jump to navigation

Dr. Roger Launius, Friday, 11-30-12 December 1, 2012

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

Dr. Roger Launius, Friday, 11-30-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1904-BWB-2012-11-30.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Roger Launius.  Topics: “Coming Home: Reentry and Recovery from Space” by Dr. Launius, space policy issues, magical thinking.  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 welcomes Dr. Roger Launius back to the program to discuss his latest book, “Coming Home: Reentry and Recovery from Space” which is a free download at www.nasa.gov/pdf/695726main_ComingHome-ebook.pdf. During our first segment, our guest provided us with a short history of resolving challenges with reentry from space with human spaceflight.  We discussed winged vehicles and capsules from a historical, practical, and engineering perspective.  We also talked about DOD influence and the advantages as well as disadvantages of both types of space vehicles.  One listener question asked about winged vehicles evolving from suborbital to orbital HSF.  Terry called in with ballistic reentry questions about the V2 rocket & we mentioned museum locations where people can see a complete V2 on display.  Another listener wanted to know if there were any winged vehicle concepts for Mars. Here, our guest talked about some science fiction examples but nothing for real on the drawing board.  Our guest then introduced us to magical thinking and we talked about reality in space exploration as compared to fantasy.  As this segment was ending, we talked about RLVs and reentry issues.

In our second segment, we started off talking about the NASA budget and the potential impact of sequestration.  Our guest said human spaceflight is the biggest challenge and in fact at one point he said we were just one banana peel away from losing HSF!  This was in the context of access to the ISS with only the Soyuz and how fragile the access was until we had multiple ways of getting to the station.  We then discussed risk and some of the issues raised on this subject by other Space Show guests that believe we need more risk to advance human spaceflight. Risk was also discussed in the context of hypothetical ISS recue missions with HSF vehicles not yet ready for prime time. We also talked about the value and purpose of HSF, including should settlement really be the purpose of it.  We had a lengthy discussion on this subject. Both Roger and I suggested the purpose of HSF is a challenge, can be illusive, and is probably something larger and broader than space settlement.  Don’t miss his explanation behind his thinking.  We also talked about spinoffs as a reason for HSF, the we addressed the lack of needed infrastructure, radiation issues, etc.  Toward the end, we took some questions about SLS and heavy lift.  Jane asked our guest about the visitors to the Air and SpaceMuseum at the Smithsonian & if Roger could infer an increase or decline in the interest in space by the visitors or if the visitors had an awareness of the challenges facing NASA and HSF.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can email Dr. Launius through me.

Dr. Edythe Weeks, Tuesday, 11-20-12 November 21, 2012

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

Dr. Edythe Weeks, Tuesday, 11-20-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1897-BWB-2012-11-20.mp3

Guest:  Dr Edythe (Edy) Weeks.  Topics: We discussed her book, various commercial space development models, benefit sharing & 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. Edythe (Edy) Weeks to the program to discuss her book, “Outer Space Development, International Relations and Space Law: A Method for Elucidating Seeds.” You can buy her book on Amazon & if you use the following URL, Amazon will contribute to The Space Show/OGLF: www.amazon.com/Outer-Space-Development-International-Relations/dp/1443839655/ref=onegiantlea20.  During our first segment of this 2.5 hour discussion, Dr. Weeks introduced us to her book and the need to understand space development from an international relations perspective.  We talked about how the industry has evolved over the last 20+ years, innovations such as citizen science suborbital missions, new commercial players, & innovative business ideas such as asteroid mining.  Dr. Weeks talked extensively about the need for an ideological shift toward space throughout the non-space population & within our global educational systems.  When Todd from San Diego emailed Edy as to how to create the ideological shift, that opened a discussion on how such shifts are created.  It was very interesting that one of the major examples cited by our guest included the growth & popularity of tattoos.  This sparked quite a conversation, some of it laced with humor, lots of fun, but also relevant points to our discussion.  As our segment was ending, our guest talked about the need to include other perspectives in the space benefits, those coming from outside the STEM fields.
     In our second & very long segment, I opened up asking Edy about the ideas in her book in support of benefit sharing & the Common Heritage of Mankind concepts found in some of the U.N. space treaties.  This discussion prevailed for the balance of our program as our guest is looking for new and different business & social models for space to be more inclusive which she believes will lead to more space commerce.  I took a challenging & argumentative position throughout most of the discussion in explaining why most in the NewSpace and commercial space industries do not support benefit sharing and why. We talked about the need for property rights & why such rights would facilitate commercial development.  Dr. Weeks was not supportive of the property rights positions, looking more for space development to accomplish much needed social change and reform around the world. Also, she made the case that property rights were not needed nor supported by the treaties & their working papers. Dr. Weeks did clarify her position regarding capitalism, the U.S., commercial space companies & benefit sharing ideas so don’t miss her clarification. Let us know your thoughts on our blog. Tax revenues were discussed but as you will hear, our guest focuses on actual benefit sharing beyond tax payments to help create wealth for everyone, including those that would be the recipient of the benefit sharing programs & the commercial space business.  We talked about voluntary charitable giving as compared to mandatory or government required giving through benefit sharing.  I cited Microsoft & Google models for why private sector giving with the pursuit of business unfettered by government induced benefit sharing is better.  Tim called in to express his very strong views in support of the private sector & his opposition to reallocation of resources regardless of how it is termed by either government or the UN.  Edy referenced the OST & the Moon Treaty in making her points, making the case that outer space resources belong to everyone, not just the developer.  While we did use an outrageously successful multi-trillion dollar model for our discussion of the space mining example, the idea was made that the company could easily afford to “give” a percentage to the benefit sharing process, over & above taxes, assuming the company was profitable, even at more realistic levels.  Our guest was very articulate in presenting her views & ideas, plus her book does a very good job of comprehensively dealing with what we just barely had time to scratch during our program.  For more information, check out Edy’s blog and YouTube video:  www.youtube.com/watch?v=okyVWJglxow & http://blogs.webster.edu/globalthinking/blog/2012/07/16/outer-space-development-is-subject-of-new-book-by-hpirs-edythe-weeks/#more-2802.
     Please post all comments/questions about this discussion on The Space Show blog.  I will bring all comments to the attention of Dr. Weeks on a regular basis.

Open Lines, Sunday, 1-29-12 January 30, 2012

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

Open Lines, Sunday, 1-29-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1700-BWB-2012-01-29.mp3

Guest:  Open Lines with Dr. David Livingston.  Topics:  Space policy programs of the presidential candidates and more.  You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Transcripts of Space Show programs are not permitted without prior written consent from The Space Show (even if for personal use) & are a violation of the Space Show copyright.  Welcome to this 2 hour forty minute Open Lines program. We took one break during the program about 40 minutes into it.  My opening monologue was longer than usual, consuming about half an hour.  I put forth many possible discussion topics but as you will hear on the show, most everyone wanted to talk about the space policy statements by Newt and to a lesser degree Romney.  We held callers to a shorter time on the phone which seemed to work nicely as we had lots of new callers and lots of different input in addition to the Space Show regular listeners/callers.  I will continue holding callers to a shorter time on the phone for future programs based on this experience.  I also put forth some ground rules to avoid partisan politics and to focus only on the space policy of the candidates.  I also made it clear that there would be no character bashing but ideas were fair game.  Most of the discussion regarding Newt’s statement dealt with his having talked about the lunar colony and making it part of the U.S.  Callers kept referencing the Outer Space Treaty (OST) which prohibits territorial claims on celestial bodies.  We talked about property rights and one caller referenced the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 Population Threshold which Newt referenced in his policy comments.  This caller also took us to a discussion of weapons in space, specifically nukes, as part of his comments on the OST.  This led to a discussion and a factual call on why weapons in space are not practical though nobody was advocating weapons in space nor did anyone advocate withdrawing from the OST or modifying it.  As for the Romney comments, some callers had issues with the panel of advisors for Romney and I questioned why DOD was being included in civil and commercial space planning, mission design, etc.  Another caller was physically present at both the Romney and Gingrich meetings so  he gave us a first hand report on what he saw and heard.  Later in the program, a caller referenced some of the gender and microgravity issues raised in the recent show with Dr. Bill Rowe and we talked about the need for a variable gravity research station to answer micro and artificial gravity questions in support of long duration human spaceflight.  While not specifically mentioned by anyone during the discussion, it is important to note that up until the new administration took office, it was national policy for the U.S. to return to the Moon and establish a lunar outpost which would eventually be turned over to commercial interests.  I don’t recall the giggle factor back then but we did talk about the giggle factor which seems to have returned as a result of the Newt comments.  Also, as soon as the program ended, I received a note about an interview by Dr. Jeff Foust on his spacepolitics.com blog with Eric Anderson, one of the key members of the advisory panel on space for Gov. Romney.  You can read this interview at /www.spacepolitics.com/2012/01/29/anderson-romney-would-be-advocate-of-commercial-space.  Again, it came in too late to be mentioned during our program but in my opinion, it is relevant to the OL discussion for today’s Space Show program.  Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog per above.  If you want to send a note to any of the callers, do so through me and I will forward it for you if have the email address of the person you want to contact.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 71 other followers