Falcon Lost in Flight
Although I was laughing a bit yesterday at the unfortunate "artist's rendition," once I realized what we were trying to do, I was amazed. I was following the test-launch of the Falcon Hypersonic Technology Vehicle 2 on Twitter with my heart in my throat. I made it into a symbol--can we still cross a revolutionary technological barrier like this?
I was thinking of all the conversations we've had here of late about why flying is still so damned slow, and I was thinking, too, of the argument in Mark Steyn's new book that the moon landings were the high point: We just don't have what it takes anymore.
It failed. It plunged into the Pacific Ocean.
It doesn't mean it's impossible. It doesn't mean anything more than the failure of one particular test. I congratulate everyone who tried. We'd all be living in mud huts and scratching at our fleas if it weren't for people who tried.
And with that, I present what may be the biggest breakthrough in cancer research in decades:
In a small trial of advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients, genetically modified versions of their own T cells behaved like "serial killers" and hunted down and obliterated tumors, resulting in sustained remissions of up to a year. The breakthrough gene therapy treatment has been 20 years in the making, and provides a roadmap for other cancers, say researchers from the University of Pennsylvania's Abramson Cancer Center and Perelman School of Medicine, who report the results in a study published today, 11 August, in two journals: the New England Journal of Medicine and Science Translational Medicine.
I won't get hysterically optimistic, but I'm glad they're trying and I pray it works.
- Comment (23)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
May '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
That's fantastic news about the gene therapy! But as for Mark Steyn's thesis, you know what they say, Claire.
Cancer research: it ain't rocket science.
May '11
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Actually, if I'm not mistaken, this is the second failure. But it's amazing technology and sometimes it takes a while to get these things working. Hopefully they can figure out what went wrong.
May '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
I was thinking of all the we've had here of late about why flying is still so damned slow, and I was thinking, too, of the argument in Mark Steyn's new book that the moon landings were the high point: We just don't have what it takes anymore.
When we think of the Apollo missions and their glorious legacy, we are reflecting on the high point of a remarkable focus of ingenuity, creative energy, and resources. But it's easy to forget that the separation between the Eagle has landed and this unimaginable frustration was less than a decade. We are no strangers to failure.
Mar '11
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
From the UK Telegraph:
"Air Force Major Chris Schulz, the HTV-2 program manager, said: “We know how to boost the aircraft to near space. We know how to insert the aircraft into atmospheric hypersonic flight.
“We do not yet know how to achieve the desired control during the aerodynamic phase of flight. It’s vexing. I’m confident there is a solution.
We have to find it.”"
I'm a little surprised they are firing this thing off without having figured out how to control it - these days, they should be able to simulate it before testing it in real life.
Well, I guess they are firing it from CA, so that no harm can be done...
Edited on Aug 12, 2011 at 12:40amRe: Falcon Lost in Flight
Mark Wilson
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
I was thinking of all the we've had here of late about why flying is still so damned slow, and I was thinking, too, of the argument in Mark Steyn's new book that the moon landings were the high point: We just don't have what it takes anymore.
When we think of the Apollo missions and their glorious legacy, we are reflecting on the high point of a remarkable focus of ingenuity, creative energy, and resources. But it's easy to forget that the separation between the Eagle has landed and this unimaginable frustration was less than a decade. We are no strangers to failure. · Aug 11 at 11:49pm
Exactly.
And "The Right Stuff" is truly a great book. I was thinking about it all morning.
May '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
David, Simulations are based on current knowledge, they can help us to better apply knowledge but can't add anything unknown to our store of knowledge, that requires careful and often painful experimentation such as led to the success of the Apollo program.
Dec '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
I think many conservatives took it as a blow to national pride when NASA for all intents an purposes took their ball and went home to make Muslim countries feel better about their contributions to mathematics.
It is a fresh breeze in our sail to see the air force pick things up where they left off. This may even be the hope of bureaucracies collapsing and concentrating their efforts.
I hope this is a clear signal to Iran, China and all those who would stand guard against the gateway of liberty, that a slumbering giant does not do so idly.
Edited on Aug 12, 2011 at 3:13amOct '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Doing things that have never been done before is very difficult, particularly when you're attempting something which cannot be tested on the ground (no existing wind tunnel can remotely replicate the aerothermal environment in which the HTV-2 operates). At some point you just have to go and fly (or at least try) in order to obtain data which will inform further designs and simulations.
In the Discoverer/Corona program, the first U.S. reconnaissance satellite project, it took 14 launch attempts before the first film was successfully recovered from orbit.
Mar '11
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
If you can't handle having an idea fail when tested, do not become an engineer, for you will be subject to endless bouts of disappointment, frustration, and feelings of inadequacy. You would be much better off in management: ignoring the consequences of failed policies is something a significant percentage of empty suits seem to specialize in.
Hmm...maybe Obama is a born manager after all.
Mar '11
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
John Walker: Doing things that have never been done before is very difficult, particularly when you're attempting something which cannot be tested on the ground (no existing wind tunnel can remotely replicate the aerothermal environment in which the HTV-2 operates). At some point you just have to go and fly (or at least try) in order to obtain data which will inform further designs and simulations.
In the Discoverer/Corona program, the first U.S. reconnaissance satellite project, it took 14 launch attempts before the first film was successfully recovered from orbit. · Aug 12 at 4:01am
I have often wondered if the first guy to try to float across a river on a log made it to the other side, or did he end up back where he started, soaking wet, and thinking "the theory is still sound, but there is a stability issue here."
Feb '11
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
There's a 1950s science-fiction story about a guy who somehow time-travels to the future...sometime around 2011...and finds that the people living then have the technology to explore space very easily, but have not bothered because they have become so narcissistic all anyone wants to do is to study his own "psychology."
Aug '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
All my life, I've read stories about promising cancer treatments and cures that were "just around the corner". This UPenn trial seems to be different, though. The words "astonishing" and "miraculous" come to mind. One of the subjects actually became ill because the several pounds of tumor broke up and was consumed so quickly. That is a side-effect that any cancer patient would welcome. However, a concern about this treatment, as articulated by the NEJM editorialists, is that the modified T cells might be too aggressive and attack healthy tissue. A way to address this is to put a "suicide gene" in the T cells. Simply amazing stuff.
Sep '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
It seems to me that one can trace the advent of semiconductors and thus computing, the interest and all the communications breakthroughs we have experienced to the discoveries in physics from Einstein to QED, so the social change from those discoveries began in the 80s when the early discoveries were made at roughly the turn of the century. Watson and Crick did their work in the 50s. I expect we will see more change from areas of life sciences in the next 10 to 20 years than we see in electronic technology.
Dec '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
David Williamson: From the UK Telegraph:
I'm a little surprised they are firing this thing off without having figured out how to control it - these days, they should be able to simulate it before testing it in real life.
... · Aug 12 at 12:37am
Edited on Aug 12 at 12:40 am
You have far too much confidence in computer modelling. You are far from alone. The Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) folks where I work can generate models of systems that accurately predict airflow and stress on processes that we understand. On things we do not understand it is Garbage In, Garbage Out (GIGO). They do not understand what is happening; they cannot model it.
May '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
This was an exciting test and if we keep at it, we will get it.
When I was a kid, the idea of knocking down an incoming missile with a LASER was scoffed at. Well, we are very close to being able to do that now.
Despite all the muddled news, I believe this is the greatest time in history to be alive. And I believe that my children will live to see the greatest time in history to be alive when they are adults.
Feb '11
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Well, seems to me the alien ships we've been reverse-engineering at Area 51 must have some control systems we could use here. *They* fly a lot faster than Mach 16!
Actually and on a more serious note - the Space Shuttle (RIP) used to fly Mach 20+ through an entire series of evolutions to reduce speed - and it was essentially a flying brick with 60's level analog technology. Can none of that be used with a new space-plane?
Feb '11
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Well, seems to me the alien ships we've been reverse-engineering at Area 51 must have some control systems we could use here. *They* fly a lot faster than Mach 16!
Actually and on a more serious note - the Space Shuttle (RIP) used to fly Mach 20+ through an entire series of evolutions to reduce speed - and it was essentially a flying brick with 60's level analog technology. Can none of that be used with a new space-plane?
Dec '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Percival
I have often wondered if the first guy to try to float across a river on a log made it to the other side, or did he end up back where he started, soaking wet, and thinking "the theory is still sound, but there is a stability issue here." · Aug 12 at 4:20am
HA!
Made all the more funny by having uttered nearly the same phrase myself on more than one occasion.
May '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Bryan G. Stephens:
When I was a kid, the idea of knocking down an incoming missile with a LASER was scoffed at. Well, we are very close to being able to do that now.
Not just very close. We have done it.
May '10
Re: Falcon Lost in Flight
Preserved Killick: Well, seems to me the alien ships we've been reverse-engineering at Area 51 must have some control systems we could use here. *They* fly a lot faster than Mach 16!
Actually and on a more serious note - the Space Shuttle (RIP) used to fly Mach 20+ through an entire series of evolutions to reduce speed - and it was essentially a flying brick with 60's level analog technology. Can none of that be used with a new space-plane? · Aug 12 at 10:42am
Yes, a lot of the same theory is used, but the specific application is different. It's easier to design a flying brick with huge drag coefficients than a sleek, efficient, maneuverable glider. Typically the problem is not that we are unable to make reference to previous technology, but that the previous application had much wider tolerance for uncertainty. We attempt to extrapolate previous knowledge into new territory. Sometimes it works, sometimes things change when you cross previously unknown limits.
That's the case with hypersonics; we have theories that were good enough in the past, but there is less margin for error on the new problems that require more precision.