Tuesday, November 14, 2017

Launch Photo

Update:  Nov 15th launch scrubbed.  Gave me a chance to improve my time exposure picture techniques.  



The launch was scrubbed due to a "red range" and late alarm.  They will try again tomorrow.
JPSS-1 will be renamed NOAA-20 and handed over After it is settled in polar orbit.

The faint vertical trail lower center left is where I expect the launch. 

26 comments:

Lawyerliz said...

We hope it scrubs for one day so SIL can see it.

Lawyerliz said...

Sheesh, shall I talk to myself?

Rob Dawg said...

Not sure where everyone has gone. Are my posts that lame?

Lawyerliz said...

Well, try another one.

LBD said...

Good evening!

Spent the day at the Chemo lounge. I got a note from my Doctor. Good news and that was the last treatment for this time around. :)

We don't get rocket launches here just chem trails from fly over.

Lawyerliz said...

I'm so glad

Rob Dawg said...

Milestones LBD. Milestones.

LBD said...

Thank you. It amazes me how well I am doing after years of just getting by. The future is bright and Doc says better treatments are on the way.

Rob Dawg said...

Good the hear. Just hoping there is HDL medicine developed in time to save me.

sm_landlord said...

I have been meaning to post this link for days now... because it's right up the Dawg's track...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/its-the-last-stop-on-the-light-rail-gravy-train-1510354782

@LBD - good to hear that you are doing well.

Lawyerliz said...

Cool.

Lawyerliz said...

Are the fires out now?

Cinco-X said...

Deadlines

Rob Dawg said...

There’s a storm front moving in that should put out the last remnants of our numerous conflagrations.

Lawyerliz said...

I read that few houses will be rebuilt with fire resistant techniques unless more regulations make then.

LBD said...

Good morning!

Flood damage is probably easier to build for then fire. What would you build with if concrete is heat damaged and steel melts?

Rob Dawg said...

Updated the post with last night's time lapse sequence. Try again tonight.

Lawyerliz said...

Nothing. Have to tear everything down and start anew. When push ces to shove a lot are not going to be rebuilt.

Lawyerliz said...

House went up 20$!! We are rich

Rob Dawg said...

Congratulations. Take lots of notes and if your fellow rich allow it come back and tell us what it's like. ;)

It would be great if we could reduce the density in fragile environments to the point that we don't overdraft aquifers and the roads are sufficient for safe evacuation, etc.

LBD said...

Great way to flush out the middle income folks who will never be able to afford the new rich only prices.

Rob Dawg said...

I don't think anyone has been following me long enough to remember my evisceration of the Yosemite Plan. The Plan was essentially to get rid of the poor. Vastly restricted private vehicles, no more low cost camping, tents, cabins. The public was outraged and the plan was abandoned. Since then the plan has been aggressively pursued anyway. Roads, campsites, tents and cabins have been reduced. Prices are through the roof. Fixing overpopulated areas in general will unfortunately result in similar results.

Rob Dawg said...

I found an old post. See if you can guess the year:


I went to Yosemite last Nov. I paid ten times more for lodging
than the first time I visited. The new PLAN (alt 2) calls for
replacing a few thousand cars with 500 diesel buses and replacing
the low cost visitor accomodations with upscale lodging. Three
quarters of the valley visitors never get more than 200 yards away
from a parking lot yet the NPS and Babbit are advocating fewer
parking spaces. Hmm. This isn't about access or saving the Valley,
this is about sanitizing the urban experience for yuppies.

Under the new PLAN I could not have gone to Yosemite. The children
are not old enough, the time for travel not long enough and the money
available not large enough. The proposals for Yosemite are the
lowest form of crass classism. The "Park" is not overrun with cars,
the "Valley" is overused by people. To fix a problem of too many
people, the NPS propose anti-family measures on top of the anti-poor
measures in place currently. The intent is to limit access to rich
childless persons.

If one assumes "too many cars" then the obvious answer is "less
cars." What is really happening is that turnouts and parking spaces
and employee housing parking spaces and RV spaces and camground
spaces and parking lot spaces and total in valley lane miles are all
being reduced in an environment of growing popularity and attendence.

It should be no big suprise that the cars are becoming a problem even
though their numbers are down and their impacts are way down.

Yosemite VALLEY is plain old overcrowed in the summer. Did you see
how many people were in the average car? Did you see the crowds
waiting to use the Valley buses? If you haven't ever been to
Yosemite before then or in off season like we do you don't know how
it used to be when there was a lot more parking and campsites and the
prices were low enough that people go stay for longer than a day
trip. 20 minutes walk past and out any tourist spot and Yosemite
becomes a very pleasurable experience.

It wouldn't be a bad thing except for the expense falling on lower
income visitors. A yuppie couple with a backpack each are no problem
but mom, dad, three kids and a baby with a cooler and portacrib and
bicycles are not going to be able to get on the train nevermind
afford the tickets. With fewer spots and the planned price increases
for the remaining spots its' unlikely they could afford to go anyway.
What is being called a traffic problem is being used to get rid of
those pesky people particularly kids. Oh BTW the $300/night rooms at
the Awanee do come with a parking space. Hmmm.

The traffic congestion is the direct result of the the last 20 years
of anti-vehicle programs. It's easy to target inanimate demons like
SUVs but much harder to tell the little children that they are no
longer welcome unless their parents are rich enough escape the rules.
Take a look at the NPS charter and find out where it says reduce
accesibility. It actually says the opposite.

Rob Dawg said...

New post.

Lawyerliz said...

You are my fellow rich

Rob Dawg said...

Just because they sometimes let me peek through the service door to where the rich congregate doesn't mean I'm rich.