Andersonic - New Issue 8

Hi, Just giving the new issue of Andersonic a mention.

Issue 8 is available from the Andersonic website, as ever featuring some UFO content:-.

• Stingray - is there more to Stingray's longevity than all that colour?
• Joe 90 - City of Dolls: a look at how the series captured the zeitgeistof the late 60s.
• Joe 90/ Business Holiday - Classic episode reviewed.
• The Metamorph Retrospective - Our writers take a closer look at the colourful opening episode of Space:1999's reboot.
• Beyond Century 21 - a look at the fate of costumes, instrumentation andminiatures from UFO and the other Anderson series after the closure of thestudios... but where exactly do Sid James and mashed potato fit into the equation?
• Space:1999/ Missing Link - a look at Edward di Lorenzo's thoughtful offering from the first series. Is it more important to feel than to think? Koenig's not sure...
• Interview - artist Mike Noble discusses his comic strip career, his techniques, influences and drawing everything from cowboys to bedsteads!
• UFO/ The Square Triangle - UFO does melodrama. Classic episode reviewed.
• Things You Do - ...when you're a fan.

The new issue is available via the website www.andersonic.co.uk - price £2.25 including UK postage (please add for postage outside UK) and also fromeBay for a limited period.
Thanks!

Any comments about the Google image for today? I thought sure someone on this list would have something to say...too bad they didn't do a better job on the UFO picture so it looked more like our UFOs... Although the Google meaning isn't really clear...I know where my head when went I saw it!!!



Cheers,

Mary









[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Didn't even know there was a Google image of the day.  I feel stupid.  I still don't even know where to find it.  *sigh*
 
Jeff

--- On Sat, 9/5/09, MARY VERES <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: MARY VERES <[hidden email]>
Subject: [SHADO] Google's UFO
To: [hidden email]
Date: Saturday, September 5, 2009, 4:15 PM


 




Any comments about the Google image for today? I thought sure someone on this list would have something to say...too bad they didn't do a better job on the UFO picture so it looked more like our UFOs... Although the Google meaning isn't really clear...I know where my head when went I saw it!!!

Cheers,

Mary

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, Jeffrey,

Saturday, September 5, 2009, 5:33:00 PM, you wrote:

J> Didn't even know there was a Google image of the day.  I
J> feel stupid.  I still don't even know where to find it.  *sigh*

http://www.google.com/

Really.

--

Jonathan Andrew Sheen

http://www.leviathanstudios.com
Leviathan of the GEI (Detached.)
[hidden email]

"What'dya expect? I'm a New Yorker!"
-Anonymous New York Firefighter, 9/12/01

Hi, all,

Saturday, September 5, 2009, 5:36:51 PM, I wrote:

J> Hi, Jeffrey,

J> Saturday, September 5, 2009, 5:33:00 PM, you wrote:

J>> Didn't even know there was a Google image of the day.  I
J>> feel stupid.  I still don't even know where to find it.  *sigh*

J> http://www.google.com/

J> Really.

To be clearer:

http://www.google.com/logos/go_gle.gif

--

Jonathan Andrew Sheen

http://www.leviathanstudios.com
Leviathan of the GEI (Detached.)
[hidden email]

"What'dya expect? I'm a New Yorker!"
-Anonymous New York Firefighter, 9/12/01

Not stupid... let me introduce you! Go to www.Google.com. Google (web search engine) gets a kick out of coming up with unique logos when there is a event, date, holiday, etc. worth playing with their logo. They usually have a hot button that explains the logo...as you'll see, today's logo has a UFO on it and NO explanation...which makes one click on the hyperlink to see where it takes you, and it goes to unexplained phenomenon...from which you get to see the top 10 unexplained phenomenon. UFOs are # 7 on the list. If you really want to learn about Google.com logos here is their official site that shows the archive of logos...some of them have been pretty creative! http://www.google-logos.com/



Sorry for the slightly OT



Cheers,

Mary



To: [hidden email]
From: [hidden email]
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 14:33:00 -0700
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Google's UFO





Didn't even know there was a Google image of the day. I feel stupid. I still don't even know where to find it. *sigh*

Jeff

--- On Sat, 9/5/09, MARY VERES <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: MARY VERES <[hidden email]>
Subject: [SHADO] Google's UFO
To: [hidden email]
Date: Saturday, September 5, 2009, 4:15 PM



Any comments about the Google image for today? I thought sure someone on this list would have something to say...too bad they didn't do a better job on the UFO picture so it looked more like our UFOs... Although the Google meaning isn't really clear...I know where my head when went I saw it!!!

Cheers,

Mary

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

OK, I AM stupid, lol.  I thought we were talking about a specific photograph, not what the Google logo looks like today.  My bad.  Thanks Jonathan!!  : )
 
Jeff

--- On Sat, 9/5/09, Jonathan Andrew Sheen <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: Jonathan Andrew Sheen <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Google's UFO
To: [hidden email]
Date: Saturday, September 5, 2009, 4:36 PM


 



Hi, Jeffrey,

Saturday, September 5, 2009, 5:33:00 PM, you wrote:

J> Didn't even know there was a Google image of the day.  I
J> feel stupid.  I still don't even know where to find it.  *sigh*

http://www.google. com/

Really.

--

Jonathan Andrew Sheen

http://www.leviatha nstudios. com
Leviathan of the GEI (Detached.)
jsheen@leviathanstu dios.com

"What'dya expect? I'm a New Yorker!"
-Anonymous New York Firefighter, 9/12/01
















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Just watched it. Never paid attention that they send 3 interceptors, each
with a missle each, to blow up 4 pieces of space junk :)

Bruce

Thanks, Mary!!  : )
 
Jeff

--- On Sat, 9/5/09, MARY VERES <[hidden email]> wrote:


From: MARY VERES <[hidden email]>
Subject: RE: [SHADO] Google's UFO
To: [hidden email]
Date: Saturday, September 5, 2009, 4:43 PM


 




Not stupid... let me introduce you! Go to www.Google.com. Google (web search engine) gets a kick out of coming up with unique logos when there is a event, date, holiday, etc. worth playing with their logo. They usually have ahot button that explains the logo...as you'll see, today's logo has a UFO on it and NO explanation. ..which makes one click on the hyperlink to see where it takes you, and it goes to unexplained phenomenon.. .from which you get to see the top 10 unexplained phenomenon. UFOs are # 7 on the list. If you really want to learn about Google.com logos here is their official sitethat shows the archive of logos...some of them have been pretty creative! http://www.google- logos.com/

Sorry for the slightly OT

Cheers,

Mary


To: SHADO@yahoogroups. com
From: 1shado1@sbcglobal. net
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 14:33:00 -0700
Subject: Re: [SHADO] Google's UFO

Didn't even know there was a Google image of the day. I feel stupid. I still don't even know where to find it. *sigh*

Jeff

--- On Sat, 9/5/09, MARY VERES <veres_mary@msn. com> wrote:

From: MARY VERES <veres_mary@msn. com>
Subject: [SHADO] Google's UFO
To: shado@yahoogroups. com
Date: Saturday, September 5, 2009, 4:15 PM

Any comments about the Google image for today? I thought sure someone on this list would have something to say...too bad they didn't do a better job on the UFO picture so it looked more like our UFOs... Although the Google meaning isn't really clear...I know where my head when went I saw it!!!

Cheers,

Mary

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

CONTENTS DELETED

I always thought the interceptors had smaller cannons for that task.
The big missiles were for taking out UFOs, and knocking a few dead
satellites out of orbit would require something less... lethal.


On 7 Sep 2009, at 16:28, Hemmings, R.K. wrote:



______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi,

Derek Meddings originally wanted the Moonbase Interceptors to have a missile containing multiple warheads:

Quote:

"When the Interceptors have been launched, appropriate time should be allowed for them to be flown into the estimated path of the UFO (this may be many hundreds of thousands of miles ahead of it). When in position, an order should be given to release the atomic warheads/missiles from the noses of the Interceptors. These missiles would then quickly and automatically break up into ten smaller parts (similar to the way in which a 12-bore cartridge breaks up) and then, after about ten seconds (allowing time for the Interceptor to reach a safe distance) these parts would erupt into a blanket atomicexplosion. If the right calculations have been made, the UFO would either be destroyed as it flew into the explosion or be caused to divert."

Derek Meddings • Special Effects Director UFO

Hope this helps,

Griff

--- In [hidden email], "Hemmings, R.K." <rkh@...> wrote:
>
> Oops! Always did think SHADO needed interceptors with multiple
> warheads (or more interceptors.) No doubt Henderson would put
> the kybosh on either option though!
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Rob

Problem with that is no shock waves in space - nothing to transmit the
shockwave



Explosions in space do not work the same as they do in air or under water..
you actually have to hit something in space ( unless you get lucky with
shrapnel from the missile casing causing significant damage to an enemy
craft).



Multiple warheads would be better utilised as a means of defeating
countervailing measures or evasive maneuvers by the UFOs.



The speed of any incoming UFO is likely to be so high that one shot is all
an interceptor would be able to get off before the UFO was out of range of
the interceptor's missiles.



From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
glwason
Sent: 08 September 2009 01:08
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [SHADO] Re: Conflict





Hi,

Derek Meddings originally wanted the Moonbase Interceptors to have a missile
containing multiple warheads:

Quote:

"When the Interceptors have been launched, appropriate time should be
allowed for them to be flown into the estimated path of the UFO (this may be
many hundreds of thousands of miles ahead of it). When in position, an order
should be given to release the atomic warheads/missiles from the noses of
the Interceptors. These missiles would then quickly and automatically break
up into ten smaller parts (similar to the way in which a 12-bore cartridge
breaks up) and then, after about ten seconds (allowing time for the
Interceptor to reach a safe distance) these parts would erupt into a blanket
atomic explosion. If the right calculations have been made, the UFO would
either be destroyed as it flew into the explosion or be caused to divert."

Derek Meddings . Special Effects Director UFO

Hope this helps,

Griff

--- In [hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com> , "Hemmings,
R.K." <rkh@...> wrote:
>
> Oops! Always did think SHADO needed interceptors with multiple
> warheads (or more interceptors.) No doubt Henderson would put
> the kybosh on either option though!
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Rob





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

CONTENTS DELETED

I'm sure that the real reason for the limited weaponry of the interceptors was that if every UFO was brought down before reaching the Earth the scope for stories would be severely limited.
For story purposes, lone UFOs consistently had to get through to Earth, butif there were very strong defences it would put an enormous strain on the scriptwriters not to make the moonbase personnel look incompetent. If everyUFO which got through had to have an elaborate reason for being able to evade the defences, it would take up screentime which might be better spent on the rest of the story.

Better all round, for script purposes, to have a defence system which is far from perfect and routinely allows UFOs through.

Regards
John

Just received my copy plus two back issues _ Great Stuff Richard. Really enjoying reading. I am really impressed with the quality of the writing andteh publications They will keep me entertained while I think of another UFO story to write!! :-)
Louise
 

--- In [hidden email], "richard650304" <point783@...> wrote: