Why would Australia want to support a foreign company? Why not do it all itself? If New Zealand can manage a domestic space launch industry then I'm sure Australia can, once they learn to write and get over their fear of fire and metal.

@@iatsd Go for it! They should build their own. But Australia would be starting from scratch, undoubtedly building small, test rockets. It will take 10+ years to get to a Falcon9-like reusable rocket. China is copying everything SpaceX is doing. Australia might want to do that, too? Or is it more cost effective to work out a deal with a South African-American billionaire who has already done substantial R&D and build licensed copies, legally…and it would have to be equitable for both sides…a sort of partnership or alliance. Then Australia would be able to leapfrog competition and get to building Superheavy boosters directly. But why would SpaceX and the USA just ‘give’ the technology to Australia? A friendly foreign company employing Australian employees, land and infrastructure might be worth it. It would also have to be approved by both governments. I’m just thinking out loud. I’m no expert. It might not be possible to work out such a deal.

Both points of view have merit - International Co-operation, and Self-Reliant methodologies. The question that would be best asked first, is which provides the best advantage to the Australian people, I suspect Hosting the launch services of companies from around the world would be more effective sooner, while encouraging locally developed vehicles as alternatives with tax rebates will take longer and require much more far sighted and apolitical comitment through programs providing tax incentives to the developers, along with mandates for Australian ownership. Of course, we'd have to take funding from other areas to accomodate it, perhaps removing all the Kiwi's from unemployment benefits would suffice,.... 😊

@@iatsd The rockets launched from New Zealand are from a US company called Rocket Lab who are headquartered in Long Beach, California. So it's not actually a New Zealand domestic space launch industry, it probably doesn't even employ very many Kiwis. they just rent launch facilities in eastern North Island, New Zealand.

@@mikeandtriciajohnson7241 I know you desperately want that to be the whoe story, but you know it isn't. Rocket Lab was set up in NZ by a NZer. It relocated the HQ-of-record to the US to access the US military launch market. Main HQ for admin, design, and launch remains in NZ.

Not really, Blue Streak, was used by ELDO (European Launcher Development Organisation) as the first stage of its "Europa-1" rocket. Blue Streak mostly worked OK but Europa-1 never really worked and the UK mostly pulled out. ELDO could never really get anything to work and in 1975 was merged with the ESRO (European Space Research Organisation) to make ESA. The Ariane series has pretty much nothing in common with Blue Streak, being developed 15 years later.

No. This was just a dead end, the British had no influence on anything that followed in space. Starchaser is less advanced than many hobbyist modelers in other countries, and some of their efforts have been, frankly, embarrassing. Absolutely anyone with enough money in the UK can easily beat anything Starchaser has ever done using commercial available HPR products.

Had it gone operational it wouldn't have been fired from Woomera!!! Europa was planned to be launched from French Guiana, like Ariane is.

XTV4 and 5 Test Vehicles used to develop Bloodhound's Ramjet engines and other systems fired at Woomera between 1953 and 1957. Bloodhound Prototypes first fired from mid 1956 at that range. Bloodhound Service Acceptance Trials were between 1958 and 1960 (this firing was one of them, though there were actually two version of the Missile. The Series 1 which was overweight and couldn't do high altitude intercepts and the lightweight Series 2, which became the production Bloodhound 1). This missile was a series 1, Meteor attitude was 15,000 feet and Impact range was 15,000 yards. The later Bloodhound 2 was developed using a series of Test Vehicles called XTV-11 through to 17. Most of the XTV-16's and XTV-17's were fired at Woomera. Also Bloodhound 2 Missile Evaluation Trials were done between 1962 and 1965. Bloodhound 1 wasn't operational until 1961 / 62 and in late 1962 they started shutting squadrons down to save money. Bloodhound 2 wasn't operational until early 1966.

@@richardvernon317 Wow. Thanks. The little I gleaned from Dad before his death, was that he was a Range Controller on Range B, then Koolymilka, trialling Thunderbird (RED Shoes?), RED Duster which might have become Bloodhound and also Sea Slug- these notes were taken 50 years after he had returned. I went back to Woomera Village in 2011 and gave Dad's photos from that time to the museum there.

@@lovethe70s Red Shoes and Red Duster were not related bar the fact that they both in the running for Army and RAF contracts for a while. Red Shoes was EE Thunderbird, Red Duster was Bristol Ferranti Bloodhound. All of the Red Duster stuff was done on Range E.

true

The fake news media strikes again!

I believe it is by the beloved Australian Catholic hymn writers Richard Connolly and James McAuley. I cannot find what it is called. I could also be wrong.

It's a Gelineau pslam tune.

Yes, even in the vernacular. That is where we get the dreadful "four hymn sandwich" we still regularly hear in NO parishes today.

Not for free online. It would be in NFSA's private archives. aso.gov.au/titles/tv/divine-service-rose-bay/

Vatican II ended the same year, 1965, in December. I do not know the exact date of this video, but probably not. However, the document on liturgy was promulgated in 1963 and official experiments had began to be used in 1964 (and much further in 1965) in many places. What we see in this short video, however, does seem to me to be consistent with what you might have seen at a pre-conciliar Low Mass.

@@BasedInAustralia the celebrant seems to have a pocket missal on the altar, along with the Altar missal. I'm guessing that this is Holy Mass according to the very short-lived 1964 Missal. Basically, the 1962 missal with the propers and parts of the ordinary in the vernacular.

@@notsparctacus Good catch. I think you're probably right. That's sort of what I suspected in the description but couldn't find any proof. However -- I found a commenter on this NLM article suggesting that vernacular readings were permitted to replace those found in the Missal by the 1960 revised code of rubrics, though. I don't know if he's right and how quickly/far it might have spread - that is all I can find on the matter. Do you know anything about that? www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2021/10/against-vernacular-readings-in.html#disqus_thread

@@notsparctacusthe Epistle and Gospel were read in the vernacular only facing the congregation. I was an altar boy back then and clearly recall the change.

Charles has a very wicked sense of humour it seems. Kevin bloody Wilson or Derek and Clive? Perhaps.🇬🇧😂

@@brucekilby9957 If you're British you probably wouldn't know who Kevin bloody Wilson is . Probably the funniest but filthiest Australian comedian we've ever had. I will have to look up Derek and Clive though

@@James-kv6kb Derek and Clive are characters of the late Peter Cook and Dudley Moore.🇬🇧🍾🍻🥃🇬🇧