevent the super-species from being swayed to do enemy work — so they'll encode loyalty right into DNA, by developing genetically programmed locks to create 'tamper proof' cells. Plus, the synthetic organism will be traceable, using some kind of DNA manipulation, 'similar to a serial number on a handgun.' And if that doesn't work, don't worry. In case Darpa's plan somehow goes horribly awry, they're also tossing in a last-resort, genetically-coded kill switch:...."

The Wired article does a fairly good job of discussing the DARPA research: mostly clarifying what scientists think is so about evolution, and the remarkable difficulty biologists have had, trying to figure out why organisms die - and how to prevent it.

What's lacking is a clear picture of just what these bugs are supposed to do.

I'll skip the standard-issues stuff about the evils of science and soldiers and technology. You've probably heard it all before.

About what DARPA may have in mind for the synthetic organisms: I can think of quite a few applications, besides the tired old 'biological warfare' scenario.

For example, bioluminescence could be used to provide nightime displays with negligible power requirements. I know: we don't have control panels with living displays. Today. In my youth, we didn't have liquid crystal displays, either.

Then, a more strictly military application: what about something the size of a grain of pollen, that turns a bright orange when it lands on petrochemicals? Spray that over a road, and you might be able to get an idea of how many vehicles drove over it - and how recently.

That' all speculation, of course.

New Technology is Scary Technology

These DARPA synthetic organisms are new - and, therefore, to some, scary - technology. I figure, once news of this gets around, some American movie maker will dust off "The Satan Bug" (1965) and scare even more people.

Synthetic Organisms? Say Hello to Fido

But humans creating synthetic organisms? We've been doing that for over 10,000 years. We can do it faster and more accurately now: but that's a difference of degree, not of kind.

Dogs have been around for upwards of 14,000 years. And, although I think coincidences can happen - I really don't think it was by chance that a mutant wolf showed up that wasn't as bright as the average wolf just simply doted on humans. I think dogs are first-rate hunting companions and guardians for a reason.

Synthetic Organisms? Been There, Done That

Dogs? Synthetic? Let's see what "synthetic" means: "not of natural origin; prepared or made artificially..." (Princeton's WordNet) I'll grant that the jury's still out on exactly how wolves turned into dogs. Some researchers are holding out for the idea that those primitive people who didn't go to college couldn't possibly have done something smart.

I'm a scholar my nature: and went through college. Twice. Almost three times. (That's another story.) I acknowledge that some people with degrees are smart and capable. I also think that people don't have to have letters after their names to be competent and creative. They don't even have to wear lab coats. (See "Hard Science Fiction, Cultural Blinders and Laban's Sheep," Drifting at the Edge of Time and Space (October 29, 2009))

Then there's the matter of frankenfood. Genetically engineered food is scaring some folks silly these days. Which is odd, when you consider that most people have been eating genetically altered food for maybe 8,000 years now. (There's a reason why domestic turkeys are so buff and stupid.)

Almost-related posts:

• "Space Aliens and Killer Monster Robots - From Outer Space; or Pittsburgh"
  (January 25, 2010)
• "Next-Generation Prosthetic Hand - and Intel Says Direct Neural Interface Brain Chips by 2020"
  (December 2, 2009)
• "Tofu Turkeys, Genetically Altered Foods, and the Evil Eye"
  (November 14, 2009)
• "Hard Science Fiction, Cultural Blinders and Laban's Sheep"
  Drifting at the Edge of Time and Space (October 29, 2009)
• "Agriculture as a Mistake"
  (October 29, 2007)

More:

• "The Human Role in Dog Evolution"
  National Geographic Lesson Plan
• "Wolf to Woof"
  National Geographic article excerpt

USS New York (LPD 21)

USS New York (LPD 21)
www.new-york.navy.mil
USS New York's website

"Strength forged through sacrifice"
"Never forget"

That last phrase, "Never forget" is on the crest of the USS New York. There's a pretty good description of the crest, and a picture of it, on the USS New York's website. (new-york.navy.mil/site%20pages/crest.aspx) Also, a history of other United States Navy ships named New York over the last couple of centuries.

The USS New York went into active service today, an event covered by quite a few news services:

• "Navy ship built with WTC steel to go into service"
  The Associated Press (November 7, 2009)
• "USS New York commissioning shown on Web"
  Newsday (November 7, 2009)
• "Michael C. Fina Selected For Custom China Service For USS NEW YORK"
  Reuters (November 5, 2009)
• "New Navy ship honors 9/11 victims"
  CNN (November 2, 2009)

USS New York: Observations and Comments

The USS New York isn't built entirely of steel salvaged from the wreckage of New York City's World Trade Center: but about 7.5 tons of steel from that source is part of the bow of America's newest warship. Which is, I think, quite enough to be symbolically significant.

Quite a few people - including folks who got quoted in the news - are under the impression that the USS New York is named after New York City. The United States Navy thinks it named the ship after New York State.

The USS New York is a warship. I'll skip the traditional hand-wringing about how much nicer it would be if everybody would be nice: If you've been in America during the last four decades, you know it by heart. More specifically, it's an American warship: and America is one of the countries that sees its military as something more than a bunch of thugs hired to kill or intimidate people the leader doesn't like. "...The ship also will be used to ferry disaster relief when needed...." (CNN)

"...The $1 billion vessel was built near New Orleans by workers who survived Hurricane Katrina...." (AP, via FOXNews)

Related post:

• "USS New York 'Official' Websites"
  (November 7, 2009)

USS New York "Official" Websites

Apathetic Lemming of the North is not the official blog of the USS New York.

And, the Lemming likes it that way. Fascinating as America's newly-commissioned destroyer is, I like to discuss other topics, too.

The Official* List of USS New York Websites

* Officially designated by the Lemming, this seventh day of November, whatever year it is: as a list I put together today.

The point is, it's very easy to call something "official."

Here are two different websites, each presenting themselves as the "official" website of the USS New York commissioning:

• ussnewyork.com
  • Domain registered by Scott Koen, of Rutherford, New Jersey
  • Created September 8, 2002
• ussny.org
  • Domain registered by Gary Decavage, of Watertown, Connecticut
  • Created January 22, 2008
  • Linked to from new-york.navy.mil, The United States Navy's website for the USS New York (LPD 21)

As far as I can tell, both are very professionally-done websites with interesting content - and are on domains created by individuals with the foresight to nail down high-value domain names. I've got no problem with that: and the results are worth visiting.

But, "official?" My guess is that ussny.org has a better claim to that term, since the United States Navy's USS New York website links to that domain, as the Commissioning Website. The dot-com website may be officially sanctioned, too, for all I know.

About the Navy's USS New York website:

• URL: www.new-york.navy.mil
• Part of the navy.mil website
  • Yes, www.navy.mil is "the official U.S. Navy Web site"
    • See SECNAV INSTRUCTION 5720.47B, dated December 28, 2005

Human Nature, Impressive Words, and Healthy Skepticism

From the looks of things, "official" hasn't fared quite as badly as "genuine" or "new and improved!" as an utterance intended to convey worth and respectability. On the other hand, over the decades I've learned to be a trifle skeptical about assertions.

Not mistrusting, you understand: just willing to see what's real, before accepting a claim as a fact. Happily, there are a plethora of "whois" services available online. I use the one at GoDaddy.com - but they all draw from the same database.

I assume that a major online service company maintains an accurate "whois" service, because they need the software for their own registration services - and stand to lose a great deal, if they were to be caught at falsifying information.

About the dot-com "official" website? From what I saw, it has pretty good content, good 'production values', and isn't hurting anyone who assumes that it has a practical, working relationship with the USS New York.

American culture seems to have a very relaxed attitude toward the application of words like "official:" which is okay, as far as I'm concerned.

But I'm going to keep my habit of checking up on the background of high-profile online entities.

Related post:

• "USS New York (LPD 21)"
  (November 7, 2009)

Northwest Flight 188: Distracted by a Laptop?!

"Pilots Say They Were Distracted "
The Wall Street Journal (October 26, 2009)

"The pilots of Northwest Flight 188 on Sunday told federal investigators that they lost track of time and location -- but never went to sleep -- when they failed last week to respond to air-traffic controllers for more than an hour, according to people familiar with the crew's statements.

"During a session with a team from the National Transportation Safety Board, these people said, the cockpit crew recounted the same sequence of events it previously sketched out for airline superiors: They became distracted in conversation while cruising at 37,000 feet Wednesday night, didn't realize how long the plane had lost radio contact and flew more than 100 miles past their destination. Such a scenario is consistent with the brief statements first officer Richard Cole of Salem, Ore., made to reporters earlier in the weekend...."

Good News, The Flight Crew Wasn't Asleep; Bad News, They Weren't Flying the Plane

So far, the flight crew of Flight 188's behavior comes under the heading of 'yagottabekiddin!'

By the way: If you've been running into some articles talking about "Northwest" and others about "Delta" - they're both right, sort of. The pilots were on a Northwest airliner. Northwest is owned by Delta.

In a way, it's nice to know that members of the flight crew were probably awake. But - doing something on a laptop that was so engrossing that they overshot the airport by 150 miles? And didn't respond to air traffic control?!

This is post-9/11, folks.

There were interceptors ready to go up and deal with the nitwits: to get their attention, in this case, since Flight 188 had a worse-than-useless flight crew. If terrorists had taken over flight 188, I'm not sure what action would be taken. Probably something along the lines of what the passengers and crew of Flight 93 were involved in.

I know: it wouldn't be nice to shoot down an airliner with people in it. But it wouldn't be nice to fly an airliner with people in it into a skyscraper with people in it: and that's been done, folks. The real world tends to have big, hard facts in it, some with sharp edges. We can ignore them - but we get hurt when we do.

As for the dudes on the flight deck of Flight 188, I have some sympathy: I work and play on a computer, and sometimes lose track of time. But I don't play Donkey Kong while driving the family's van.

Related post:

• "Northwest Flight 188 Overshoots MSP - Time to Reconsider Humans on Flight Crews?"
  (October 23, 2009)

Northwest Flight 188 Overshoots MSP - Time to Reconsider Humans on Flight Crews?

"Northwest Flight Misses MSP Airport"
MyFOX9.com (October 22, 2009)

"Were you on flight 188? Call us @ 952-946-5767"

"The NTSB is investigating a case of distracted pilots at the controls after a Northwest Airlines flight overshot the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport by about 150 miles.

"According to the National Transportation Safety Board, Northwest Flight 188 from San Diego to Minneapolis lost radio contact with air-traffic controllers around 6:56 p.m. CDT on Wednesday. The Airbus A320, cruising at 37,000 feet, was carrying 144 passengers and five crew, said Delta.

"At 7:58 p.m. CDT, the plane flew over MSP Airport and continued northeast for approximately 150 miles. The MSP air traffic controller reestablished communications with the crew at 8:14 p.m. and said that the crew had become distracted and had overflown MSP, and requested to return to Minneapolis..."

The pilots apparently were discussing airline policy while the autopilot kept the airliner safe - 37,000 feet over the Minneapolis-St. Paul International airport.

I'm heartily grateful that one of the crew stayed focused.

Maybe it's time to start thinking about banning humans from critical decision-making positions: although AI research and development hasn't produced robots capable of matching the best human decision-making. (I'm only half-joking about this: September 8, 2009, April 25, 2009, April 7, 2008, March 3, 2008, October 11, 2007)

123-Foot Cruise Missile Targets American City

This isn't, putting it mildly, the point in history when it's a good idea for an American airliner's crew to aim at a metropolitan area, go on autopilot, and stop responding to traffic control.

The Airbus A320 wasn't designed as a cruise missile, but neither were the airliners that took down New York City's World Trade Center and put a hole in the Pentagon, back in 2001. Even after a flight from Denver, I'd guess that Flight 188 had enough fuel on board to turn the IDS Tower into a torch.

Which helps explain the American military's response:

"...Military fighter jets in two locations were on alert after communication was lost with the NWA plane. Pilots were in the jets on the tarmacs, fueled up and waiting for orders...."

I'm pretty sure the pilots would have tried communicating with those nincompoops in the cockpit, before getting orders to shoot the Airbus down. We've been through something like this before. ("Six Years Ago, Tomorrow: Remembering 9/11," Another War-on-Terror Blog (September 10, 2007), excerpt about Flight 85)

The FOX9 article includes a link to the Flight Track Log at FlightAware.com.

If Flight 188's flight crew decides to defend their right to put the lives of their cabin crew and passengers in danger, things could get interesting. That particular Airbus had an older cockpit voice recorder: one that only retains the last 30 minutes of cockpit chatter. (FOXNews) So the pilots could play dumb.

Dumber.

---

"Apathetic"? I've discussed this earlier today.

NASA's X-37 Project, New Technologies, and - EEEK! the Military!!

"Air Force's Secretive Space Plane Nears Maiden Voyage "
Space.com (October 22, 2009)

"You would think that an unpiloted space plane built to rocket spaceward from Florida atop an Atlas booster, circle the planet for an extended time, then land on autopilot on a California runway would be big news. But for the U.S. Air Force X-37B project — seemingly, mum's the word.

"There is an air of vagueness regarding next year's Atlas Evolved Expendable launch of the unpiloted, reusable military space plane. The X-37B will be cocooned within the Atlas rocket's launch shroud — a ride that's far from cheap.

"While the launch range approval is still forthcoming, SPACE.com has learned that the U.S. Air Force has the X-37B manifested for an April 2010 liftoff...."

The practical side of this article tells that the X-37 project is moving along. Slowly, but it's moving. That part is, for me, rather exciting. It's good to see that NASA is doing research and development for next-generation reusable vehicles like the Space Shuttle.

The rest is a discussion of the serious concerns of globally-minded persons, diligent in their efforts to constrain efforts by the military-industrial complex (the phrase isn't used, BTW) to sully the purity of space with their engines of oppression. Or, this culture's usual background noise of peackniks: it depends on your point of view.

Here's a sample:

"...'The problem with it [X37-B] is whether you see it as a weapons platform,' said Theresa Hitchens, former head of the Center for Defense Information's Space Security Program, now Director of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) in Geneva, Switzerland...."

Me? I think it would be very nice if everybody would be nice, and agree to stop being nasty. I also think that there's little in the five millennia or so of human history to suggest that the world's Caligulas and Pol Pots will be willing to go along with such a nice idea. (I'm pretty sure Pol Pot still has his fans - after all, there's the 79% of Cambodia's population that he didn't kill.)

Isn't the Lemming Supposed to be Apathetic?

I've posted an explanation of this blog's name. Briefly, the Lemming is "apathetic" in the sense that I don't care deeply, passionately, irrationally, about the 'right' things.

X-37 and NASA

For a super-secret, hush-hush project, NASA has quite a bit about the X-37 online:

"X-37 VEHICLE"
NASA

"NASA's X-37 is an advanced technology flight demonstrator, which will help define the future of space transportation - pushing technology into a new era of space development and exploration at the dawn of the new century. The X-37 will test and validate...."

There are quite a few pictures, too: Artists' renderings of the X-37, for the most part.

On the other hand, the most recent press release I saw was from April, 2004. So, if I wanted to, I could weave a tale of suspense and intrigue about what the X-37 project is really about. It wouldn't be true (at least I seriously doubt that space aliens, the Girl Scouts, and Elvis are involved), but it might be fun.

Sadly, for that I don't have time.

Related posts:

• " 'Hot Eagle:' the Space Marines Are Coming"
  Another War-on-Terror Blog (October 19, 2008)
• "EEEK! Guns! Hoplophobia and Foreign Policy"
  Another War-on-Terror Blog (December 23, 2007)

A Quite Cool USMC Television Commercial

Die-hard peaceniks should stop viewing this post immediately.

"Marine Corps - 'Knight' [Extended Version]"

Marine1763, YouTube (June 27, 2008)
video (1:00)

"Recruiting commercial for the United States Marine Corps. Semper Fidelis!"

"Semper fidelis," by the way, is Latin for "always faithful" - and is the motto of the United States Marine Corps. If you didn't get educated in American schools during the last quarter-century or so, you probably know that already. (See "Newark Schools Protected From Dangerous Six-Year-Old and His Cub Scout Gadget" (October 16, 2009))

Don't get me wrong: I've known quite a number of fine people who are also teachers, and was in the education racket for a while myself. But that's a whole different topic.

(Once again, the Lemming is "apathetic" only in the sense that I don't care intensely about the, ah, correct things.)

Now, about that television commercial: I like it. Rousing music, cool graphics, intriguing setting - and yes, I used to play FRPG (Fantasy Role-Playing Games) back in the day. From the looks of it, there are people who are into that sort of thing these days, too. And, who like to play chess.

I realize that this video is a bit controversial, since it shows those big, rough Marines in a non-unfavorable light. What can I say? I'm just not good at going along with societal norms.

Related post:

• "The Strong, the Proud, the Banned: San Francisco Can't Handle Marines"
  Another War-on-Terror Blog (September 25, 2007)

---

A tip of the hat to irish_brigid, on Twitter, for the heads-up on this.

Twitter Troubles: Denial-of-Service Attack

"Statement from Twitter on denial of service attack"
SciTechBlog, CNN (August 6, 2009)

"Here's a more detailed update on the Twitter outage. Thanks for those of you who are commenting on the situation. Please keep it up.

"Sent to CNN.com by Biz Stone, a Twitter co-founder:

"'There’s no indication that this attack is related to any previous activities. We are currently the target of a denial of service attack. Attacks such as this are malicious efforts orchestrated to disrupt and make unavailable services such as online banks, credit card payment gateways, and in this case, Twitter for intended customers or users. We are defending against this attack now and will continue to update our status blog as we defend and later investigate.'..."

And, the first comments (Comments were closed a bit later):

"Jim / August 6th, 2009 11:23 am ET
"Twitter is so last year."

"Shannon / August 6th, 2009 11:25 am ET
"Twitter is pretty lame if it can't defend against a DDOS attack. My morning is ruined."

"Cheryl in MI / August 6th, 2009 11:32 am ET
"Facebook has been acting very strangely all day, too. Has anybody determined if it is under similar attack?"

"M Carlson / August 6th, 2009 11:34 am ET
"Wasn't Twitter just banned from Armed Forces use? Wasn't the case for banning Twitter because it was being used to spread malicious lies to our servicepeople? Oops, Twitter all gone."

And so on.

M Carlson may have read this article, also on CNN:

"Marines ban Twitter, Facebook, other sites"
Wired, via CNN (August 4, 2009)

"The U.S. Marine Corps has banned Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and other social media sites from its networks, effective immediately.

" 'These internet sites in general are a proven haven for malicious actors and content and are particularly high risk due to information exposure, user generated content and targeting by adversaries," reads a Marine Corps order, issued Monday.

" 'The very nature of SNS [social network sites] creates a larger attack and exploitation window, exposes unnecessary information to adversaries and provides an easy conduit for information leakage that puts OPSEC [operational security], COMSEC [communications security], [and] personnel... at an elevated risk of compromise.'..."

Human nature being what it is, I'm pretty sure that there are people who feel, deeply and ardently, that They are behind the Twitter attack. Back when I was young, many would have been positive that They were 'the Commies.' These day's, there's a sort of smorgasbord: military-industrial complex, Iran, Muslims in general, Russia, China. There's more to the list, including shape-shifting space-alien lizard people.

I'm not quite so certain. I wasn't able to log onto Twitter until noon today, so I know that something was amiss. I'm inclined to believe that there was a directed denial of service attack. As to who is responsible? I simply don't know.

Now, about the big, bad military doing something naughty: The Marines did ban social networking sites. Not, apparently, because they were afraid of U. S. Marines being told The Truth¹ - but because software used by networking sites like Twitter could, in principle, be used to hack into computers at the Marines' end. That wouldn't be good, at least from my perspective.

I haven't nailed this down, but I've heard that other branches of the American military are, in light of the Marine Corps decision, reviewing their own policies.

This is still new technology, and a new social arena: Let's not be too surprised when there are a few unpleasant surprises.

I've found it helpful to compare the social and legal situation on the Internet to the so-called 'wild west' of America's history. There was a period where people were building towns, doing business that ranged from the legitimate to the dubious, to the outright illegal. And there were troublemakers and criminals - who were gleefully aware that the nearest legal authority might be more than a day's ride away.

Then, as now, there was sometimes trouble, like when someone decided to cut the telegraph line, or pull up the rails.

But it was a period of invention - socially and technologically - and, I think, an exciting one. Like today.

Yee-ha!

---

1The American military isn't quite what some subcultures believe it to be: "All Those Poor, Uneducated, Minorities Being Drafted in America!" Another War-on-Terror Blog (January 4, 2009).

U.S. Coast Guard Twitter Account

Nosing around - yesterday, I think, I found that several U.S. Coast Guard Twitter accounts.

• uscoastguar
  "Official Twitter account for the United States Coast Guard"
  Frequently updated: good real-time look at USCG operations
• Amver
  "Global search and rescue system sponsored by the USCG. We use commercial ships to rescue people in distress at sea."
• CGBlog
  "The official twitter account for CGBlog.org- all things Coast Guard (USCG)"

There's a U.S. Marines Twitter account, too: usmc, but they don't say much: there are four Twitters there, including the first on on November 10, 2007. The U.S. Marines usmc Twitter account's location is listed as "Everywhere."