It seems that a number of government officials are holding to their concern about the prospect that the Titan 4B booster scheduled to carry a classified US NRO payload into orbit from Florida will hit the "massive" Hibernia platform.
To see if we can help allay their almost phallicly-based concerns, here's some added information on the footprint left by falling space debris.
The Titan 4B is a two stage system. That means the payload is placed in orbit after it separates from a second stage that has carried it into space. The first stage and side-mounted boosters will have burned out and fallen back to Earth shortly after the launch.
While the Titan 4B may be a 10, 000 pound system fully loaded, the second stage will be returning to Earth the farthest of all debris from the launch point, will have broken up on reentry to Earth's atmosphere and will therefore consist of smaller bits and pieces than when it was fully assembled.
In the case of the system on the pad at Canaveral for the B-30 launch, there is no second stage. It's a 403B version. Therefore, the bulk of the debris will be even closer to the launch point in Florida.
That said, I draw attention to a description of a "debris footprint" from the FAQ at this site, kept up by the Center for Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies.
In particular pay attention to this paragraph:
"The footprint width is generally determined by the effects of wind on the falling debris objects, with heavy objects affected less, and lightest the most. The width of the footprint may also be affected by the breakup process itself. For example, if the object should explode during reentry, fragments will be spread out across the footprint. A footprint width of perhaps 20-40 km is typical, with the most pronounced effects near the heel of the footprint."
If you look at the nice little graphic on that site you will see a big red area on the map representing the surface area where debris may fall.
Until someone shows me the debris footprint for this particular launch, I am going to go out on a limb and say that the Hibernia and Terra Nova rigs were 15 miles outside the red zone representing the most like region of impact for all the bits and pieces of this Titan 4(03)B.
The odds of any bits striking these platforms was small.
And for the record, I give the Premier some slack when he said something about Americans being concerned about seals but not about missiles dropping on peoples' heads. He was a bit concerned, likely based on a poor briefing. Since he loves drama and hyperbole in equal measures, he could come up with a statement that is as accurate as the one uttered by a future Premier when he talked of turbot hanging on by their fingernails.
Fish don't have fingers.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query "titan 4B". Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query "titan 4B". Sort by date Show all posts
07 April 2005
Look to the skys!
A bizarre afternoon in Newfoundland and Labrador, what with the Premier calling a hasty news conference to talk about American missiles falling from the sky and coming close to the "massive" Hibernia platform. Such was the panic that there was a plan to evacuate the Hibernia platform and the Terra Nova FPSO and tow another semi-submersible rig out of the potential impact area.
Well, here's what it was really all about.
- This launch has been scheduled for some time, according to both the Kennedy Centre website and other sites on the net that track missile launches globally. One site reports this payload was originally scheduled for a launch in 2001 at Vandenberg air force base in California. The mission was subsequently moved to Canaveral. It has been scheduled and rescheduled at least three times since late March owing to problems reportedly with the payload or with ground equipment.
- The mission, labeled B-30, is a launch by the United States Air Force of a classified payload labeled NROL-16 for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) , using a Titan 4B booster from Cape Canaveral, Florida. In plain English, it's a "spy" satellite, although I dislike that term for a variety of reasons. Here's a link with some speculation on the payload and other details. Here's another link with even more detail on the possible payload, a radar imaging satellite similar to several launched in the late 1990s and 2000.
- This is one of the last launches for the Titan 4B. It is getting old and costly. In fact some of the delays in this mission have been due to equipment problems related to the booster. Here's a piece from the roll-out last fall.
- These satellites are usually placed in very specific orbits and together with others provide complete global coverage. There is some room to adjust launch trajectories but I'd guess not a heck of a lot.
- This is nothing new. Boosters and other missile bits have been falling into the sea off Newfoundland for as long as there have been missiles launched from Florida. In the 1980s two US Navy range telemetry ships stopped in port. I still have pictures of the visit of USNS Range Sentinel.
- I'd venture there have been other launches in the general direction of the Hibernia platform before on a similar trajectory.
- Each of these launches involves the booster burning up on re-entry although pieces of the booster will return to Earth. To estimate the chances of having something hit Hibernia, do the following: Stand on top of the Fortis Building. Using a penny, hit the postage stamp I have laid in the middle of Water Street. Keep your eyes closed throughout.
- As part of the normal planning for an event like this, the launching agency would prepare a footprint giving an anticipated zone in which debris will fall. This is shown as an ellipse on a map and several larger ellipses around it representing areas where it is less likely but possible that debris may strike.
Each of these zones would be tens of kilometres wide.
The big issue here is where within that footprint map the Hibernia rig fell.
- In Ottawa, this launch would have been part of the normal intelligence briefings at DND for senior officers and officials and senior ministers would have been briefed as well. PCO has a section that would have noticed it and it appears cabinet was actually briefed today.
- It would be normal for senior ministers (DND and Public Security) as well as senior officials to contact their US counterparts to express concern at the proximity to the oilfields. Their ability to influence things would be minor in dealing with a sensitive payload like this unless there was plenty of room to pick a different trajectory.
- While it is possible the US planners missed the Hibernia rig in their planning, I'd doubt it very much for a whole bunch of reasons. Danny Williams suggestion that they goofed is a typical bit of Williams fantasy.
- The simple fact is that the rig is massive only if you are one person standing right next to it. From 180 miles in space across a vast sea it is a fixed spot. The chances of hitting the rig or any other man-made object are slim. The launch was scheduled for about 2230 EDT (0000 NDT) for a reason: less air traffic. The Americans also issue routine warnings to mariners to avoid specific areas as a normal precaution.
- The problem in assessing Danny Williams' comments about 15 miles is that we have no idea who briefed him and what they told him. Reporters should take his comments with a bag of salt. It appears from some of his comments that the Premier was briefed by officials and did not get information from senior federal officials directly.
Is the rig 15 miles outside the high probability impact zone? Well, that zone would be miles wide. My guess is that some official didn't get complete information and if they did, they didn't interpret it correctly. That led to a legitimate level of anxiety on the Premier's part and the subsequent news conference.
Basically, the Newfoundland government has no internal capability to assess anything defence related. They are at the mercy of a bunch of factors, including a complete lack of experience in dealing with this sort of issue. Given that everyone, officials and politicians are well removed from the major analysis sites in Ottawa, the chance for misunderstanding and miscommunication are magnified.
I could recount stories of Davis Inlet and the first Gulf War but that is for another time. This is not about which party is in power; it is about a lack of expertise within the provincial government.
- The American delay, described as being either for 48 hours or indefinitely depending on who is reporting it, likely has nothing to do with Canadian concerns. Given the history of Titan 4B boosters, the repeated rescheduling of this mission and that the system is due to be phased out, I'd suspect the Americans are dealing with some mechanical issues.
Well, here's what it was really all about.
- This launch has been scheduled for some time, according to both the Kennedy Centre website and other sites on the net that track missile launches globally. One site reports this payload was originally scheduled for a launch in 2001 at Vandenberg air force base in California. The mission was subsequently moved to Canaveral. It has been scheduled and rescheduled at least three times since late March owing to problems reportedly with the payload or with ground equipment.
- The mission, labeled B-30, is a launch by the United States Air Force of a classified payload labeled NROL-16 for the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) , using a Titan 4B booster from Cape Canaveral, Florida. In plain English, it's a "spy" satellite, although I dislike that term for a variety of reasons. Here's a link with some speculation on the payload and other details. Here's another link with even more detail on the possible payload, a radar imaging satellite similar to several launched in the late 1990s and 2000.
- This is one of the last launches for the Titan 4B. It is getting old and costly. In fact some of the delays in this mission have been due to equipment problems related to the booster. Here's a piece from the roll-out last fall.
- These satellites are usually placed in very specific orbits and together with others provide complete global coverage. There is some room to adjust launch trajectories but I'd guess not a heck of a lot.
- This is nothing new. Boosters and other missile bits have been falling into the sea off Newfoundland for as long as there have been missiles launched from Florida. In the 1980s two US Navy range telemetry ships stopped in port. I still have pictures of the visit of USNS Range Sentinel.
- I'd venture there have been other launches in the general direction of the Hibernia platform before on a similar trajectory.
- Each of these launches involves the booster burning up on re-entry although pieces of the booster will return to Earth. To estimate the chances of having something hit Hibernia, do the following: Stand on top of the Fortis Building. Using a penny, hit the postage stamp I have laid in the middle of Water Street. Keep your eyes closed throughout.
- As part of the normal planning for an event like this, the launching agency would prepare a footprint giving an anticipated zone in which debris will fall. This is shown as an ellipse on a map and several larger ellipses around it representing areas where it is less likely but possible that debris may strike.
Each of these zones would be tens of kilometres wide.
The big issue here is where within that footprint map the Hibernia rig fell.
- In Ottawa, this launch would have been part of the normal intelligence briefings at DND for senior officers and officials and senior ministers would have been briefed as well. PCO has a section that would have noticed it and it appears cabinet was actually briefed today.
- It would be normal for senior ministers (DND and Public Security) as well as senior officials to contact their US counterparts to express concern at the proximity to the oilfields. Their ability to influence things would be minor in dealing with a sensitive payload like this unless there was plenty of room to pick a different trajectory.
- While it is possible the US planners missed the Hibernia rig in their planning, I'd doubt it very much for a whole bunch of reasons. Danny Williams suggestion that they goofed is a typical bit of Williams fantasy.
- The simple fact is that the rig is massive only if you are one person standing right next to it. From 180 miles in space across a vast sea it is a fixed spot. The chances of hitting the rig or any other man-made object are slim. The launch was scheduled for about 2230 EDT (0000 NDT) for a reason: less air traffic. The Americans also issue routine warnings to mariners to avoid specific areas as a normal precaution.
- The problem in assessing Danny Williams' comments about 15 miles is that we have no idea who briefed him and what they told him. Reporters should take his comments with a bag of salt. It appears from some of his comments that the Premier was briefed by officials and did not get information from senior federal officials directly.
Is the rig 15 miles outside the high probability impact zone? Well, that zone would be miles wide. My guess is that some official didn't get complete information and if they did, they didn't interpret it correctly. That led to a legitimate level of anxiety on the Premier's part and the subsequent news conference.
Basically, the Newfoundland government has no internal capability to assess anything defence related. They are at the mercy of a bunch of factors, including a complete lack of experience in dealing with this sort of issue. Given that everyone, officials and politicians are well removed from the major analysis sites in Ottawa, the chance for misunderstanding and miscommunication are magnified.
I could recount stories of Davis Inlet and the first Gulf War but that is for another time. This is not about which party is in power; it is about a lack of expertise within the provincial government.
- The American delay, described as being either for 48 hours or indefinitely depending on who is reporting it, likely has nothing to do with Canadian concerns. Given the history of Titan 4B boosters, the repeated rescheduling of this mission and that the system is due to be phased out, I'd suspect the Americans are dealing with some mechanical issues.
15 April 2005
Rocket Man - The Movie and other loose ends
Ironic given the recent flap, Newfoundland and Labrador has played a key role in Titan missile launches from Florida through a communications relay point in Argentia. The site was built in 1993 and continues operation as part of the Florida missile launch complex's range instrumentation system.
That system allows continuous communications with the launch vehicle. In the event of any problems with the launch, data from Argentia would allow the launch controllers to make a decision about destroying the rocket and payload.
and now for the trivia...
Ok, so maybe some of you are growing tired of the whole Titan 4B launch story, but as a guy who grew up when men on rockets were going to the moon, there is something about the whole thing that still captures my imagination.
The movie: Here is a link to NASA and some footage (no audio) in mpg format from the night launch of the Cassini probe. This launch used a Titan 4B and it is damned impressive. For those who may have missed it, the B-30 mission that caused such a fuss here this past week will be a night launch.
Note especially that towards the end of this clip, there is a bit of a flash. That is the solid fuel boosters separating a mere two minutes into the flight, on schedule. They drop back to the ocean. The payload is then taken to orbit by the sustainer, a liquid fueled vehicle based on the old Titan intercontinental ballistic missile.
The impact: I still haven't been able to confirm whether or not that sustainer breaks up on re-entry or lands intact. One source I'd trust has it that the thing comes down in one piece. That's actually better than bits and pieces, since there is an even higher level of confidence in where one big piece will go, as opposed to a bunch of little ones.
Personally, in that scenario, I'd still think there is almost no chance of any kind of explosion form whatever fuel remains on board, if any.
Tracking ships and launch monitoring: Having invested a lot of money into the rockets and the payloads, and as part of an overall monitoring system, the United States operates a number of missile tracking ships in the Atlantic and Pacific that spend their time down range during a launch gathering data. They feed back to the launch control centre so that there is never a time when the launch authorities don't know what is going on. It's part of the overall safety program to ensure launches are safe and that in the event of a problem, accurate information is flowing back to Florida in case the rocket must be destroyed in flight.
Here's one link. Scroll down to see all the vessel types. If memory serves, Observation Island was one of the ships I visited in the early 80s when it and another vessel, the Range Sentinel, were open to public tours during a port call.
Here's a link that discusses revitalization of launch facilities in Florida. "The USNS Redstone was deactivated on 6 August 1993, but a new range site was completed in Argentia, Newfoundland in June 1993 to support northbound flights of the TITAN IV from Cape Canaveral." [Emphasis added]
I'll have to check to see if this site is still active. Have a read through this history though; it gives tons of useful information on operations at Canaveral including range monitoring.
I also found a Powerpoint presentation from the late 1990s on command and control issues related to re-invigoration of the Canaveral launch complexes. It includes a prominent mention of Argentia and the so-called high-inclination launches. US NAVFAC Argentia closed in the early 1990s so odds are high as I write this that the Titan related site remained active for some time afterward and may still be there working busily away.
Update:
Further searching turned up the name of a company that provides communications support to Canaveral under contract. It's current corporate information package includes work at a site in Argentina, Newfoundland.
Just for the heck of it, here's a link to photos of the Island and a tiny bit of Labrador taken from STS-96. Kinda hard not to get a little awestruck at the beauty of the Earth from space. I feel a Tom Hanks moment coming on our voyage from the Earth to the moon.
If anyone out there is old enough to remember, there used to be a tracking and communications station at Shoe Cove used for the Apollo and Apollo-Soyuz programs in the 1970s. There's not much left but here is a link to some pictures of the Shoe Cove site as it stood recently.
That system allows continuous communications with the launch vehicle. In the event of any problems with the launch, data from Argentia would allow the launch controllers to make a decision about destroying the rocket and payload.
and now for the trivia...
Ok, so maybe some of you are growing tired of the whole Titan 4B launch story, but as a guy who grew up when men on rockets were going to the moon, there is something about the whole thing that still captures my imagination.
The movie: Here is a link to NASA and some footage (no audio) in mpg format from the night launch of the Cassini probe. This launch used a Titan 4B and it is damned impressive. For those who may have missed it, the B-30 mission that caused such a fuss here this past week will be a night launch.
Note especially that towards the end of this clip, there is a bit of a flash. That is the solid fuel boosters separating a mere two minutes into the flight, on schedule. They drop back to the ocean. The payload is then taken to orbit by the sustainer, a liquid fueled vehicle based on the old Titan intercontinental ballistic missile.
The impact: I still haven't been able to confirm whether or not that sustainer breaks up on re-entry or lands intact. One source I'd trust has it that the thing comes down in one piece. That's actually better than bits and pieces, since there is an even higher level of confidence in where one big piece will go, as opposed to a bunch of little ones.
Personally, in that scenario, I'd still think there is almost no chance of any kind of explosion form whatever fuel remains on board, if any.
Tracking ships and launch monitoring: Having invested a lot of money into the rockets and the payloads, and as part of an overall monitoring system, the United States operates a number of missile tracking ships in the Atlantic and Pacific that spend their time down range during a launch gathering data. They feed back to the launch control centre so that there is never a time when the launch authorities don't know what is going on. It's part of the overall safety program to ensure launches are safe and that in the event of a problem, accurate information is flowing back to Florida in case the rocket must be destroyed in flight.
Here's one link. Scroll down to see all the vessel types. If memory serves, Observation Island was one of the ships I visited in the early 80s when it and another vessel, the Range Sentinel, were open to public tours during a port call.
Here's a link that discusses revitalization of launch facilities in Florida. "The USNS Redstone was deactivated on 6 August 1993, but a new range site was completed in Argentia, Newfoundland in June 1993 to support northbound flights of the TITAN IV from Cape Canaveral." [Emphasis added]
I'll have to check to see if this site is still active. Have a read through this history though; it gives tons of useful information on operations at Canaveral including range monitoring.
I also found a Powerpoint presentation from the late 1990s on command and control issues related to re-invigoration of the Canaveral launch complexes. It includes a prominent mention of Argentia and the so-called high-inclination launches. US NAVFAC Argentia closed in the early 1990s so odds are high as I write this that the Titan related site remained active for some time afterward and may still be there working busily away.
Update:
Further searching turned up the name of a company that provides communications support to Canaveral under contract. It's current corporate information package includes work at a site in Argentina, Newfoundland.
Just for the heck of it, here's a link to photos of the Island and a tiny bit of Labrador taken from STS-96. Kinda hard not to get a little awestruck at the beauty of the Earth from space. I feel a Tom Hanks moment coming on our voyage from the Earth to the moon.
If anyone out there is old enough to remember, there used to be a tracking and communications station at Shoe Cove used for the Apollo and Apollo-Soyuz programs in the 1970s. There's not much left but here is a link to some pictures of the Shoe Cove site as it stood recently.
-30-
Revsied from 22:00 hrs, 14 Apr 05 with new lede and additional information.
13 July 2005
To infinity and beyond!
Space Transportation System mission 114 (STS-114) will launch from pad 39B at Canaveral space centre 13 July 2005 at approximately 1531 hrs Eastern Daylight Savings Time using an inclination of 51.6%.
That means the space shuttle will transit across the Grand Banks, not too far off the track used by the NROL-16, the last Titan 4B mission in May that caused a near panic in the oil patch offshore Newfoundland and in the provincial government. Maybe google-searching is a government wide deficiency.
So how come people aren't losing their minds about an even bigger hunk of metal that has a track record of blowing up rather spectacularly?
Incidentally, as I noted earlier this year, the shuttle has flown over the Grand Banks on more than half its launches since 1981. Yet no one in the oil patch noticed.
The last shuttle mission had problems on launch such that the American space administration team might have aborted before that giant liquid tank made it to orbit; that is, had they known that on recovery the thing was going to scatter bits and pieces of people and machine from California to Mississippi.
So come this afternoon, I'll be sipping my coffee, watching CNN and enjoying the show, minus the local melodrama.
Incidentally, has anyone finished the internal review on the Hill to find out why the provincial government's emergency management system blew to bits when it first heard of the Titan missile?
Might be a good subject for an access to information request.
Incidentally, incidentally, how many provincial government employees hold valid security clearances as a result of their provincial jobs such that they could receive classified national briefings on things like, say, intelligence reports or other matters of national security? The answer explains a lot of what happened during the Titan thing.
Yet another good access to info request.
That means the space shuttle will transit across the Grand Banks, not too far off the track used by the NROL-16, the last Titan 4B mission in May that caused a near panic in the oil patch offshore Newfoundland and in the provincial government. Maybe google-searching is a government wide deficiency.
So how come people aren't losing their minds about an even bigger hunk of metal that has a track record of blowing up rather spectacularly?
Incidentally, as I noted earlier this year, the shuttle has flown over the Grand Banks on more than half its launches since 1981. Yet no one in the oil patch noticed.
The last shuttle mission had problems on launch such that the American space administration team might have aborted before that giant liquid tank made it to orbit; that is, had they known that on recovery the thing was going to scatter bits and pieces of people and machine from California to Mississippi.
So come this afternoon, I'll be sipping my coffee, watching CNN and enjoying the show, minus the local melodrama.
Incidentally, has anyone finished the internal review on the Hill to find out why the provincial government's emergency management system blew to bits when it first heard of the Titan missile?
Might be a good subject for an access to information request.
Incidentally, incidentally, how many provincial government employees hold valid security clearances as a result of their provincial jobs such that they could receive classified national briefings on things like, say, intelligence reports or other matters of national security? The answer explains a lot of what happened during the Titan thing.
Yet another good access to info request.
14 April 2005
It only took a week - time for a public security advisor on the Hill
News this morning that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, the offshore regulatory board and the oil companies have finally gathered enough information to go back to their regular jobs and stop panicking over the launch of an American rocket from Cape Canaveral.
Having spent now a total of 25 years dealing with defence and security issues both as part of my undergraduate and graduate studies and my work life, I'd draw everyone away from the cheap and easy conclusions here.
The simple fact remains that defence- and security- issues are on the provincial government's agenda on a daily basis. Historically, the provincial government has difficulty making accurate assessments of defence and security matters on its own - even though they can collect accurate information from a variety of sources. Instead, the government relies almost exclusively on getting things from Ottawa. That was one of the big problems in this instance.
In this instance, no threats were averted. There was no threat. It was a totally artificial crisis. But it does point to a fundamental problem in the province's ability to identify a crisis accurately, deploy resources and then address a crisis. This has nothing to do with this premier and this government: it is a chronic problem going back 25 years and more. I saw it during my time in the Tower.
For a case after my time, does anyone remember 9/11? While people have been busily patting themselves on the back, it was largely characterized by fumbles and some monumental gaffes. Some were minor; some, like actual physical security of the airport were serious. Some, like the silly spat with Ottawa over cots were based on exactly the sort of misinformation that led the Premier to go public in this instance, with predictable and avoidable responses.
Personally, I think it is time for government to undertake a public security review. There are at least three senior retired army generals from this province I can think of who would be available to take on the task. Other provinces did that sort of thing after 9/11.
Aside from anything they'd recommend, government needs to appoint a senior official as a direct advisor to the Premier on public safety and security, much like the new national security advisor to the Prime Minister. It's a specialist area; let's find someone who knows what they are talking about.
When there is another Titan booster scare, the security advisor can calm frayed nerves. By the same token, when something real happens, cabinet can be assured that they will be getting the most reliable information from the best sources, including their own. They can act with confidence in their information.
And it won't take a week to figure out something this simple. At the risk of prompting yet another couple of e-mails poking me, I will remind you that most of the basic questions the Premier asked were answered here either when he asked them or beforehand. When it came down to the self-destruct mechanism question yesterday, I actually threw up my hands in astonishment.
But hey. The fact is that readers of this blog had reliable, factual information on this booster from the get-go. Had I heard this story on Wednesday night - like government did - you would have rolled out of bed Thursday morning to a full briefing with your coffee. And you would have gone about your regular work-week unaffected by fear of things falling from the sky.
Note: This is actually a new posting, but I am including the text of one from yesterday in which I made some observations about this Titan episode. It is attached here since the two things are linked.
"Information levels up; anxiety levels down"
It was encouraging to see the Premier scrummed today expressing increasing comfort with the information he is getting about the upcoming Titan 4B launch on Sunday.
Over the past 24 hours or so, I have been getting a bit of clarity of my own on what the basic problem was. If there is any doubt or confusion from any earlier posts, let me try to put my conclusions as succinctly as possible.
1. It appears that neither the provincial government nor the oil companies noticed the number of rockets flying over the Grand Banks before.
2. Therefore, when information on this launch was handed to them, there was a legitimate and understandable "holy shit" reaction. Everybody here reacted as one would want them to react.
3. The Premier and others went searching for information, primarily from the federal government. Again, this is exactly what anyone would expect.
4. There is a limited or non-existent capability within the provincial government to make any independent assessments of defence- or security-related information that affect the province. I base this on my observations of this case and my knowledge of other cases from previous administrations going back 20 years. There is a systemic dependence on the feds. Yes, I know this is a federal area of responsibility but broader security issues like this are at least a joint responsibility.
5. The feds never really paid any attention to this launch for a variety of reasons. The simplest one is that officials at DND or Public Safety likely looked at the mission, calculated the risk and then decided there was no big deal here. They may have passed on the information to provincial Emergency Measures but it may have been flagged as "information purposes only", as opposed to "get ready to panic". Essentially, the federal interpretation of this event was the right one if they watched but didn't rush to action.
6. The Premier's ongoing frustration with this matter and his public comments stem for the basic lack of information he was getting. He either wasn't getting good briefings, what he was getting was crap, or he just didn't trust what he was hearing. Either way, he has a significant issue to deal with because...
7. The provincial government should be able to make some security-related assessments on its own using a variety of information sources. If the oil companies lacked information and were hopping up and down, the provincial government should have been able to calm them down somewhat. Then they could proceed to ask some focused, informed questions outside the glare of public scrutiny
8. If the Premier had received reliable information as early as Thursday, he may not have gone public as quickly as he did. As a consequence, he would have avoided putting everyone else on edge. Don't be surprised if the Americans were scared of law-suits. I noted that prospect days ago. As such they would become even more reluctant to share information, especially if they had any fear at all that a confidential briefing would be on CNN that night or the next day. Get lawyers involved: everyone's backside tightens.
9. On that basis it may well have been possible to defuse this matter as early as Saturday last week, i.e. 10 Apr 05, a mere three days after the initial scare.
10. As it is, the thing is finally settling down. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a decision taken to continue drilling as if nothing happened.
11. If anyone wants briefings on the launch licensing process for US rockets, the safety precautions and the international and domestic US legal issues, please let me know. I can easily deliver them to a group for an appropriate fee. After all that is one of the things I do for a living.
And yes, as you can expect me to say, just remember you read it here first.
Having spent now a total of 25 years dealing with defence and security issues both as part of my undergraduate and graduate studies and my work life, I'd draw everyone away from the cheap and easy conclusions here.
The simple fact remains that defence- and security- issues are on the provincial government's agenda on a daily basis. Historically, the provincial government has difficulty making accurate assessments of defence and security matters on its own - even though they can collect accurate information from a variety of sources. Instead, the government relies almost exclusively on getting things from Ottawa. That was one of the big problems in this instance.
In this instance, no threats were averted. There was no threat. It was a totally artificial crisis. But it does point to a fundamental problem in the province's ability to identify a crisis accurately, deploy resources and then address a crisis. This has nothing to do with this premier and this government: it is a chronic problem going back 25 years and more. I saw it during my time in the Tower.
For a case after my time, does anyone remember 9/11? While people have been busily patting themselves on the back, it was largely characterized by fumbles and some monumental gaffes. Some were minor; some, like actual physical security of the airport were serious. Some, like the silly spat with Ottawa over cots were based on exactly the sort of misinformation that led the Premier to go public in this instance, with predictable and avoidable responses.
Personally, I think it is time for government to undertake a public security review. There are at least three senior retired army generals from this province I can think of who would be available to take on the task. Other provinces did that sort of thing after 9/11.
Aside from anything they'd recommend, government needs to appoint a senior official as a direct advisor to the Premier on public safety and security, much like the new national security advisor to the Prime Minister. It's a specialist area; let's find someone who knows what they are talking about.
When there is another Titan booster scare, the security advisor can calm frayed nerves. By the same token, when something real happens, cabinet can be assured that they will be getting the most reliable information from the best sources, including their own. They can act with confidence in their information.
And it won't take a week to figure out something this simple. At the risk of prompting yet another couple of e-mails poking me, I will remind you that most of the basic questions the Premier asked were answered here either when he asked them or beforehand. When it came down to the self-destruct mechanism question yesterday, I actually threw up my hands in astonishment.
But hey. The fact is that readers of this blog had reliable, factual information on this booster from the get-go. Had I heard this story on Wednesday night - like government did - you would have rolled out of bed Thursday morning to a full briefing with your coffee. And you would have gone about your regular work-week unaffected by fear of things falling from the sky.
-30-
Note: This is actually a new posting, but I am including the text of one from yesterday in which I made some observations about this Titan episode. It is attached here since the two things are linked.
"Information levels up; anxiety levels down"
It was encouraging to see the Premier scrummed today expressing increasing comfort with the information he is getting about the upcoming Titan 4B launch on Sunday.
Over the past 24 hours or so, I have been getting a bit of clarity of my own on what the basic problem was. If there is any doubt or confusion from any earlier posts, let me try to put my conclusions as succinctly as possible.
1. It appears that neither the provincial government nor the oil companies noticed the number of rockets flying over the Grand Banks before.
2. Therefore, when information on this launch was handed to them, there was a legitimate and understandable "holy shit" reaction. Everybody here reacted as one would want them to react.
3. The Premier and others went searching for information, primarily from the federal government. Again, this is exactly what anyone would expect.
4. There is a limited or non-existent capability within the provincial government to make any independent assessments of defence- or security-related information that affect the province. I base this on my observations of this case and my knowledge of other cases from previous administrations going back 20 years. There is a systemic dependence on the feds. Yes, I know this is a federal area of responsibility but broader security issues like this are at least a joint responsibility.
5. The feds never really paid any attention to this launch for a variety of reasons. The simplest one is that officials at DND or Public Safety likely looked at the mission, calculated the risk and then decided there was no big deal here. They may have passed on the information to provincial Emergency Measures but it may have been flagged as "information purposes only", as opposed to "get ready to panic". Essentially, the federal interpretation of this event was the right one if they watched but didn't rush to action.
6. The Premier's ongoing frustration with this matter and his public comments stem for the basic lack of information he was getting. He either wasn't getting good briefings, what he was getting was crap, or he just didn't trust what he was hearing. Either way, he has a significant issue to deal with because...
7. The provincial government should be able to make some security-related assessments on its own using a variety of information sources. If the oil companies lacked information and were hopping up and down, the provincial government should have been able to calm them down somewhat. Then they could proceed to ask some focused, informed questions outside the glare of public scrutiny
8. If the Premier had received reliable information as early as Thursday, he may not have gone public as quickly as he did. As a consequence, he would have avoided putting everyone else on edge. Don't be surprised if the Americans were scared of law-suits. I noted that prospect days ago. As such they would become even more reluctant to share information, especially if they had any fear at all that a confidential briefing would be on CNN that night or the next day. Get lawyers involved: everyone's backside tightens.
9. On that basis it may well have been possible to defuse this matter as early as Saturday last week, i.e. 10 Apr 05, a mere three days after the initial scare.
10. As it is, the thing is finally settling down. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a decision taken to continue drilling as if nothing happened.
11. If anyone wants briefings on the launch licensing process for US rockets, the safety precautions and the international and domestic US legal issues, please let me know. I can easily deliver them to a group for an appropriate fee. After all that is one of the things I do for a living.
And yes, as you can expect me to say, just remember you read it here first.
08 April 2005
The Missileer
If you haven't heard enough about rockets, then I am here to feed your curiosity and hopefully, allay some of the anxiety that has seized our beloved Premier.
Here are some basic points that I suspected but which are now confirmed as well as some links to yet more background information.
See, Premier Williams, there is no reason for you to be confused if your staff used the internet.
Or called me in. After all, I have spent about half my life on defence issues and I currently work as a defence policy consultant.
1. USAF Space Command knew the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms were there all along. As their public affairs spokesman said, the odds of a missile hitting a tiny oil rig in the middle of the vast ocean are small, maybe one in a trillion, especially when the platforms are outside the debris zone.
2. The Titan is a combined solid and liquid fueled missile. The side boosters are solid fueled and burn out shortly after launch. The main propulsion unit is the liquid-fueled Titan which has been in USAF service since the 1950s.
3. They have way too much experience with operating this system to make dumb mistakes about debris zones and impact areas for debris. Lquid fueled systems are great because you can predict where they will land with much greater accuracy than solid fueled systems. You can also cut off their power when you want to and do all sorts of other things with them you can't do with their solid fueled cousins.
4. A similar Titan rocket was fired on a similar trajectory in 1994 without incident.
5. The more recent loss of a Titan 4A from Canaveral is worth paying attention to because:
a. the Premier used it to bolster his hysteria at a scrum today; and,
b. he is WRONG.
The incident occured in 1998 and involved an older version of this particular booster. That missile was destroyed by the on-board self-destruct mechanism shortly after launch when problems occured. These were later attributed to wiring problems. It never got close to Canadian waters - in fact it traveled exactly 4, 422 feet from the launchpad. Here's a link to the full report.
A subsequent launch of the 4B version went off flawlessly, as reported at this link.
For a description of a two-stage Titan launch try this link from 2003. The version here had an extra boost vehicle designed to manoeuvre the payload into orbit. I erroneously described this as a second stage earlier; that doesn't change my assessment that there is a near zero chance (one in a trillion) of any debris from the B-30 launch landing within sight of Hibernia and Terra Nova.
6. Here's a link to a story on the delay of the current mission, dated 07 April 2005.
7. Here's a link on the payload likely being carried. It describes radar imaging in layman's terms. Read this and you will understand, Premier, why this launch will not be scrubbed and why there is virtually a zero chance of it being fired off on a trajectory designed solely to calm your nerves.
At least this little episode has caused me to find a raft of new sources on the web for tracking space-related issues.
Here are some basic points that I suspected but which are now confirmed as well as some links to yet more background information.
See, Premier Williams, there is no reason for you to be confused if your staff used the internet.
Or called me in. After all, I have spent about half my life on defence issues and I currently work as a defence policy consultant.
1. USAF Space Command knew the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms were there all along. As their public affairs spokesman said, the odds of a missile hitting a tiny oil rig in the middle of the vast ocean are small, maybe one in a trillion, especially when the platforms are outside the debris zone.
2. The Titan is a combined solid and liquid fueled missile. The side boosters are solid fueled and burn out shortly after launch. The main propulsion unit is the liquid-fueled Titan which has been in USAF service since the 1950s.
3. They have way too much experience with operating this system to make dumb mistakes about debris zones and impact areas for debris. Lquid fueled systems are great because you can predict where they will land with much greater accuracy than solid fueled systems. You can also cut off their power when you want to and do all sorts of other things with them you can't do with their solid fueled cousins.
4. A similar Titan rocket was fired on a similar trajectory in 1994 without incident.
5. The more recent loss of a Titan 4A from Canaveral is worth paying attention to because:
a. the Premier used it to bolster his hysteria at a scrum today; and,
b. he is WRONG.
The incident occured in 1998 and involved an older version of this particular booster. That missile was destroyed by the on-board self-destruct mechanism shortly after launch when problems occured. These were later attributed to wiring problems. It never got close to Canadian waters - in fact it traveled exactly 4, 422 feet from the launchpad. Here's a link to the full report.
A subsequent launch of the 4B version went off flawlessly, as reported at this link.
For a description of a two-stage Titan launch try this link from 2003. The version here had an extra boost vehicle designed to manoeuvre the payload into orbit. I erroneously described this as a second stage earlier; that doesn't change my assessment that there is a near zero chance (one in a trillion) of any debris from the B-30 launch landing within sight of Hibernia and Terra Nova.
6. Here's a link to a story on the delay of the current mission, dated 07 April 2005.
7. Here's a link on the payload likely being carried. It describes radar imaging in layman's terms. Read this and you will understand, Premier, why this launch will not be scrubbed and why there is virtually a zero chance of it being fired off on a trajectory designed solely to calm your nerves.
At least this little episode has caused me to find a raft of new sources on the web for tracking space-related issues.
11 April 2005
Risk management
"The [oil] industry is risk averse," [Premier Danny] Williams said.
That's from a scrum the Premier gave on Sunday about the oil companies and the pending launch of an American satellite launch that will see debris from the rocket used landing - at the closest - 25 kilometres away from the Hibernia and Terra Nova oil production platforms. He's been quoted in a number of news stories saying exactly those words.
Oil companies aren'’t actually risk averse. They are risk managers. Oil companies follow a “"discipline for living with the possibility that future events may cause adverse effects."”
That's from a scrum the Premier gave on Sunday about the oil companies and the pending launch of an American satellite launch that will see debris from the rocket used landing - at the closest - 25 kilometres away from the Hibernia and Terra Nova oil production platforms. He's been quoted in a number of news stories saying exactly those words.
Oil companies aren'’t actually risk averse. They are risk managers. Oil companies follow a “"discipline for living with the possibility that future events may cause adverse effects."”
08 April 2005
You read it here, first - the Space version - revised
As I told you yesterday, "Given the history of Titan 4B boosters, the repeated rescheduling of this mission and that the system is due to be phased out, I'd suspect the Americans are dealing with some mechanical issues."
As VOCM is reporting: "Meantime, the U.S. Air Force Space Command at Cape Canaveral says the launch was postponed because of mechanical problems with ground support equipment."
Go the US Air Force Space Command webpage and you'll see the schedule for launches at Canaveral. NROL-16 is still listed but with the launch date being "no earlier than 11 April 05".
In other coverage, the Canadian Press story is running in various forms in all the major newspapers. The Post is checking to see if Jean Brault mentioned anything about it in his explosive testimony before committing to coverage. Explosive testimony. Explosive missile. Do the math.
CBC's national has a script story and a video story [<--requires Real Player] by our own Chris O'Neill-Yates. (Psst Chris: the launch video you used is a submarine launched missile not a Titan)
As VOCM is reporting: "Meantime, the U.S. Air Force Space Command at Cape Canaveral says the launch was postponed because of mechanical problems with ground support equipment."
Go the US Air Force Space Command webpage and you'll see the schedule for launches at Canaveral. NROL-16 is still listed but with the launch date being "no earlier than 11 April 05".
In other coverage, the Canadian Press story is running in various forms in all the major newspapers. The Post is checking to see if Jean Brault mentioned anything about it in his explosive testimony before committing to coverage. Explosive testimony. Explosive missile. Do the math.
CBC's national has a script story and a video story [<--requires Real Player] by our own Chris O'Neill-Yates. (Psst Chris: the launch video you used is a submarine launched missile not a Titan)
14 May 2005
Top Secret Argentia site - the facts
Friday's Telegram had an editorial which screamed for some clarification.
It spoke of a top secret building at the base, hinting that this might be the place a former Marine Corps soldier said was used to store nuclear weapons. The editorial made it sound like people didn't know what was going on there.
Piffle. That building was known as the "T" Building and is located at the south side of the base. It housed the data processing centre for a section of the Sound Underwater Surveillance System or SOSUS. This was a collection of hydrophones strung across the seabed that listened for Soviet submarines. To the best of my knowledge the T Building is not the building the former Marine is talking about.
In 1963, data from the Argentia SOSUS station was used to help pinpoint the location of a United States Navy submarine that had disappeared after leaving Spain on its way home.
The T Building was a highly sensitive facility since SOSUS was part of the front line defence against Soviet ballistic missile submarines. Not much of a surprise therefore that it was highly guarded and the Americans looked suspiciously on anyone who inquired about it. Does anyone remember Stephen Ratkai? Maybe that's a name for the "Newfoundland and Espionage" posting.
The top secret research facility everyone has been talking about was the SOSUS station - top secret underwater acoustic research.
Were nuclear weapons present at Argentia?
Yes.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, complete nuclear weapons were deployed to Argentia. This is one of the major facts that led the federal government to negotiate an agreement with the United States specifically governing American nuclear weapons deployments to Argentia.
At other times, nuclear weapons components were there. That is, the base housed everything except the cores of fissionable material that would produce the atomic explosion of the thing worked properly.
There has been no report of any unusual radiation levels at Argentia. This undermines the story that the site housed large numbers of weapons, that these weapons were improperly stored and that there is a major environmental catastrophe at Argentia being covered up by the US government.
Of all the buildings at Argentia, the T Building was retained in American control after Argentia was closed out. It was refurbished and two large white radar domes were mounted on top as part of the US Air Forces range instrumentation system for the Cape Canaveral launch facility. The T Building continues to be used today, including during the recent Titan 4B launch.
Now you know the facts.
Make up your own mind.
It spoke of a top secret building at the base, hinting that this might be the place a former Marine Corps soldier said was used to store nuclear weapons. The editorial made it sound like people didn't know what was going on there.
Piffle. That building was known as the "T" Building and is located at the south side of the base. It housed the data processing centre for a section of the Sound Underwater Surveillance System or SOSUS. This was a collection of hydrophones strung across the seabed that listened for Soviet submarines. To the best of my knowledge the T Building is not the building the former Marine is talking about.
In 1963, data from the Argentia SOSUS station was used to help pinpoint the location of a United States Navy submarine that had disappeared after leaving Spain on its way home.
The T Building was a highly sensitive facility since SOSUS was part of the front line defence against Soviet ballistic missile submarines. Not much of a surprise therefore that it was highly guarded and the Americans looked suspiciously on anyone who inquired about it. Does anyone remember Stephen Ratkai? Maybe that's a name for the "Newfoundland and Espionage" posting.
The top secret research facility everyone has been talking about was the SOSUS station - top secret underwater acoustic research.
Were nuclear weapons present at Argentia?
Yes.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, complete nuclear weapons were deployed to Argentia. This is one of the major facts that led the federal government to negotiate an agreement with the United States specifically governing American nuclear weapons deployments to Argentia.
At other times, nuclear weapons components were there. That is, the base housed everything except the cores of fissionable material that would produce the atomic explosion of the thing worked properly.
There has been no report of any unusual radiation levels at Argentia. This undermines the story that the site housed large numbers of weapons, that these weapons were improperly stored and that there is a major environmental catastrophe at Argentia being covered up by the US government.
Of all the buildings at Argentia, the T Building was retained in American control after Argentia was closed out. It was refurbished and two large white radar domes were mounted on top as part of the US Air Forces range instrumentation system for the Cape Canaveral launch facility. The T Building continues to be used today, including during the recent Titan 4B launch.
Now you know the facts.
Make up your own mind.
28 April 2005
SAGE information
News stories on VOCM and in the Telly today discuss a ship docked at Portland, Me that may be a telemetry vessel supporting the launch tomorrow of the last Titan 4B rocket from Canaveral air force station. The Telly story isn't on line.
To get some other information, here's the original story from Portland, in the Portland Press Herald. Here's a story with a photo of the ship, a converted offshore supply vessel. Here's an Associated Press version of the story, sans photo.
The SAGE appears to be owned by a company in Louisiana, called Tidewater, that specializes in the supply of offshore vessels. Some of their ships, as this link indicates, have been adapted for other uses.
For those wanting some boilerplate on the vessel, such as registration data, gross tonnage and construction, here's a detailed link.
This vessel is carrying temporarily installed equipment on the rear deck. The domes presumably shield radar systems of an unknown type. They are mounted on trailers or other temporary shelters housing equipment and support crew.
There has been plenty of speculation on the Internet on this launch and on the appearance of this ship in Portland. Spec is fun; but I will take a closer look and see if I can figure out something a bit more concrete on this.
To get some other information, here's the original story from Portland, in the Portland Press Herald. Here's a story with a photo of the ship, a converted offshore supply vessel. Here's an Associated Press version of the story, sans photo.
The SAGE appears to be owned by a company in Louisiana, called Tidewater, that specializes in the supply of offshore vessels. Some of their ships, as this link indicates, have been adapted for other uses.
For those wanting some boilerplate on the vessel, such as registration data, gross tonnage and construction, here's a detailed link.
This vessel is carrying temporarily installed equipment on the rear deck. The domes presumably shield radar systems of an unknown type. They are mounted on trailers or other temporary shelters housing equipment and support crew.
There has been plenty of speculation on the Internet on this launch and on the appearance of this ship in Portland. Spec is fun; but I will take a closer look and see if I can figure out something a bit more concrete on this.
26 April 2005
The Rocket on the Rock - Get your hats here!
While everyone is hopelessly Earth-bound, I will be looking to the skies again later this week as the last Titan 4B launch vehicle slips gracefully from its base at Canaveral and streaks into the heavens.
The date you may ask?
As far as I know right now it is this weekend. It may be as early as Friday 29 Apr 05; it may be as late as Sunday 01 May 05. If the pattern holds the launch time is likely sometime between 2230 hrs Eastern Daylight Savings Time and midnight. That translates out to between 0000 hrs and 0130 hr Newfoundland Daylight Savings Time.
My money is on Friday.
Howard Pike from the offshore regulatory board is supposed to be heading out as a gesture of reassurance that all is well. Howard can feel free to send me an e-mail about the experience and I promise to post it in its entirety.
Army Navy Surplus should have a sale on used helmets so that anyone feeling a bit nervous about the whole thing can have some small comfort.
I'd suggest the Kevlar models which can run upwards of CDN$100. While they are good at protecting skulls from most flying objects, they can't be used as bowls or wash basins as the old steel pots could.
If this was anywhere else on the planet, some enterprising young person would be selling hats of some kind with a logo on it depicting the rocket, the province and somebody holding a Jockey Club enjoying the show.
The date you may ask?
As far as I know right now it is this weekend. It may be as early as Friday 29 Apr 05; it may be as late as Sunday 01 May 05. If the pattern holds the launch time is likely sometime between 2230 hrs Eastern Daylight Savings Time and midnight. That translates out to between 0000 hrs and 0130 hr Newfoundland Daylight Savings Time.
My money is on Friday.
Howard Pike from the offshore regulatory board is supposed to be heading out as a gesture of reassurance that all is well. Howard can feel free to send me an e-mail about the experience and I promise to post it in its entirety.
Army Navy Surplus should have a sale on used helmets so that anyone feeling a bit nervous about the whole thing can have some small comfort.
I'd suggest the Kevlar models which can run upwards of CDN$100. While they are good at protecting skulls from most flying objects, they can't be used as bowls or wash basins as the old steel pots could.
If this was anywhere else on the planet, some enterprising young person would be selling hats of some kind with a logo on it depicting the rocket, the province and somebody holding a Jockey Club enjoying the show.
11 April 2005
The truth is out there - if you want to accept it
A rock-steady source of good information sent me some data on launches by the Space Transportation System (STS), otherwise known as the space shuttle. He got it from NASA so I guess they know what they are talking about.
Seems that STS has been known to use an inclination greater than 51 degrees before and they plan to use it again since this takes them to places like the International Space Station.
On that inclination, they transit the Grand Banks and, as my solid source reminded me, that is why St. John's and especially Goose Bay are identified as possible landing sites should the STS encounter some problems.
At the risk of causing the Premier to have apoplexy, I thought it best to share this information with my faithful audience. It certainly helps to put the Titan 4B launch into perspective.
In the list that follows, I have edited so that only the launch inclinations greater than 50 degrees are included. Note that inclination is taken using the Equator as zero degrees. A 90 degree inclination is a polar orbit heading over the North Pole first. A 180 inclination would put something into orbit along the Equator opposite to the Earth's rotation. For a better discussion of STS mission inclinations, try this page.
Here's the editted list. Note the frequency the STS uses those high inclinations.
STS//Inclination// Notes
STS-9 57.0 HIGH
41g 51.7 HIGH
STS-51-B 57.0 HIGH
STS-61-A 57.0 HIGH
STS-27 57.0 HIGH
STS-28 57.0 HIGH
STS-36 62.0 HIGH
STS-39 57.0 HIGH
STS-48 57.0 HIGH
STS-42 57.0 HIGH
STS-45 57.0 HIGH
STS-47 57.0 HIGH
STS-53 57.0 HIGH
STS-56 57.0 HIGH
STS-59 56.9 HIGH
STS-60 56.4 HIGH
STS-64 56.9 HIGH
STS-68 57.0 HIGH
STS-66 57.0 HIGH
STS-63 51.6 HIGH
STS-71 51.6 HIGH
STS-74 51.6 HIGH
STS-76 51.6 HIGH
STS-79 51.7 HIGH
STS-81 51.6 HIGH
STS-84 51.7 HIGH
STS-85 57.0 HIGH
STS-86 51.6 HIGH
STS-89 51.6 HIGH
STS-88 51.6 HIGH
STS-91 51.7 HIGH
STS-92 51.6 HIGH
STS-96 51.6 HIGH
STS-97 51.6 HIGH
STS-98 51.5 HIGH
STS-99 57.0 HIGH
STS-101 51.6 HIGH
STS-102 51.5 HIGH
STS-106 51.6 HIGH
STS-100 51.6 HIGH
STS-104 51.6 HIGH
STS-105 51.6 HIGH
STS-108 51.6 HIGH
STS-110 51.6 HIGH
STS-111 51.6 HIGH
STS-112 51.6 HIGH
STS-113 51.6 HIGH
Planned future launches
STS-114 51.6 HIGH
STS-121 51.6 HIGH
STS-115 51.6 HIGH
STS-116 51.6 HIGH
STS-117 51.6 HIGH
Seems that STS has been known to use an inclination greater than 51 degrees before and they plan to use it again since this takes them to places like the International Space Station.
On that inclination, they transit the Grand Banks and, as my solid source reminded me, that is why St. John's and especially Goose Bay are identified as possible landing sites should the STS encounter some problems.
At the risk of causing the Premier to have apoplexy, I thought it best to share this information with my faithful audience. It certainly helps to put the Titan 4B launch into perspective.
In the list that follows, I have edited so that only the launch inclinations greater than 50 degrees are included. Note that inclination is taken using the Equator as zero degrees. A 90 degree inclination is a polar orbit heading over the North Pole first. A 180 inclination would put something into orbit along the Equator opposite to the Earth's rotation. For a better discussion of STS mission inclinations, try this page.
Here's the editted list. Note the frequency the STS uses those high inclinations.
STS//Inclination// Notes
STS-9 57.0 HIGH
41g 51.7 HIGH
STS-51-B 57.0 HIGH
STS-61-A 57.0 HIGH
STS-27 57.0 HIGH
STS-28 57.0 HIGH
STS-36 62.0 HIGH
STS-39 57.0 HIGH
STS-48 57.0 HIGH
STS-42 57.0 HIGH
STS-45 57.0 HIGH
STS-47 57.0 HIGH
STS-53 57.0 HIGH
STS-56 57.0 HIGH
STS-59 56.9 HIGH
STS-60 56.4 HIGH
STS-64 56.9 HIGH
STS-68 57.0 HIGH
STS-66 57.0 HIGH
STS-63 51.6 HIGH
STS-71 51.6 HIGH
STS-74 51.6 HIGH
STS-76 51.6 HIGH
STS-79 51.7 HIGH
STS-81 51.6 HIGH
STS-84 51.7 HIGH
STS-85 57.0 HIGH
STS-86 51.6 HIGH
STS-89 51.6 HIGH
STS-88 51.6 HIGH
STS-91 51.7 HIGH
STS-92 51.6 HIGH
STS-96 51.6 HIGH
STS-97 51.6 HIGH
STS-98 51.5 HIGH
STS-99 57.0 HIGH
STS-101 51.6 HIGH
STS-102 51.5 HIGH
STS-106 51.6 HIGH
STS-100 51.6 HIGH
STS-104 51.6 HIGH
STS-105 51.6 HIGH
STS-108 51.6 HIGH
STS-110 51.6 HIGH
STS-111 51.6 HIGH
STS-112 51.6 HIGH
STS-113 51.6 HIGH
Planned future launches
STS-114 51.6 HIGH
STS-121 51.6 HIGH
STS-115 51.6 HIGH
STS-116 51.6 HIGH
STS-117 51.6 HIGH
10 April 2005
And then another day brings the appearance of changes
The launch of a US Air Force Titan 4B is being delayed owing to unspecified problems with ground equipment involved in loading the oxider, according to a news release from 45 Space Wing, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station on Saturday.
Mission B-30 has been postponed several times in the past month for the same reason. As of Friday, 08 Apr 05, the launch is delayed indefinitely, as is another mission using a Delta 4 rocket.
CBC news is linking the delay to a meeting in Dartmouth Saturday of officials from Newfoundland and Labrador, the Government of Canada and the United States government to discuss the launch and implications for the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. The link is to an older story, but late Saturday night, CBC Radio news tied the delay to the meeting.
Canadian Press, meanwhile, reports that US officials provided Canadian federal and provincial officials with the American risk assessment on the launch. Earlier comments by Premier Danny Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador suggested the Americans had made their plans without taking account of the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. Public affairs officers from USAF Space Command contradict this assessment by the Premier, emphasizing that the platforms are outside the debris zone.
Federal public security minister and deputy prime minister Anne McLellan today reporters on Saturday that "[t]he risk is absolutely minuscule. If one is looking at a risk of one in 10 trillion, then you realize that the risk is absolutely minimal." [Emphasis added]
To get an accurate version of comments by US State department briefer Richard Boucher go to the State Department website. Media reports and comments by Premier Williams that there was confusion as to the date of the launch appear to be a misinterpretation of Boucher's comments. The date April 13 is suggested as the date Boucher believes is the correct one - he says "I think" - and then refers reporters to the US Department of Defence for further comment. The US DOD public affairs website contains no mention of the issue and the story does not appear to have picked up any attention from US news outlets.
For those curious about details, here is a link to the hazard area related to the launch originally planned for 10 Apr 05 and now postponed indefinitely. This is not the debris zone, but the area of maximum hazard to air and marine interests at the time of launch and immediately after. Note that this hazard warning lists the launch complex CX-40. This should not be confused with other numerical identifiers like NROL-16 and B-30.
Taken, altogether in one spot, there are three postions here that one can see quite easily. They can be summarised as follows:
1. The US government and its agencies are launching a military satellite into a specific orbit and intend to carry on with the launch, barring any technical delays.
The Canadian federal government appears to be accepting American assurances on the safety of the launch. This is a reasonable position given the issues involved.
2. The platform operators are taking prudent actions like planning to shut down operations and are likely assessing the risks from this launch to their direct financial interests in offshore oil production. They are entitled to take these precautions. Any compensation would be a legal matter; I suspect the operators are getting advice from their lawyers and insurers to be extremely cautious.
3. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is taking an extreme position, without having apparently taken responsibility for shutting down production. Premier Williams comments have been extreme, are often at odds with established facts, history and the advice and information already in the public domain that suggest the risk to the offshore platforms is minimal, negligible or virtually non-existant.
The Premier has insisted on changes to USAF plans which are highly unlikely to ever take place. Simply put, he doesn't have the juice to make them happen, nor does Canada.
Further, the Premier's personal involvement in this matter remains unexplained. The Premier is neither the minister repsonsible for the offshore (Ed Byrne), nor the minister responsible for intergovernmental affairs (Tom Marshall), nor the minister responsible for emergency response (Jack Byrne) unless each of these three ministers is on leave. Of course, as first minister the premier can do just about anything he wants. It just seems strange that he has taken control of this issue and made statements which are at odds with established facts.
His rhetoric has heightened anxiety in the public about this matter apparently needlessly.
Will the Premier being seeking monetary compensation from the United States government for losses incurred by the provincial government in the event of a launch even if there is no affect to the rig (excepting as a result of decisions taken by the operators) . Will this become the basis for an Atlantic Missile Accord? His approach thus far is consistent with what one might expect from the lawyer representing the future plaintiff in a law suit.
Mission B-30 has been postponed several times in the past month for the same reason. As of Friday, 08 Apr 05, the launch is delayed indefinitely, as is another mission using a Delta 4 rocket.
CBC news is linking the delay to a meeting in Dartmouth Saturday of officials from Newfoundland and Labrador, the Government of Canada and the United States government to discuss the launch and implications for the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. The link is to an older story, but late Saturday night, CBC Radio news tied the delay to the meeting.
Canadian Press, meanwhile, reports that US officials provided Canadian federal and provincial officials with the American risk assessment on the launch. Earlier comments by Premier Danny Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador suggested the Americans had made their plans without taking account of the Hibernia and Terra Nova platforms. Public affairs officers from USAF Space Command contradict this assessment by the Premier, emphasizing that the platforms are outside the debris zone.
Federal public security minister and deputy prime minister Anne McLellan today reporters on Saturday that "[t]he risk is absolutely minuscule. If one is looking at a risk of one in 10 trillion, then you realize that the risk is absolutely minimal." [Emphasis added]
To get an accurate version of comments by US State department briefer Richard Boucher go to the State Department website. Media reports and comments by Premier Williams that there was confusion as to the date of the launch appear to be a misinterpretation of Boucher's comments. The date April 13 is suggested as the date Boucher believes is the correct one - he says "I think" - and then refers reporters to the US Department of Defence for further comment. The US DOD public affairs website contains no mention of the issue and the story does not appear to have picked up any attention from US news outlets.
For those curious about details, here is a link to the hazard area related to the launch originally planned for 10 Apr 05 and now postponed indefinitely. This is not the debris zone, but the area of maximum hazard to air and marine interests at the time of launch and immediately after. Note that this hazard warning lists the launch complex CX-40. This should not be confused with other numerical identifiers like NROL-16 and B-30.
Taken, altogether in one spot, there are three postions here that one can see quite easily. They can be summarised as follows:
1. The US government and its agencies are launching a military satellite into a specific orbit and intend to carry on with the launch, barring any technical delays.
The Canadian federal government appears to be accepting American assurances on the safety of the launch. This is a reasonable position given the issues involved.
2. The platform operators are taking prudent actions like planning to shut down operations and are likely assessing the risks from this launch to their direct financial interests in offshore oil production. They are entitled to take these precautions. Any compensation would be a legal matter; I suspect the operators are getting advice from their lawyers and insurers to be extremely cautious.
3. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is taking an extreme position, without having apparently taken responsibility for shutting down production. Premier Williams comments have been extreme, are often at odds with established facts, history and the advice and information already in the public domain that suggest the risk to the offshore platforms is minimal, negligible or virtually non-existant.
The Premier has insisted on changes to USAF plans which are highly unlikely to ever take place. Simply put, he doesn't have the juice to make them happen, nor does Canada.
Further, the Premier's personal involvement in this matter remains unexplained. The Premier is neither the minister repsonsible for the offshore (Ed Byrne), nor the minister responsible for intergovernmental affairs (Tom Marshall), nor the minister responsible for emergency response (Jack Byrne) unless each of these three ministers is on leave. Of course, as first minister the premier can do just about anything he wants. It just seems strange that he has taken control of this issue and made statements which are at odds with established facts.
His rhetoric has heightened anxiety in the public about this matter apparently needlessly.
Will the Premier being seeking monetary compensation from the United States government for losses incurred by the provincial government in the event of a launch even if there is no affect to the rig (excepting as a result of decisions taken by the operators) . Will this become the basis for an Atlantic Missile Accord? His approach thus far is consistent with what one might expect from the lawyer representing the future plaintiff in a law suit.
18 June 2009
“How dare you complain about it?”
Not surprisingly, the latest of Danny Williams public attacks against any contrary voices is stirring further revelations.
The biggest news this week was Williams verbal assault on talk show host Randy Simms for suggesting that maybe some other issues in the province – like the faltering fishery – needed some urgent attention.
Apparently, it wasn’t the only testy exchange between the two. Williams took a snotty tone with Simms during an exchange the week before over government’s role in a botched April announcement on breast cancer testing.
A caller to an open-line show Wednesday afternoon identified only as “Kevin” described his own experience with the political rant from a government member of the House of Assembly.
His crime?
Daring to voice an opinion in a local newspaper.
You’ll find the whole thing over at Geoff Meeker’s blog at the Telegram.
Farther down the post there’s a reference to Tom Marshall, minister of justice, who weighed in to support Williams in his tirade. Marshall – who is widely respected as knowledgeable and decent – sometimes winds up in these sorry positions defending his boss.
In late 2007 former Tory Premier Brian Peckford was on the receiving end of a Marshall scolding.
Curiously enough – in light of Randy Simms comments - Peckford had dared to suggest that perhaps the provincial government was too focused on oil and that other issues deserved greater attention. Peckford’s was a sensible and reasonable presentation.
Marshall’s on the other hand, was - uncharacteristically for him - a pile of misrepresentations and mindless Leader worship. It included this dig which Peckford certainly did not deserve:
And for him to say that we're focusing exclusively on oil and gas would be the same as saying that when he was office he focused exclusively on growing cucumbers, and we all know that's not true. But it's an asinine comment to make and he has to be held to account for it.
Marshall was right, except that the asinine comments were his. And on another level Marshall can be forgiven since he did help put Danny Williams in the job. Marshall was Williams’ west coast chair for the Tory leadership coronation in 2000-2001.
Marshall defends Williams in the most recent case by saying that if “you are against this province then he – and rightly so – is going to be your worst enemy.”
The only problem with that is that none of the people who have felt Williams’ wrath, like say Randy Simms, could even vaguely be considered to be “against this province.”
To make the point let’s leave aside the politicians. Let’s forget Loyola Hearn, the guy who Williams supported for premier in the 1989 race to replace Peckford as Tory leader. Let’s even forget that Hearn returned the favour and helped organize Williams’ campaign in 2000.
Let’s forget Norm Doyle and Fabian Manning. Let’s leave aside John Efford, Roger grimes and basically any politician before Williams irrespective of party who has been dismissed as perpetrating give-aways.
Let’s just look at the ordinary people who wind up on the receiving end of a “crap” comment:
- Mark Griffin, a lawyer from Corner Brook was accused of betraying the province when he commented on concerns in central Newfoundland after the closure of the AbitibiBowater mill.
- From the Gulf News in 2008 during the Memorial University fiasco:
‘However, the most disturbing conclusion of all in this wretchedly pathetic display of political arrogance, is that we now know we have a government with a paranoid determination to control.
Premier Williams has been known to personally call editors and letter writers who offer criticism of him and his government's decisions.
While his stated aim is to "set the record straight" the tactic probably leaves ordinary letter-writing citizens with the sense of "better be careful what you say because He is watching."
This government, quite simply, likes to control the message.
It also likes to attempt to control public debate and opinion.’
- Craig Westcott (The Newfoundland Post) and David Cochrane (CBC Provincial Affairs reporters) have both been cut off from interview opportunities with the Premier, the latter for only a short period but the former on permanent “ignore”.
- Ryan Cleary and the crew at the Independent who fell from grace and then garnered gobs of provincial advertising cash only after they slacked off their government reporting. [Why exactly did Ivan Morgan stop writing about Danny? – ed.]
- Max Ruelokke, head of the province’s offshore regulatory board whose only “crime” was to win two merit based competitions against Williams’ preferred candidate.
- The judge in Ruelokke v. the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador who weighed the evidence and found in favour of Max Ruelokke getting the job, calling government’s actions “callous” as he did so.
- Madam Justice Margaret Cameron, who commented negatively on the curious amnesia afflicting some of the witnesses at an inquiry into one of the province’s most serious health scandals.
- Joyce Hancock, formerly head of the province’s status of women council, who expressed concern over a series of issues surrounding women in the senior public service.
- NASA, for launching a Titan 4B booster as they have done for decades. [Okay that one wasn’t a direct attack but it was a totally loopy, beyond-all-reason, panic-attacky tirade of silly proportions.]
And that’s just the bigger ones that have actually made into some of the local media. There are at least two more your humble e-scribbler can relate involving reporters. There are more to come, undoubtedly as people shrug off the fear.
Williams complaints the day after the Randy meltdown certainly followed in the same vein. As with the clash with Simms over health care, Williams is evidently highly frustrated at news stories which convey something other than the manufactured image from his publicity machine and the scripted comments of his open line callers and online anonymous army.
Voicing that frustration won’t make the stories go away. If anything, the resurgent CBC Here and Now, for example, the source of Williams’ annoyance over health care will just keep piling on the accurate stories of problems here and there in the administration.
This is the normal course of things for any government and any politician. This is what news organizations do. To complain about it is to complain about dogs barking.
Williams has been lucky thus far to have had a relatively free ride and precious little serious criticism until recently. Still, he has liked to complain from the start about the media and public attention. He complained bitterly about attention paid to the lengthy process of getting his private business affairs into a blind trust. Anyone recall the silliness about his being reduced to living on an allowance from the trustees?
The better part of a decade after he got into politics, the guy who says he has a thick skin, actually demonstrates time and again that he doesn’t. He needs to get over it and himself. Williams garnered more, negative media attention for himself over the racket with Randy than he any positive coverage with what should have been a triumphant day of news about another offshore deal.
before leaving this whole issue of childishness, thin skins, and all the rest, we shouldn’t forget another Premier of a decade or so ago who was fond of expressing his displeasure with people who dared contradict him.
One story involved a very prominent local business leader and a disagreement over hydro development or some such. The comments came in a very public way at Marble Mountain. Another involved a local editor and accusations that the editor’s insufficient endowment were the driving force behind his writing. As the story goes, the line was something like the only reason you are taking me on is because you have a small dick.
The impact of that sort of childish behaviour wasn’t readily apparent since Newfoundland and Labrador is a small community used to suppressing open confrontation. Still, the opinions do get expressed.
Nasty - and false - rumours circulate, whispered from one to another with glee. Even those stories relayed above may have been embellished, with time, as they made it to your humble e-scribbler. At a certain point, their veracity is not as important as the fact they get circulated with great vigour in the community, not in the news media, but over the dinner table and on the links.
The mighty will be humbled if they go too far.
And humbled that one was on the day he left federal politics. There were no soft questions at all and no one was concerned about his legacy after a long career in public service. Every reporter in the hastily called news conference took turns to slam Brian Tobin with every hard question they had about his departure. They’d been saving stuff up, as it seemed, and on that day, they used it.
Voters used the frustration they’d saved up as well, in a couple of districts, in a by-election not long after. They humbled the people from the same party who carried on after the Big Guy had left the scene. The sins of the Father, as it were.
People made a change and they changed for a bunch of reasons, not the least of which was a desire to get right of the behaviour of the crowd that they had before.
How quickly some people forget.
-srbp-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)