Rotating Space Stations

This first video, about 1/2 hour long, has a recurring graph in it where they, item by item, put on it things that limit human comfort and habitation inside a rotating structure. In the end, you are left with a stripe of radius vs rotation rate where people would be OK. In other words, it answers things like what size your space station must be to “work”. I wish the low end of the graph was a bit more precise, but interpolating it looks like about 25 M is near the lower bound. So somewhere between 75 and 100 feet.

This is well inside the size of structures we’ve already built that rotate in a 1 G field, so ought not to be very hard to design something similar for space:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Eye

The London Eye is a cantilevered observation wheel on the South Bank of the River Thames in London. It is Europe’s tallest cantilevered observation wheel, is the most popular paid tourist attraction in the United Kingdom with over 3.75 million visitors annually, and has made many appearances in popular culture.

The structure is 135 metres (443 ft) tall and the wheel has a diameter of 120 metres (394 ft).
When it opened to the public in 2000 it was the world’s tallest Ferris wheel. Its height was surpassed by the 525-foot (160 m) Star of Nanchang in 2006, the 165 metres (541 ft) Singapore Flyer in 2008, and the 550-foot tall (167.6 m) High Roller (Las Vegas) in 2014. Supported by an A-frame on one side only, unlike the taller Nanchang and Singapore wheels, the Eye is described by its operators as “the world’s tallest cantilevered observation wheel”.

Then this video is from the Gateway Foundation. It’s a bit “sellers puff” at times, but it looks like these folks have a well thought out design that could be put together in space and made operational fairly quickly. I think they are ‘over selling’ the notion that there will be a need for regular folks on the station (waitresses, cops, and janitorial), but then again if they are successful in selling it as a Hotel / Hot Spot then yeah, rich people will pay up for the service and won’t be happy with just a mini-bar in the room and high grade microwaved dinners… 24 minutes:

I would hope they will succeed. Though I doubt they will need old guys fixing computers ;-)

Not to be confused with the medical “Gateway Foundation”, the Spaceport one is here:

https://gatewayspaceport.com/

It looks like they have thought things out in stages and included issues like finances…

Von Braun Station

This is a segmented spaceport that will be revenue generating at each major stage of completion. This will be mankinds first space station with artificial gravity.

The Gateway

You could call it a destination hotel, a low Earth orbit cruise ship, or a city in space with a spaceport. But the best way to understand this complex piece of infrastructure is to look to its namesake: The Gateway.

That they are selling “memberships” is a bit of a trigger for me, but the BASIC is free (but no space perks) while for $40 per year or $400 one time you can get a “Crew Membership” and enter a lotto for a trip to space, if it ever happens…

I think their design is generally OK, and having escape ships next to each cabin space is a nice touch, but just the cost of hauling 22 mini-shuttles into space is “not small”; and one picture looked like there may be two at each point, so 44 total… And will there be 44 expert space pilots on station all the time? I suppose a robotic landing would be possible, but… with emergency decent from anywhere on orbit that’s a bit of an issue too. Or maybe they have enough supplies they can just auto-dock with the ISS and wait for a big space transport to come up and fetch them ;-)

OTOH, if you have a program where visitors get to sit in the pilot seat of the flyer and look out the window while thinking about flying it it, maybe it would have ‘pay off’. I note in passing the “drivers window” is looking “straight down” given their mounted position so you would need to stand on the display panels / windshield on entry… Maybe they need a different mounting orientation ;-)

Subscribe to feed

Advertisements
Posted in Human Interest, Science Bits, Tech Bits | Tagged , , | 9 Comments

Brexit Party Leading Polls, UCP Wins In Canada

A very startling turn of events, and I first ran into it in this video (17 minutes).

It seems that The Brexit Party now TOPS the most recent poll for European Elections. Ahead of Labor. Ahead of Conservatives.

Then, in Canada, the people in Alberta didn’t buy into the smear campaign and have told NDP to knock it off via electing UCP ( United Conservatives with 63 seats, NDP 24) so change coming to Canada too. Watch for Alberta to “have words” with Ottawa.

Not a good week for the Globalists and Socialists ;-)

I find it amusing that “Houndog” had to get RT clips to show off the Brexit Party win. Guess Sky and The BBC were not pushing it much ;-)

I’d add some links / quotes from text sources (news papers et. al.) but it’s after 4 AM, I’ve been working all night on some tech stuff after most of a week of graphs and temperature data, and I just need to get this up and go get some sleep… So maybe tomorrow I’ll add some in comments.

Subscribe to feed

Posted in Political Current Events | Tagged , , , , | 6 Comments

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Anomaly North America

In prior postings I did a sample of various countries around the world, and a full set of South America and Antarctica. This extends that set with North America.

I’m goiing to group things into North Continental (USA, Canada, Greenland), Central (Mexico and Central American countries) and Carib, those islands in the Caribbean Sea. Why? Because countries in those areas ought to look a lot more like each other in terms of Anomaly than like those in other groups. The Caribbean is dominated by water and tropical conditions. Central America and Mexico are about the same but with a bit less water influence. The USA, Canada and to some extent Greenland are large land masses prone to cold winters and significantly further north (so more summer / winter sun changes). This also lets me group making the graphs into smaller work units and it is less oppressive ;-)

Here’s the Koppen Climate graph for North America so you have something for comparison.

Koppen Climate Zones for North America

From that I think you can see why I’d put Cuba into the Caribbean rather than count it in South America… like GHCN did…

The Graphs

Northern Big 3 (Canada, USA, Greenland)

Greenland

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Difference

So about 1 C range of changes both ways. So an error band of about 1 C? Is that what this means? So we can’t know if there is 1/2 C of warming… The the actual anomalies below bounce around by a 3 C range (that might have a flier off the graph – I didn’t check). Looks to me like Greenland data is just chaotic weather. I do note that the really big DIP happens right on the “baseline period” used by GISStemp (1950-1980) or Hadley (1960-1990)…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Greenland Anomaly

Canada

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Difference

Interesting that it’s a roll off to colder. The anomalies (below) look a mess, but without evident warming. More like the loss of some very low going extremes recently. (One wonders if the big freeze in the last couple of years will show up in future data?)

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Canada Anomaly

USA

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly Difference

Again with recent data cooled. Wonder if they were embarrassed by all the attention over the last few years. We also again see no real warming tops, only loss of cold excursions and a general narrowing of the range. Or perhaps being early to the party, they had already “cooked” the v2 data so no more needed here. /snark;

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 USA Anomaly

The Caribbean & Bermuda

These are all in one large shallow water basin with common weather. They ought to be nearly identical.

Antigua & Barbuda

Antigua has no data in GHCN v3.3:

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="AC";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

So all we get is the v4 anomaly graph:

GHCN v4 Antigua & Barbuda Anomaly

GHCN v4 Antigua & Barbuda Anomaly

Bermuda

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Difference

Not a lot of change in the data. They seem to have cooled since 1980 (see graph below) and were hotter back around 1880 – 1860.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bermuda Anomaly

The Bahamas

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Difference

About 1/2 of recent data warmed about 1/2 C, and a cool dip about 1940-1980; but now about the same as the mid 1800s. Cyclical changes?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Bahamas Anomaly

Barbados

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Difference

Drop the past about 0.4 C and warm the recent about 1/4 C – Presto! a trend! Except that those pesky 1800s look about the same as now. Better use that cold snap from 1940 to 1980 as the “baseline period” and ony measure warming against it.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Barbados Anomaly

Cayman Islands

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Difference

Again with cooling the past a bit. But from 1990 to date is basically flat. Ought not the “warming from CO2” be more now and less in 1970?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Cayman Islands Anomaly

Dominica

Dominica has no data in v3.3, so all we get is the v4 anomaly graph.

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="DO";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.06 sec)
GHCN v4 Dominica Anomaly

GHCN v4 Dominica Anomaly

Dominican Republic

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Difference

So they had a crazy high 2 C “warming” rate, chop 1 C out of it and get a more respectable 1 C rate. Or is there just 1.5 C of “random” in temperature measuring on islands?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Dominican Republic Anomaly

Grenada

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Difference

Again with 2 C of warming, so chop a degree C out of some of it, yet the most recent data points (see below graph) are below normal. But that’s just weather, right?

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Grenada Anomaly

Guadaloupe

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Difference

A whopping 5 C range of temperatures, but currently about the same as 1940. Natural variability or error band, one of the other, is way higher than that 1/2 C of Project Fear Warming.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guadeloupe Anomaly

Haiti

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Difference

Looks like nobody fooled with the temperatures between versions. Guess a major hurricane will stop that kind of thing for a while. Anomaly graph below is rather flat too. Had a rise in to 1960, then was ignored for about 20 years, and now the temperatures are like “1940 all over again”.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Haiti Anomaly

Jamaica

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Difference

Push up the 40s (outside the baseline interval) a 1/2 C and drop the baseline spots about 1/2 C but with some noise in it, then lift the very recent by about 1/2 C. I think we’ve seen that before.

Per the anomaly graph below, Jamaica has warmed about 3 C. All that without setting regular record temperatures and with nearby islands not having the same rise. Airport tarmac anyone? Didn’t Jamaica have a big pop in tourism with the whole Bob Marley / Reggae thing? I know I went. Locals were complaining about added traffic, all the airplanes and hotels… I note in passing the hot late 1800s highs are about the same as now.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Jamaica Anomaly

Martinique

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Difference

Differences look like about 1 C range of random. Anomaly trend looks like it was cold in the ’60s and recovered.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Martinique Anomaly

Netherlands Antilles

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Difference

A nice 1/4 C or so cooling of the past, and another 1/4 C to 1/2 C warming of the recent data, pretty soon you got yourself a trend. Except now is about the same as 1980.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Netherlands Antilles Anomaly

Puerto Rico

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Difference

Well that’s interesting. In v3.3 it was heating up by 1 C in Puerto Rico, so now the change is a 1 C cooling, and Puerto Rico is showing mostly flat trend in the red anomaly spots below. Almost like a decade of scrutiny and being pulled before congress might have caused some folks to fear being caught…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Puerto Rico Anomaly

St. Kits & Nevis

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Difference

Nothing goning on in St. Ktis & Nevis. Oddly, as all these islands are in the bathtub together, their anomaly graphs ought to all look alike. Yet they don’t…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Kits & Nevis Anomaly

St. Lucia

Saint Lucia has no data in either version, so no graphs at all:

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="DO";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.06 sec)


MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom4 WHERE abrev="ST";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.31 sec)

Kinda makes you wonder why it is in the inventory at all.

St. Pierre & Miquelon

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Difference

Nice gentle almost unnoticed 1/4 C cooling of the past, a narrow “dip” in the baseline interval. All in all, nicely done sculpting.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Saint Pierre & Miquelon Anomaly

ST. Vincent & The Grenadines

Saint Vincent & The Grenadines have no data in version v3.3.

MariaDB [temps]> SELECT COUNT(deg_C) 
FROM anom3 AS A 
INNER JOIN country AS C on A.country=C.cnum 
WHERE C.abrev="VC";
+--------------+
| COUNT(deg_C) |
+--------------+
|            0 |
+--------------+
1 row in set (0.01 sec)

So all we get is this v4 anomaly graph:

GHCN v4 Saint Vincent & The Grenadines Anomaly

GHCN v4 Saint Vincent & The Grenadines Anomaly

Trinidad & Tobago

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Difference

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Difference

WOW, that 2 C of change down in the “baseline interval” is about the same as the dip in the anomaly graph then… Without that 2 C of down, Trinidad & Tobago would look sort of flat; with “now” temps about the same as the 1920-1930 temps.

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Anomaly

GHCN v4 Trinidad & Tobago Anomaly

Virgin Islands (US)

One wonders what happened to the British Virgin Islands in terms of temperatures… but moving on…

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Difference

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Difference

Sure doesn’t look like warming to me. Given some islands flat, and some with 3 C of warming, I think we’re looking at land use issues, thermometer location, or error bands / data fudging.

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Anomaly

GHCN v4 U.S. Virgin islands Anomaly

Mexico & Central America

Mexico

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Difference

Gee, that recent rise at the tail of the anomaly data (below) seems to match in shape the rise in the difference graph (above).

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Mexico Anomaly

Belize

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Difference

The actual anomaly data (below) isn’t warming on the top end, though we do see the loss of low going anomalies in the recent data. As though tons of concrete at the airport held heat over night… The change graph isn’t doing much either, though around 1980 got a spike. Sleepy little Belize…

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Belize Anomaly

Guatemala

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Difference

Not really warming though we lose some of the low going anomalies in recent data (see graph below) and the changes between v3.3 and v4 are not much. Looks like nobody is paying attention to Guatemala.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Guatemala Anomaly

El Salvador

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Difference

Looking at the anomaly plot below, there’s a nice “dip” in the baseline interval, and a gap about 1990-2005, but then some crazy changes in the above difference graph. Looks to me like +/- 1 C of error band and nobody really knowing just what the temperature is in tenths of C.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 El Salvador Anomaly

Honduras

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Difference

Already has a nice “dip” in the baseline interval, but those changes in the recent time are just wild.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Honduras Anomaly

Nicaragua

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Difference

We have 1/2 C drop added to the baseline, and 1 C of rise added in recent data. Just about the same as the “warming” found. Looks like someone found a way to get Nicaragua data in line with goals.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Nicaragua Anomaly

Coasta Rica

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Difference

Nice dip in the baseline interval, but what’s this with the cooing at the end? Costa Rica just not getting hot? And right next to Nicaragua too. Ought to be nearly identical, but isn’t.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Costa Rica Anomaly

Panama

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Difference

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Difference

Gee.. Looks to me like Panama is being flat to slightly cooling (see below) and not much change at all between v3.3 and v4. I wonder if this is at a US Military Base and they are grumpy if you play with their data? I wonder if that’s why it cuts off in 1980… Seems to me someone ought to know the temperature in Panama right now.

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Anomaly

GHCN v3.3 vs v4 Panama Anomaly

Tech Talk

The specifics on the report / graph making programs is in the first “by country” posting so will not be repeated here.

This SQL produced the list of countries in North America (Region 4):

SELECT cnum, abrev,region, cname 
FROM country WHERE region=4 ORDER BY cname;

Here’s the list:

MariaDB [temps]> source bin/Namerica.sql
+------+-------+--------+------------------------------------+
| cnum | abrev | region | cname                              |
+------+-------+--------+------------------------------------+
| 426  | AC    | 4      | Antigua and Barbuda                |
| 423  | BF    | 4      | Bahamas, The                       |
| 401  | BB    | 4      | Barbados                           |
| 402  | BH    | 4      | Belize                             |
| 427  | BD    | 4      | Bermuda [United Kingdom]           |
| 403  | CA    | 4      | Canada                             |
| 429  | CJ    | 4      | Cayman Islands [United Kingdom]    |
| 405  | CS    | 4      | Costa Rica                         |
| 430  | DO    | 4      | Dominica                           |
| 407  | DR    | 4      | Dominican Republic                 |
| 408  | ES    | 4      | El Salvador                        |
| 431  | GL    | 4      | Greenland [Denmark]                |
| 409  | GJ    | 4      | Grenada                            |
| 432  | GP    | 4      | Guadeloupe [France]                |
| 410  | GT    | 4      | Guatemala                          |
| 411  | HA    | 4      | Haiti                              |
| 412  | HO    | 4      | Honduras                           |
| 413  | JM    | 4      | Jamaica                            |
| 433  | MB    | 4      | Martinique [France]                |
| 414  | MX    | 4      | Mexico                             |
| 434  | NT    | 4      | Netherlands Antilles [Netherlands] |
| 415  | NU    | 4      | Nicaragua                          |
| 416  | PM    | 4      | Panama                             |
| 435  | RQ    | 4      | Puerto Rico [United States]        |
| 417  | SC    | 4      | Saint Kitts and Nevis              |
| 436  | ST    | 4      | Saint Lucia                        |
| 438  | SB    | 4      | Saint Pierre and Miquelon [France] |
| 437  | VC    | 4      | Saint Vincent and the Grenadines   |
| 424  | TD    | 4      | Trinidad and Tobago                |
| 425  | US    | 4      | United States                      |
| 440  | VQ    | 4      | Virgin Islands [United States]     |
+------+-------+--------+------------------------------------+
31 rows in set (0.00 sec)

In Conclusion

So there you have it. A few days of “seat time” at the computer. Hopefully it is of use to someone. I think it does point out what country’s data needs more scrutiny. Then there’s also the question of why trends in some nations are different from another very nearby and in the same body of water. Furthermore, there’s a great “cross check” for this in that there is surface water temperature data from decades of hurricane tracking. On these small islands, air temperature never strays far from water temperature. I was swimming in Jamaica once when rain started. The ocean, air, and rain all at 86 F.

It does look like there was a cyclical “dip” after the hot 1930s-40s into a cool ’50s-70s and we have newspaper and magazine articles from then shouting about a New Little Ice Age (and I personally remember it – IT Happened.) So despite the folks saying that picking it for a “baseline” doesn’t matter, I think it’s just too convenient. The method I used to calculate anomaly has no baseline. A given thermometer is only compared to itself over a selected month across the years. (So, for example, the Jamaica Airport thermometer would have all of its Januaries averaged then the January anomaly computed against that. Repeat for each other month of the year for each instrument.) Then there is just the shortness of most records. Many just start in that cold period and rise out of it, not having an old 1870 hot sample to see in their past.

Finally, with that much change showing up in some very small countries, you know they didn’t have a dozen thermometers to choose from in 1890. It must be some kind of “intervention” when decades of data all move by the same amount. It just screams “Fudging the data” (though I’m sure they would call it fixing errors in the past). But when all the “warming” comes from the “fixing up” and “adjusting” (even of this “unadjusted” data) or from splicing a 1/2 cycle and calling it a trend: Just where is the room for CO2?

It took me a few days of “seat time” to make this set and post it, so don’t worry if you just want to look at a few each day over time. After the first dozen even my eyes started to glaze over ;-) But these will be here for months or years to come, for your pondering.

Subscribe to feed

Posted in AGW Science and Background, Global Warming General, NCDC - GHCN Issues | Tagged , , , | 10 Comments

Tony Heller – Corruption Of The USA Temperature Record

This is a rather well done video demonstrating the basic issues in the USA Temperature record and with hints about why the global data are so useless. 16 minutes:

Subscribe to feed

Posted in AGW Science and Background, Global Warming General, NCDC - GHCN Issues | Tagged , , , , , , , | 3 Comments