jump to navigation

Hu Davis and William (Bill) Ketchum, Sunday, 5-5-13 May 5, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Hu Davis and William (Bill) Ketchum, Sunday, 5-5-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2002-BWB-2013-05-05.mp3

Guests:  Hu Davis & William (Bill) Ketchum.  Topics:  Space infrastructure, SSP, SLS, Falcon Heavy, reusability, space policy and U.S. space leadership.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

We welcomed Hu Davis and Bill Ketchum to the program to discuss the need for space infrastructure development, SSP, and a space leadership policy by the United States. In the first segment of our 91 minute program, we talked about the need for space infrastructure development, reusable rockets, and space solar power.  Our guest Hu Davis has a Power Point presentation on SSP that will be uploaded to The Space Show blog summary so don’t forget to check it out on the blog.  I will also upload to the blog Bill Ketchum’s pdf paper,  “What Will America Do In Space Now?”  We discussed the history of various space infrastructure studies and efforts and the same for SSP studies, pointing out how new technologies, engineering methodologies, and sophisticated manufacturing have made many projects cost effective today when that was not the case years ago.  Our guests fielded several questions from listeners about the SSP business case, reusability and the SLS compared to the Falcon Heavy.  Doug asked about the use of in space resources & our guests suggested that for SSP for example, using in space resources could account for 90% SSP components.  Questions were asked about the land cost and the use of rectennas.

In our second segment, we talked about nuclear propulsion and tax/economic subsidies to our current terrestrial energy industry which make it harder to develop SSP.   We talked about the problem and the lack of viability for SLS.  Questions came in regarding on orbit propellant transfer and cryogenic transfer development.  As our program was ending, our guests talked about space education outreach, persuading congressional leaders and the public to support space infrastructure development, SSP , and more.

Please post your comments/questions for our guests on The Space Show blog and I will make sure they know about them.  You can email either of our guests through me at Drspace@thespaceshow.com.

what will america do in space now

2013 Solar High Master Draft for SWRI-1

Dr. Philip Metzger, Monday, 4-8-13 April 9, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Dr. Philip Metzger, Monday, 4-8-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1991-BWB-2013-04-08.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Philip Metzger.  Topics: Starting industry in space for the coming space resource revolution re space mining robotics & more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

We welcomed Dr. Philip Metzger to the program to discuss the topic of a coming space resource revolution because of the prospects for a rapid advancement of robotic industry in space.  Please visit his website at www.philipmetzger.com. During our first segment of this two hour five minute program, Dr. Metzger explained the need for space resource usage as a result of a growing Earth population, increasing energy demands, industrialization & an overall feeling of being “squeezed” regarding future demand and resource usage.  From this point, he took us through the technologies, advancements and some visionary plans for setting up a commercial industry in space for space mining robotics and ISRU technologies which are available today.  Dr. Metzger was clear in telling us that the NASA charter was about exploration, not starting up space industry.  We then talked about the ways that industry can access the advance technology created by the NASA exploration and science programs.  Our guest provided us with several robotic examples, including the possibility of making heat shields from Phobos materials which could go a long way toward making a Mars mission affordable.  We talked about technology readiness levels, TRL 1-9.  Phil explained what the various levels meant & how the technology development is passed on to the next development group as the level advances.  I asked our guest to describe a typical day in his lab.  Starting at 6:45AM, Dr. Metzger described his duties and functions and those of the rest of the lab workers.  As you will hear, it’s a mixture of administrative, design, computer work, testing, retesting, & equipment manufacturing.  3D Printing was discussed in some detail and was actually a discussion topic throughout the entire program.  We talked about our being able to repair robotics as compared to building the robotics to avoid needing repair.  Listener Mike sent in an email to inquire about 3D printing, teleoperated & AI robotics for self sustaining lunar/asteroid economies. He also wanted to know how human space exploration fit into the robotic model.  Phil had much to say in response to Mike so don’t miss this discussion. Near the end of this segment, we talked about robotics & the communications time delay, even for the Moon, and what this means for HSF & robotic development. Another concept introduced to us was that of self-sustaining robots that do not need to continue being launched to their destination! Near the end of this segment, Phil introduced us to Lizard Scale Robotics & the different categories going up the scale of robotic development to the top level human scale.

In our second segment, Doug called in from S. California to inquire about starting an affordable industry, financing, and the use of lunar propellant ice.  This took us to a discussion of setting up profitable ventures for space industry development. Phil talked about a new spaceport concept starting with spaceports here on the ground, then in LEO, on the Moon, & then moving out to Phobos.  For a profitable venture, he did say the time line was still too long for capital investment so we discussed public/private partnerships. Also in this segment, we talked hardware designs, the need to start with low technology, even clumsy robots and evolve upward, but avoiding launches & most everything being made in space. We talked about launch capabilities, heavy lift, & getting a specific mass to where it needed to go.  Closing the business case came up & our guest talked about the old “impoverished view” as compared to a new, expanded, multi-potential global view. Don’t miss this discussion.  Mike sent in another note about what it might mean to be second & the value of the exponential potential.  Phil took us through this discussion which made it crystal clear why maintaining our space leadership or being part of it on an international partnership level was so important for our future.  In this context, Dr. Metzger talked about widespread participation in space development for multiple co-owners.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can reach Dr. Phil Metzger through his website or me using drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Robert Sackheim, Monday, 4-1-13 April 2, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Robert Sackheim, Monday, 4-1-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1986-BWB-2013-04-01.mp3

Guest:  Robert (Bob) Sackheim.  Topics:  Commercial space, propulsion, U.S. space policy & more. Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

We welcomed Robert Sackheim to the program to discuss NASA, commercial space, the current state of rocket propulsion and advancements in the field.  During our first segment of this 1 hour 47 minute discussion, Mr. Sackheim talked about his background and experience at TRW, NASA MSFC, and his current consulting.  I asked him several questions about the current state of rocket propulsion. Bob had much to say about this, focusing on chemical rocket propulsion, satellite propulsion, electric propulsion, and the need for nuclear propulsion.  He talked about booster rockets, various rocket stages and their propulsion, rocket engines, and even SRBs.  Several questions came in asking him if we had the current technology for HSF to Mars or even the Inspiration Mars flyby mission talked about so much in the recent press.  Listeners wanted to know if our current levels of propulsion were up to the task.  After a rather thorough propulsion discussions, Bob turned to commercial space, lowering total space mission costs, regulatory policy, and commercial spaceports.  He also talked about budget issues and raised the question a few times as to why ten NASA centers were needed given their often overlapping, competitive, and duplicate work.

In our second segment, commercial space took the lead with a discussion on public/private partnerships & the belief that Americans can do anything if we set our mind to it, including space travel.  Of course here the problem as we know lies in leadership and today it appears that leadership in space & other areas is sparse at best.   Bob then focused on geo satellites and the increasing development and capabilities applicable to cubesats.  HSF came up for discussion as did the robotic missions. You might be surprised by what our guest had to say about HSF.  Other issues in this segment included the lunar space elevator, the congressional and NASA track record in canceling ongoing projects & taking lessons from history, SSP, & ways to reform & move NASA forward.  Bob spoke about evolving toward the old NACA model.  I asked about the impact of space advocacy from his perspective given his leadership experience and past positions in leading organizations and projects.  We also asked him about space tourism and hybrid rocket engines. He had much to say about hybrids, don’t miss the discussion.  Bob talked about the Falcon rockets, testing including static fire tests, and SRBs as related to the Constellation project and safety.  Toward the end, our guest was asked about NewSpace, fuel depots, & cryo transfer.  For closing comments, he talked about commercial space being the way to go & the path to our space future.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. You can reach Mr. Sackheim through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Dr. Alan Stern; Open Lines, Sunday, 3-24-13 March 25, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
4 comments

Dr. Alan Stern; Open Lines, Sunday, 3-24-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1979-BWB-2013-03-24.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Alan Stern.  Topics:  Golden Spike & the NSRC 2013 conference followed by Open Lines in the last hour.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

We welcomed back Dr. Alan Stern for the first hour of this two hour program.  Dr. Stern first talked about his new company, Golden Spike, then he told us about the upcoming NSRC 2013 Conference.  Please visit these websites for more information:  http://goldenspikecompany.com; http://nsrc.swri.org.  Dr. Stern started by telling us about the Golden Spike company plan, goals, objectives, and time tables.  He talked about the technology, their business plan, pricing, who may want to buy the two seats to go to the Moon for $1.5 billion and what they might do on the Moon though that is the choice of the customer.  He talked about the number of launches needed based the specific launch vehicle to be used.  We also talked about the lunar lander, challenges to the mission, and the company financial needs.  Return payload requirements were mentioned which are 50 kilos at this time.  Questions were asked about EVAs and spacesuits, capsule life support, radiation, etc.  Dr. Stern also received questions pertaining to the future plans for Golden Spike and potential mission expansion plans.  As we approached the end of the first segment of the two hour program, we talked about the upcoming NSRC 2013 conference to be held from June 3-5 in Broomfield, CO.  Alan went through the logistics, keynote speakers & he talked about the potential impact of sequestration on the conference.  During our hour with Dr. Stern, he also talked about two Indiegogo programs underway.  The first  campaign Alan talked about re $1 for each mile to the Moon can be found at http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/golden-spike-is-sending-nations-and-people-to-the-moon-join-in.  Later, Alan talked about naming the closest exoplanet via Indiegogo.  Check it out at www.uwingu.com.

In our second segment, we went to Open Lines.  I talked about the recent set of astronaut panels at Rocky Mountain College and when they might be archived on Space Show websites.  I also went over the coming Space Show schedule.  Doug called to talk about sequestration and he had Space X, Falcon Heavy and reusable questions per our discussion with Dr. Stern.  Later, John from Atlanta called re Golden Spike, Inspiration Mars, and the NASA budget.  He also talked about the continuing resolution (CR) and did not think there would be much blowback on Congress or NASA budget and spending issues.  In our sequestration comments, we talked about the FAA closure of some controlled airports and the political use of the sequestration.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog above  You can email our guest or any of our callers through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

John Strickland, Monday, 3-19-13 March 20, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
2 comments

John Strickland, Monday, 3-19-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1977-BWB-2013-03-19.mp3

Guest:  John Strickland.  Topics:  NSS, ISDC, space settlement, SSP, launcher reusability & more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

We welcomed back John Strickland for this two hour discussion on a wide range of topics of interest to the NewSpace, commercial space, and space settlement audiences.  John started out by talking about the upcoming NSS ISDC Conference in San Diego from May 23-27.  For more information visit the NSS website, www.nss.org and click on the ISDC link.  Some tracks are still open for submitting abstracts so if this interests you, click on the appropriate link at the ISDC site.  During this part of our discussion, John talked about the NSS Roadmap and the planned coverage of it at ISDC 2013.  John was then asked about the deep space commercial and Mars ventures announced in 2012 and so far this year.  He said they were helpful to the overall space settlement agenda and explained how in his discussion comments.  He added that the Mars missions and Golden Spike were “laudable” but suggested we may not be ready by the time the projects give for doing the venture. He later said he would have spent the money differently.  Don’t his miss all his comments on these new commercial and HSF missions to Mars.  Our conversation then focused on the problems of sequestration and then John talked about heavy lift and SLS.  Our next discussion topic was Space Solar Power (SSP).  Here, John took us through a detailed analysis of why terrestrial solar and wind is not the best way to go, then he went through some of the characteristics of SSP and why it is the preferred way to acquire much of our energy. This is a detailed and at times marginally complex discussion but one you will want to hear.  In the end, he suggested we delay until we have the bigger launchers such as Falcon Heavy or bigger to make the launch component more economical.  His analysis included total energy needs for a city, Texas, the U.S., globally, etc.  It is a very instructive discussion.  Near the end, he said we should not put all our eggs in one energy source basket.  Listen to his solid explanation for this suggestion.

In our second segment, John talked about launcher reusability and more regarding SSP.  He introduced us to space logistics, commercial docking with cargo to the ISS, & the need for reusable deliveries, thus the RLV.  From here, he talked about fuel depots, mostly at Earth-Moon L1 and L2.  He explained the boil off problem, the cryogenic transfer problem, and the need for good insulation plus a cryo cooler.  Other issues in this segment addressed a lunar base, plausible time lines for accomplishing much of what our guest talked about, the Chinese space program and the complicated US-China relationship.  Near the end, a listener asked about a possible Texas spaceport per suggestions of SpaceX.  Tim called just before the end of the show to talk fuel depots, types of propellant for the depots and then he mentioned the VAPAK process (see http://ralph.open-aerospace.org/PDF/2009.04.14%20-%20HCG%20White%20Paper%20-%20VaPak%20Overview.pdf.)

If you have questions/comments, please post them on The Space Show blog.  To contact John Strickland, send your email through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Dr. Doug Plata, Sunday, 2-24-13 February 25, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Dr. Doug Plata, Sunday, 2-24-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1957-BWB-2013-02-24.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Doug Plata.  Topics:  Taking action on one’s space advocacy ideas.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

We welcomed Dr. Doug Plata to the program to discuss taking action on one’s space advocacy ideas and plans.  For examples of this, visit Dr. Plata’s  www.lunarcots.com for more information on his Lunar Cots idea and to sign his Lunar Cots petition which he talked about throughout our two hour program.  Dr. Plata said he was not around in the Apollo era plus he only started getting interested in space about 3 years ago.  I commented that he did not bring to the table disappointment and unrealized, perhaps even foolish expectations that many of us who were around during Apollo have experienced, including an expectation of lunar colonies and trips to Mars by now.  Doug had a clean slate to build upon, no legacy issues or unrealized expectations or anything like that.  Doug said his interests are to go BLEO but how?  Based on his analysis, he decided lunar development was first, researched Cislunar development, and developed his Lunar Cots idea based on successes for NASA public/private partnerships such as COTS.  From there, he developed the idea of the Lunar Cots Petition for people to sign and to eventually give NASA and other key policy makers.  He also mentioned that were he to advocate something, he felt it was his responsibility to technically know about the issues so he could accurately represent them to people.  He also said that one person, even with very small steps, could make a difference and he clearly walks that talk.  Part of his Lunar Cots idea addresses the need for a Cislunar Transportation System.  The first John called (from Atlanta) and raised the question about there being sufficient water ice on the Moon.  In his response, Doug referenced the LCROSS mission.

In our second segment, Doug took calls and listener emails.  The discussion about there being sufficient lunar water ice on the Moon continued.  He also talked about automatic equipment for lunar mining as compared to telerobotics.  Doug was asked who he talks with about Lunar Cots and the petition. We heard everyone, from the general public to space enthusiasts.  In talking about space advocacy in general, he said there were many paths and people had to find a path that made sense to them & then figure out a way to act upon their individual advocacy.  John called from Florida and asked about heavy lift and fuel depots.  Another Jon called from New Jersey to ask about doing something, anything, and the use of prizes. Even Charles Pooley got in on the discussion to talk about starting small and his Microlaunchers concept.  Toward the end, Doug was asked by a medical school student why he was not doing aerospace and human factors space medicine.  Also during this segment, both Doug and I talked extensively about finding something to do regarding one’s advocacy, even if it involved stepping out of one’s comfort zone and seemed to be too small an effort.  The reality is that to make a difference, even a small effort can be and is usually beneficial.

Please post your comments/questions on the Space Show blog.  You can email Doug through the address he provided on air or through me.

Space Show Webinar with Dr. Haym Benaroya, Dr. John Jurist, Sunday, 2-17-13 February 14, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Space Show Webinar with Dr. Haym Benaroya, Dr. John Jurist, Sunday, 2-17-13

Behind The Scenes Engineering for Space Structures and Infrastructure

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1951-BWB-2013-02-17.mp3 (audio only)

http://vimeo.com/channels/thespaceshow  — Video

Guests:  Dr. Haym Benaroya, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics:  Engineering space structures, hardware, and habits for LEO, the Moon, and Mars.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

     We welcomed our main guest Dr. Haym Benaroya and co-host Dr. John Jurist to our first Space Show webinar for 2013.  As Dr. Benaroya is a mechanical and aerospace engineering at Rutgers University and well known for lunar architecture and engineering structures, we asked Dr. Benaroya to take us behind the scenes for a look into the engineering needed to have something in LEO, on the surface of the Moon, or Mars.  Dr. Benaroya prepared a special .pdf presentation for us which is on The Space Show blog per above.  I urge you to follow along with the .pdf slides as Dr. Benaroya discusses space engineering.

     During the first half of this two hour five minute webinar, Dr. Benaroya started out by discussing some of the basic issues in space engineering including gravity.  He started with Slide 2 and talked about each item and the engineering considerations associated with it, both here on Earth and in space.  As you will hear, not only are the engineering considerations significantly different between Earth and space, but many are also different from one another depending on if the project is in LEO, on the Moon or Mars.  Make sure you follow along with him using his slides.  Listeners, Dr. Jurist, and I asked Professor Benaroya many questions about lunar based habitats, LEO habitats, shapes, pressure forces, regolith issues, heat issues, and more.  Referring to Slide 5 Dr. Benaroya talked about gravity issues and concerns.  Slide 6 was about lunar dust issues, tidal forces, seismic concerns.  We compared seismic reinforcing in San Francisco or other terrestrial earthquake zones to what would be needed on the Moon.  The subject of engineering for extreme and rapid temperature changes came up for LEO, the Moon & Mars.  Dr. Benaroya suggested many times during our discussion that we would need to use ISRU given the high cost of getting materials to space.

     In this first segment, other topics included the potential afforded lunar engineers by having a Lunar Space Elevator available and even a lunar bulldozer!  The subject of heavy lift came up as it always does on these programs and all of us talked about fewer larger launches as compared to many smaller launches, even using depots. Doug called in to argue for the Falcon Heavy.  As Dr. Jurist pointed out, putting mass on the Moon is about 10% give or take of the rockets IMLEO mass capability.  In responding to Doug, both Dr. Jurist & Dr. Benaroya illustrated the difference between the Falcon Heavy and SLS regarding landing a specific mass on the Moon.  Just before the segment ended, in responding to a question from Dr. Jurist, Professor Benaroya suggested that each person on the Moon would need about 20 times his or her weight in mass on the lunar surface for around a six month stay.  To determine the most cost effective way to get the needed infrastructure and mass safely to the lunar surface, lots of issues go into the trade studies to determine the best approach, including launch vehicle choice.

     In the second segment of our webinar, we took a call from John in Florida who wanted to ask Dr. Benaroya about his earlier comment about using magnesium on the Moon as a type of rebar in lunar concrete.  We next talked about reliability, power sources, competing technologies and design issues.  One of the issues brought up was the need to design the structure to be successful during the design phase, not just the completion stage. This was a most interesting discussion, don’t miss it.  One of the points he made was that we can’t test structures in space like we can on Earth so engineering design issues must be considered & dealt with for space that would not be encountered on Earth.  He talked about the preferred shape for a lunar structure and advocated the arch as in Slide 21.  Our professor then talked about design standards here on Earth, the fact that we have none for space so all of the Earth standards are extrapolated to work in space though we have no history for doing this. Also, he talked about using four to five times for a safety factor where on Earth the safety factor might be more like 1.5 or 1.6.  We also talked about confidence intervals. While on Earth, something may be done with a CI of 95% or higher, he suggested that on the Moon or in space the CI would more likely be pretty low, around 70 or maybe 80%!  He cited dust design as an example of what he was talking about as dust is not a big factor in terrestrial engineering but it will be on the Moon or Mars.  Doug called again to advocate inflatable structures rather than the engineering and building of structures.  Prof. Benaroya suggested that they may be used early on but that most of the studies show their primary advantage to be in transportation because on the surface they have to be made rigid.  This is another discussion you don’t want to miss.  Near the end of our webinar, advanced manufacturing for the future was discussed.  Dr. Benaroya talked about advances in robots, layered manufacturing and 3D printing. He explained how these can really change the game for space structures, engineering, manufacturing, and costs.  Near the end, questions came in as to why the Moon instead of Mars, the 7-8 year time lines mentioned by the lunar companies and Mars One as well as wanting to know if space engineering was strictly an academic project or if it was being worked real time by companies that can actually make hardware.  As you will hear, it’s a combination of both at this time.  Dr. Benaroya kept talking about time lines 2-3 decades long and I asked him about speeding that up and the short time lines for the lunar and Mars One group.  He did not think the shorter time lines were feasible.  See what you think after you hear his and Dr. Jurist’s comments on emerging company time lines.  Dr.  Benaroya concluded by pointing out the popularity of these subjects in both undergraduate and graduate classes and the importance of student research and its benefits.

     Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog above.  To email Dr. Jurist, do so through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.  You can contact Dr. Benaroya at benaroya@rci.rutgers.edu.

Here is Professor Benaroya’s webinar presentation material:

Space Show Prof. Benaroya Webinar Lunar Structures Engineering 2-17-13

.

Michael Laine, Monday, 2-4-13 February 5, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
2 comments

Michael Laine, Monday, 2-4-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1943-BWB-2013-02-04.mp3

Guest:  Michael Laine.  Topics:  Lunar space elevator updates. Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.

     We welcomed back Michael Laine for LiftPort Group updates regarding the lunar space elevator.  For more information, visit www.liftport.com.  Michael started our two hour discussion talking about his very successful Kickstarter campaign last year.  LiftPort started the campaign asking for $8,000 but raised $110,000!  During this first segment, Michael talked about the plans to use the $110K, the experiments LiftPort would do and why additional funding was needed to advance the lunar space elevator project.  I asked Michael lots of questions about the lunar space elevator market, his time table for transitioning away from being a Power Point project, & the LiftPort labor force.  LiftPort is mostly volunteer labor. For now it is working on tether and balloon experiments.  We talked extensively about using Kickstarter and even talked about the tax consequences for Kickstarter revenue.  Michael did say that he thought the project would be a private project in that government would not be a major supporter, if at all.  Michael then talked about his fact finding global missing seeking new financing and partners after the Kickstarter campaign. He had much to say about his visit to Iceland and the company CCI Games.  When pressed, Michael suggested 8 years from last August to completion. Listen to the details supporting this timeline.  Michael also outlined four areas needing resolve to move the lunar elevator project forward.

     In our second segment, Michael described more of the elevator project, including the use of EML1 and why & how the elevator ribbon would work, including its logistics from EML1 to the lunar surface and EML1 back toward Earth.  He also talked about their lunar surface elevator contact point on Sinus Medii.  A listener asked him about the Google Lunar XPrize & Michael told us how a GLXP mission could benefit the LiftPort project.  Also in this segment, we talked about costs.  Michael estimated about $800 million for a robotic mission and maybe up to $1.2 billion for three astronauts roughly every three weeks.  He compared these costs to the cost of shuttle launches and flights to the ISS.  When asked about lunar markets that might economically justify the lunar elevator, he talked about the potential of HE3 mining and new uses for the material here on Earth, plus lunar SSP and solar panel manufacturing.  Alex asked Michael to be specific about the transitional steps from Power Point to the beginning of a systems engineering project to develop the elevator.  Emory emailed in more questions about tether use, Tim called (sorry for phone line issues on Tim’s call) regarding tethers and more.  David Ben wanted to know about the Falcon Heavy and I expanded that to include SLS.  A question came up about LiftPort’s interest in a Mars space elevator. Our discussion concluded with Michael suggesting that Kickstarter & similar crowd source funding organizations will play a bigger & more important role in funding space ventures in the future.

     Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. Michael can be reached at info@liftport.com.  You can also subscribe to the LiftPort free newsletter from their website.

John Strickland, Tuesday, 1-22-13 January 22, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

John Strickland, Tuesday, 1-22-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1934-BWB-2013-01-22.mp3

 Guest: John Strickland. Topics: Cislunar transportation and economics, SSP, and more. Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. We welcomed John Strickland to the show to discuss cislunar space development, economics, transportation, SSP, and much more. You can read his latest The Space Review article, “Cislunar transportation: the space trucking system” at http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2221/1. We have also placed on The Space Show blog several images John referred to during our 96 minute discussion. We started the first segment by discussing what is needed in terms of supporting space infrastructure to establish a Cis-lunar space economy. In addition, we talked about heavy lift launch vehicles in general, expendable rockets, the need for RLVs and more. John said there were three basic vehicle needs, a crew vehicle, cargo vehicles, and tankers. At one point he said he would like to see a Dragon model as a tanker. This discussion then went to orbital fuel depots and our guest had much to say on the depot topic. Here, he brought up the idea of a lunar ferry and robotic missions using the RLV. A listener asked him for the biggest challenge to the ideas he was sharing with us and he said money!

     In the second segment, Doug called in and talked about John’s Space Review article per the above URL. Doug had several questions and challenges for John. Another listener emailed in questions relating to John’s trucking system comparisons. Later, Tim called to ask about electric propulsion and this took us to the Falcon Heavy topic, the need for RLVs, etc. Also, John referred quite a bit to Image #2 on The Space Show Blog, the LMO Waystation. We then addressed Space Solar Power (SSP).Guest:  John Strickland.  Topics:  Cislunar transportation and economics, SSP, and more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.  We welcomed John Strickland to the show to discuss cislunar space development, economics, transportation, SSP, and much more. You can read his latest The Space Review article, “Cislunar transportation: the space trucking system” at http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2221/1. We have also placed on The Space Show blog several images John referred to during our 96 minute discussion. We started the first segment by discussing what is needed in terms of supporting space infrastructure to establish a Cis-lunar space economy. In addition, we talked about heavy lift launch vehicles in general, expendable rockets, the need for RLVs and more. John said there were three basic vehicle needs, a crew vehicle, cargo vehicles, and tankers. At one point he said he would like to see a Dragon model as a tanker.  This discussion then went to orbital fuel depots and our guest had much to say on the depot topic. Here, he brought up the idea of a lunar ferry and robotic missions using the RLV.  A listener asked him for the biggest challenge to the ideas he was sharing with us and he said money! In the second segment, Doug called in and talked about John’s Space Review article per the above URL.  Doug had several questions and challenges for John.  Another listener emailed in questions relating to John’s trucking system comparisons.  Later, Tim called to ask about electric propulsion and this took us to the Falcon Heavy topic, the need for RLVs, etc.  Also, John referred quite a bit to Image #2 on The Space Show Blog, the LMO Waystation.  We then addressed Space Solar Power (SSP). He said it would take from $50 billion to $200 billion for a 1GW base load, Ground based Solar or wind system. He then discussed what would have to change about how we do space to see SSP become a reality.  Tim also wanted to know about bypassing the Moon and going directly to a NEO.  John had much to say about using the incremental approach which included the Cis-lunar economic development we have talked about on this program and on other programs.  John’s closing comments with the Teddy Roosevelt statement were important one so don’t miss it.  Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog per above.  You can email John Strickland for his materials and with your questions at jkstrickl@sbcglobal.net  He then discussed what would have to change about how we do space to see SSP become a reality. Tim also wanted to know about bypassing the Moon and going directly to a NEO. John had much to say about using the incremental approach which included the Cis-lunar economic development we have talked about on this program and on other programs. John’s closing comments with the Teddy Roosevelt statement were important one so don’t miss it.

      Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog per above. You can email John Strickland for his materials and with your questions at jkstrickl@sbcglobal.net.

Below are the images pertaining to the discussion with John.  Note that the “1 page with 2 ferry images” link below opens a document with two color diagrams which will also be part of tonight’s discussion. 

1 page with 2 ferry images

 

Mars Ferry Lander With Writing Corrected

Mars Ferry Lander With Writing Corrected

LMO Waystation

LMO Waystation

LMO Waystation Assembled Horizontal

LMO Waystation Assembled Horizontal

Jim Muncy, Sunday, 1-20-13 January 21, 2013

Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
4 comments

Jim Muncy, Sunday, 1-20-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1933-BWB-2013-01-20.mp3

Guest:  Jim Muncy.  Topics: Comprehensive space policy & commercial space discussion.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.  We welcomed Jim Muncy back to the show for this comprehensive space policy and commercial space two hour plus discussion.  While many topics overlapped both segments and we went back and forth on several topics, this summary will be a two part summary.  Jim started the discussion with a look at new space legislation kicking off the year.  After a short summary of several items and their impact on commercial space, we talked about the makeup of the new Congress and how it might view civil and commercial space.  Jim then started addressing specific projects including Orion and its expansion to include ESA, SLS, the Boeing CST100, Atlas 5, and more.  A listener asked about the Space Settlement Act and the Space Foundation Pioneering White Paper.  We then turned our attention to Cis-lunar space as a commercial gateway and Jim mentioned new commercial opportunities such as Golden Spike.  We also talked about the recent study on NASA by the National Academies.  Other topics included the need to do exploration, to take risks and NASA acting more like the old NACA with aviation.  The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) was brought up by a caller and we started talking about large program expenses as compared to smaller, less costly, & more frequent programs that fly much more often.  In response to another listener, Jim said SLS was not in competition for funds with commercial crew as one was near term & the other long term.  Falcon Heavy was brought up, especially as an alternative to SLS.

     In our second segment, Jim was asked about how best to influence congress. Later on, Jim was asked to comment on the liability indemnification issue surrounding Spaceport America & Virgin Galactic.  Our domestic economic situation came up many times in both segments but in this segment, it was applied to problems with our weather satellite system & infrastructure needs as opposed to flying missions.  This included mention of the Hurricane Sandy relief package just passed by Congress.  Other issues talked about included the aerospace skilled workforce, parochial congressional interests, the NASA bureaucracy, & the role of space advocacy.

     Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog above.  You can email Mr. Muncy through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 47 other followers