- I mis-typed, it was "Armageddon 2419" and was last re-issued in the 1980s by Ace when Jim Baen was editor there. ISTR that they did several authorized sequels to it from outlines done by Niven and Pournelle.
Yep, I'm not blowing smoke, I worked on that puppy from late-1982 to early-1989; there are parts that were a real headache, especially with the tools we had at the time (great compared to working "on the board" but nowhere near as good as what's available now). I can honestly swear to be intimately familiar with the first one (I've been there at midnight at Plant 42, Site 4, in Palmdale supporting the crew installing some of my handiwork). Yeah, it's not the most aesthetically attractive aircraft, but it does what it's supposed to do and does it well. Fortunately, low observables materials have developed significantly since it was designed and modenr stealthy aircraft are as much of a maintenance headache. These days, I'm working at Sikorsky on their Black Hawk and Sea Hawk helicopters.
I'll agree with you about Albus and the goblins, he's woefully ignorant and doesn't care. I suspect Sun-Tzu would be dismissed as "just another muggle" and not bothered with (that's an attitude that's going to bite the wizarding world more and more as more and more airborne and space-borne reconnaisance and imaging platforms go up; I doubt protective and concealing wards were intended to deal with all that).
Author's responseI've read several (dozen) from the Ace/Baen collection. It's strange.. Larry and Jerry are two of my favorite writers...by themselves, but put them together and their work is a train wreck. The Mote in God's Eye and The Gripping Hand, both stand out as being particularly bad.
I often design model airplanes, both as display and flying models and so, I can easily understand. Even when starting out with an established planform, every new requirement needs something else to be changed.
After I left the service, and before we moved up here to Washington, I worked in the helicopter simulators on NAS North Island, I taught my then-five year old daughter, to fly an SH60F ASW helicopter(in the box). She was so short, her feet wouldn't reach the pedals, so I handled them for her. She managed to take it off and hover. It was ugly, but she did it.
When I brought the simulator down off it's struts and opened the door, I saw a bunch of Lt's and LCdr's waiting to give me a hard time for the wobbly flight. One asked: "Hey Dave, who flew that?" I just reached behind me and brought out my little girl, her face split in half by a grin.
The: "NO!" that sounded that day, echoed through the barn.
Shortly after that, I was told not to bring her to work. "It was too dangerous." Crap! I'd been bringing her on occasion for the previous two years.
I guess the zeroes didn't like to learn that a five year old could do what they could.
You're right about the Purists dismissing Sun-Tzu. Being a mere muggle, he was obviously of no consequence.
I'm hoping that by the time the muggles see the wizards as a threat, Harry will have given them a reason to let them be. After all, he's going to be above board about everything. You'll learn more in the next chapter when Harry goes to visit the Queen.
(#) twistyguru 2010-06-02Another good chapter in a fun and interesting story. I'm eagerly looking forward to the scene where Lucius presents the box of robes and snapped wands to MoldieButt.
Your point about dirty wounds is well taken (I speak as a former ER doc). If they're not cleaned out well at the outset, they can go really, really bad. Hmm, probably had a sadist/surgeon (heh, like there's any other kind) clean it out the second time. Personally, I never liked having people wiggle on me, so I (almost) always used a big IV slug of happy juice first...of course, I caught all manner of shit for that from my fellow docs, but nobody wiggled while I was working much.
Keeping Fawkes around would be a goodness, especially since abandoning Dumbles for Harry would give Harry another extra bit of Light street cred. Don't want him bonded to Harry? How about bond Fawkes to Neville? That'd be an interesting twist that I don't think I've ever seen.
Of course, Fawkes bound to Luna would be interesting, too....
Author's responseThanks Doc. I'm glad you're enjoying the show. That scene should be filled with fun...for us.
My daughter used to whine about my cleaning her scrapes before bandaging them, until I got fed up and showed her that scar. I explained exactly how it came about and how it still hurt. She hasn't given me a problem (in that area) since.
I had a little chat with FireLemming about that, and we agree with you. Fawkes needs to stick around for a time. His being there could both provide support to Harry's cause, and at the same time, help them obtain information on Dumbley's doings.
She suggested Harry. I really didn't want him bonded to Harry, because he's got enough on his plate just now. He's got to train over sixty of his friends in the Jedi arts, plan an attack against one of the most dangerous psychopaths since Stalin, Help Bones reform the government, invent a way to eliminate the 'other' dark lord, force the sheeple to think for themselves and keep the whole mess under wraps. An accusation by Dumbledore of 'Stealing his familiar through dark magicks', would definitely turn the world firmly against him, despite his control over The Prophet, and likely they would support Mr. Twinkles again.
Neville was a candidate, and like you, I'd never seen that before, but he's nearly in the same position as Harry, so we decided on Luna.
More coming next week.
- Fawkes with Luna should be quite an experience for both; 'sides, Fawkes can help her with her job of keeping Harry away from the Dark Side.
I wonder if you're going to make the special Weasley "Stupify" a running joke through the story? I can just see Bill and Charlie using it on various occassions if/when they return to help.
I liked Snivellus' reaction to his little package. I see he decided to use it in that ancient ritual, "The Passing of the Buck". I do so hope Lucius gets his proper reward from Tommy-boy for this.
Yeah, I'm passing familiar with the current successor to the SH-60F, the MH-60R, as well as most of the other current production variants; granted primarily with propulsion and related systems and structure, but you'd be surprised how much you interact with. I can well imagine how upset they were over your daughter being able to fly the simulator that well. I've had the pleasure, over the decades, of working on a variety of aircraft, from the smallest Cessnas up to the B-2 and, going higher, the ISS (I take pride that some bits that I nurtured from proposal through to installed hardware are up there in orbit now, working as advertised). Since late 1982, it's primarily been the military/government aerospace sector, but there's been quite a variety of programs and projects in that time. PRior to that, most of my experience was in civil, both personal and business, aircraft.
Author's responseWhile Luna said she is there to keep him from going over, she really won't have too much trouble there. Hermione is the one giving him the 'incentive' to stay in her good graces, after all. Fawkes will be there to back him when he needs it, but for the most part, he's going to be an 'inside source closely connected to...'
He will also be working with Peeves and Dobby to Keep Mr. Twinkles off balance.
That's a good dear. I hadn't really considered it, but since the twins learned it from Arthur, I can't see him not teaching his elder boys the benefits of a well placed knock on the head. On the other hand the only other person who deserves one is Fudgey and I've already neutered him. Meh. It might come up.
At this point, Lucy is still in Azkaban. I'm thinking one of the other Deez is visiting Narcissa when the package arrives, addressed to 'My Lord'. He takes it to Voldy, thinking it's for him, and things go from there.
That's one of the things I like about the 60's. With the exception of the payload and a few slight differences in control panels, one is the same as the rest. If you can fly one, you can fly all. The sims for the Romeo's had just come on line when I left, to take over the Ch-46D and SH3F/HH3H sims a few blocks away, but I got the chance to play with them too. Better visuals, but the controls and flying characteristics were the same. I still crashed trying to roll one.
Hint. Flying the H60 is like driving a Cadillac with cruise control. The H3 is more like a Porsche with rack and pinion steering and half the steering fluid gone. They are TOUCHY!
The 46 is surprisingly easy to fly.
Sigh! I'd love to fly in orbit. It's the one goal I set for myself that I've never attained...and at my age, probably never will. The closest I came was 68,000 feet in an early model TF-15A(later renamed F-15B), back in '76. The were From the 56th Aggressors, on their way From Nellis AFB to Eglin on a cross country training flight. I was in the CAP at the time. Six of us got the chance to fly in the back seat. Capt. Stone was a real trooper and took it as far as he could for me. I got to see the top of the world. God, that was something.
I was sportin' a semi for days after.
I understand he caught hell for taking it above it's service ceiling, but he just laughed it off and said the ceiling was just a recommendation.
Seeing your 'babies' flying up there must be a hell of a thrill to you, knowing that without you to see them through their teething stages, they wouldn't be there. Good on ya, man!
I never liked the Cessna trainers, (I've flown the 152's and the 172's) though since I took my flight training in the Tomahawk, I suppose that's the reason. I see the Cessna design under the wing, as an air dam, where the wind can flip you (almost happened on a crosswind landing) whereas the tomahawk design allows it to slip up & over the canopy. Regardless what people say about the Tomahawk/Skipper, I think they're hell of easier to fly. Lot's more forgiving.
Since,82, huh? So, can you tell me about the saucers? Snicker!
And where the hell is my flying car?
Sorry:" Third para...That's a good Idear.
- Ponders......if Fawkes is the "inside source" does that mean he's the Wizarding World's version of "Deep Throat"? Would that make Luna his "Bob Woodward"? He'll need a code name........ Then again I was also thinking he's like a deep cover operative a la James Bond; just with a "licence to flame"! After all, he did have a rendevous with that female phoenix in Japan, and I'm sure that he knows several more in other places! :)
- Hmm, I can't say that I personally know about any saucers, extra-terrestrial or local in origin, though I admit I sometimes wonder if some of Avro Canada's more "interesting" projects were not taken deep into the "Black" world. On the other hand, I learned enough from what people wouldn't talk about to know that there's some interesting "vehicles" out there; forex. just from what folks at Northrop wouldn't talk about, I got a fair idea of what Tacit Blue looked like before it was declassified.
I'll admit to being prejudiced, I worked on the 152 and 172 (especially the 152, the fuel system changes from the 150 to the 152 were all mine and, back in my files, I've still got my copy of the certification report on the 152's fuel system.
Yeah, I can imagine the H-60's quite an improvement over the versions of the H-3/S-61 that the Navy operates (do they still still use any H-3s other than the VH-3s of HMX-One? If I take the outside walk from the plant gate to the office I work in, I go right by the dedicated maintenance and overall hanger for those and their sister VH-60s). A generation or two of design background will do that. I suspect though, that the newly remanufactured S-61T aircraft might be a lot closer to the H-60 since they incorporate a lot of technology from the H-60 and other lines.
Yeah, seeing your "babies" flying is quite a thrill. One reason I was most interested in seeing the flight of F-35B c/n BF04 was that it was the first with full, or almost full, equipment fit including some installations I did.
Author's responseAVRO's project was a hideously expensive waste of time. They wanted a coriolis powered saucer and got a horribly overpriced hovercraft with no directional stability. I would have loved to see the CF-105 'Arrow', though, but it was gone and done before was old enough to appreciate it. Le Sigh!
It's interesting how much information can be got from people who 'can't discuss that'. The problem is, the engineers and technicians who work on projects like Tacit Blue are justifiably proud of their achievements and want to brag.
Cessna/Piper: Usually people like one or the other. I prefer the Piper, but the Cessna is nearly impossible to spin...and it has that silly push/pull throttle. It works, but it's hardly 'gool'. The piper has a 'real' throttle quadrant.
The last plane I flew was a Stolt Starduster Too.
Now, THAT's a hell of an airplane!
HC-85 in San Diego, Operates the HH-3H, and I think there's at least one other HC squadron on the east coast.
If the S-61's flight control/stability system has been upgraded as well, I see no reason they shouldn't be flying for another ten or fifteen years. The 'kettle drum' is a good airplane.
F-35: Pretty bird. Fast, and most importantly, versatile. If it can be made rough-field capable, like the Yak 38, it would be an asset to any army.
- Heh, my first questions were regarding a particular engine that I thought, by its design, would be good for low-observables aircraft; when I started getting "I can't talk about that" and funny looks, I had a start. The real confirmation was when I went to work on the AGM/BGM-137 "TSSAM" which shared a lot of aerodynamics with TACIT BLUE.
As I said, I've an appreciation for Cessnas from having worked there (working with discrepant parts in MRB is quite the education for the young engineer).
I daresay that the F-35B can land anywhere the Yak-38 can and with less distrubance since it's got a lift fan rather than lift engines. That they can make three different versions on one assembly line is a triumph of careful planning and good engineering.
Author's responseWhile most focus for low observables, is on turbine engines, perhaps a ducted fan would be a better choice. After all, that's what the TF-34 hi-bypass turbofan engine is. the advantage would be a much quieter engine with a nearly undetectable IR signature. The down side would be a less powerful engine and a slower airplane.
I do like the low-winged Cessna's. 'Nuff sed there.
I didn't know the F-35 was rough-field capable. That's a tactical advantage anywhere. I do like the fact that they designed the aircraft to be modular and interchangeable. With only a few switches in basic parts, one is the other.
(I've always wondered how a Williams F-107 engine would work in a small home-built? Maybe a Long EZ or a BD-10?)
- That might work for a homebuilt, though I think getting such an engine made available would be something else. I always though the Garrett ATF3 would be a good low observable engine with the exhaust right behind the fan so you'd get good mixing - turns out my thoughts were good 'cause that's what Tacit Blue used.
The F-35B with it's stovl/vtol capability (depending on room and payload) can pretty well go anywhere, just like the Harrier (the USMC wouldn't have it any other way). Well, the basic design is modular, but there's a lot of version-specific structure while most of the systems remain the same across all three variants (designing one installation to fit all three variants occassionally was challenging).
Author's responseHey Cat. The ATF-3 is a good choice, but I figure the 107 can make almost anything into a mach buster(assuming the airplane is well enough built.)
Hell, it pushes a 1200 lb harpoon along at many times faster than we can see.
I cannot see the MC asking anything less.
Here's my Addy: Alorkin@msn.com
This way we can jaw all day about engines and avionics, without boring the rest of the people.
- Sorry to nitpick, but the particular usage is something of a pet peeve of mine. Prophecy (long e sound at the end) is the noun (meaning both an individual prediction and the art of generating them) while prophesy (long i sound at the end) is the verb. You prophesy, uttering a prophecy.
Author's responseHey Blaisedec
Yeah, that’s basically how I see it too. ‘Prophesy’ is the art, ‘prophecy’ is the utterance. (I believe I mentioned that in the author’s notes back in chapter 10.)
- O.K, Q.; since when does 'sanctioned' mean 'killed'? I thought it was another term for being punished?
Author's responseThere are dozens, if not hundreds of euphamisms for killed. The word sanctioned was coined from ‘The Eiger Sanction’ (1975) starring Clint Eastwood. Basically it’s politic-eze to use words that can have more than one meaning. That way if the crime is detected, and investigated, and the investigation actually goes somewhere, the person or government agency that ordered it, can disavow any knowledge.
Sign up to review this story.