SpaceX Wants to Send People Around the Moon in 2018

It's certainly an ambitious plan. Extremely ambitious, considering the manned version of the Dragon spacecraft SpaceX uses hasn't even flown in space yet. Stupidly, insanely ambitious, considering the Falcon Heavy rocket that would be used has also not actually flown yet.

I'm not saying that commercial space flight is a bad thing, it is in all likelihood the future of space travel. What I'm saying is that space is not a nice place, and rushing spacecraft development is not likely to end well for any passengers. Space travel will always carry a certain danger, but rushing development to fit a deadline is just stupid, and will not work. That said, I don't think that's going to happen. No, if this little trip happens at all, it'll be 2020 at the earliest. Even if the rocket and the spacecraft are ready for flight, it still needs FAA approval to fly, and the FAA is a government organization. And government organizations don't know the meaning of the word "quick".

Exoplanets Around TRAPPIST-1

Yeah, you've probably heard the news already. It's been everywhere. Recently, scientists announced the discovery of a seven planet system orbiting the red dwarf TRAPPIST-1, all of which are Earth sized and likely made of rock, and three of which are solidly in the habitable zone. What makes this system especially inviting for future study is the dimness of the star. TRAPPIST-1 is tiny and incredibly faint, the midday sky on the orbiting worlds would only be as bright as the sky at sunset on Earth. Most of the heat comes in infrared, and any plants on the surface would be black instead of green. There may very well be habitable planets, but they won't be like Earth.

Anyway, a dim star makes it much, much easier to study the orbiting planets. Planets glow, but not by much, and they pale in comparison to their stars normally. It's like trying to study a firefly floating next to a floodlight from a mile away. It's difficult. But here, instead of a floodlight, we have a 60 watt bulb. It makes life that much easier.

Anyway, I'm sure we'll be hearing more about the TRAPPIST-1 system in the future, especially when the James Webb Telescope goes up in 2018. But for now, we'll just have to imagine what standing on some of those worlds would be like.

Richland Golf Club Review

The par 4 2nd

That's right, more golf! Hey, it was another weekend with excellent weather, how could I not play some golf? The course at hand today is Richland Golf Club in Middletown, Maryland, and I played it on Monday, February 20th. This is a course that I have never played before, and to be perfectly honest, I probably won't be playing again for a while, if at all. In season, it's out of my price range, and there's a big, big problem with the course. The routing is terrible. Obviously, I don't know why exactly that is, but I have my suspicions. I think real estate came before golf integrity. Yes, it's one of those kind of courses. There are houses all over the place, occasionally flanking both sides of holes.

The par 3 4th

Naturally, the routing suffers because housing came first. The holes are disjointed, and the site is very hilly. I used Golfnow to make my tee time, which means I got a cart, and for once, I was kind of glad I had it. This was not a walking-friendly golf course, and for me, that's a bad thing. The disjointed golf doesn't just mean you get holes a long way from each other, but you also get a bunch of holes crammed together awkwardly. On the back nine, we go from par 5 to par 3 to four straight par 4's, all of which are similar in length. The first 3 (12, 13, and 14) run parallel to each other, are dead straight and basically completely flat. Taken in isolation, I actually liked those holes, and the 15th hole is semi-blind from the tee, and blindness in any form is something you don't see often enough. But together? Those holes lose some of their charm, and become more tedious than enjoyable.

The par 3 6th

Of course, most people don't care about routing. Not when you have a cart. The only reason I noticed was because I was thinking about it. The course itself was in excellent condition, and despite its flaws, I enjoyed a good number of the holes themselves. Maybe it was just because I was playing fairly well. Hit a lot of good drives, and I would have done better than 79 if I had remembered how to putt. And I will say this: the complimentary yardage book was a fantastic touch. And not just because it was necessary on a few holes, it was genuinely useful and informative.

As for the golf course itself, the front nine is significantly hillier. It starts off pretty difficult, with a long par 4 that I would say is the second or third hardest hole on the course. It's not an easy start. The fourth hole, a downhill par 3, features a stone wall and is visually appealing. The ninth hole is shorter than the first, but I would say it's more difficult, especially into the wind, the way I played it. There's a big ravine that splits the hole in half, and reaching that ravine was even more difficult into the wind. Admittedly, my drive wasn't very good, but I still had 190 yards left on my second. Then I hit a fantastic shot, one of the best iron shots I've hit in a while. Didn't make the birdie putt, but still, it was a nice way to end the nine.

The par 4 13th

The back nine is a lot flatter and more compact, as I've mentioned. It plays near a creek, which comes into play on a couple of holes. The nine begins and ends with par 5s, the 10th is downhill, reachable, with no water, which, on paper, I played in a very standard fashion. Green in regulation, 2 putt par. That misses the topped drive. But I managed to recover, obviously. The last hole plays uphill, is also reachable, and has water in play near the green which I managed to hit in 2 and birdie. Only birdie I had during the round. I've already talked about the four par 4s, and the other hole of note is the 17th, another long par 4 with a ravine running across the hole. I do not like that hole, it's too narrow, it's got OB on the right, and too many forced carries on a course are just annoying to deal with. I parred the hole, but still, it's not a good hole.

I paid 33 dollars to play this golf course at 11 AM on a holiday. Was it worth the price? I mean, I guess, but I wouldn't play much more than that for a housing-development friendly golf course. It really does spoil the design and the routing. I want to say that the course looks good, and without the houses, it would.

I also played Glade Valley Golf Club this past weekend, and I liked that course more. I didn't get any pictures of that course, I was playing with three random people, and I will definitely play that course again. So there's that to look forward to, right?

UPDATE: I can't believe I didn't remember this when I was writing this at first, but just how appropriate is the name Richland for a golf course? It just makes too much sense.

Picture(s) of the Day #6

It's been a little while since I did one of these. Winter isn't exactly the best time for really compelling photography. Everything is either brown, gray, or some strange combination of brown and gray. Unfortunately, most of the time, it's not really warm enough for outdoor activities, but at the same time, it's often not cold enough for winter activities. Especially this year, we have gotten almost no snow at all. Some people might not like that, but I'm just fine with no snow, because when the weather does one of its occasional winter warm-ups, I can go play some golf. And that's just what I did this past weekend. The golf course of choice? Black Rock Golf Course in Hagerstown, Maryland. I've played there before, and I do generally like it. It's not a difficult course, and it's pretty wide open. In other words, a good place for my first round of golf in more than a month.

Just keep in mind that golf courses never look very good in the middle of winter. This course normally looks a lot better. Still, the course was in pretty good shape, considering it's the middle of February. Maybe over the summer I can go back, and do a real review of the course with better quality pictures. We'll see.

Mars 2020 Rover: Is It Behind Schedule?

At least, that's the word on the street. It's a very weird street.

Anyway, according to NASA's Office of Inspector General, the new Mars 2020 rover, which is headed of to Mars in, uh, 2020, is lagging behind schedule in several areas. The biggest problems are that the sample collecting technology isn't where it needs to be, and five out of the seven main science instruments are on a "condensed development schedule".

What does this mean? Well, it probably means there will be cost overrides, and the Mars 2020 rover, budgeted at $2.4 billion, wasn't exactly cheap to start off with. It also means the rover might not be able to do as much science as was initially hoped, or it might mean the rover will have to wait until the next launch window. So, look forward to the launch of the Mars 2020 rover in...2022. They almost had it.