jump to navigation

Space Show Webinar with Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, Sunday, 11-25-12 November 24, 2012

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

Space Show Webinar with Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, Sunday, 11-25-12

Audio only:  http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1900-BWB-2012-11-25.mp3

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

Guests:  Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics:  Trajectory analysis to EML2, Mars, 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.  You can view our webinar on our Vimeo Space Show channel, http://vimeo.com/channels/thespaceshow.  To follow along with Dan’s pdf, use

http://thespaceshow.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/adamo-eml2roundtripr2.pdf.  We welcomed Dan Adamo back to the program and Dr. John Jurist as co-host for this special webinar addressing trajectory analysis for an EML2 mission and more.  On The Space Show blog, you will find Dan’s PDF document used during the webinar, a link to the movie he played in the second half of the webinar, and his Phobos-Grunt analysis paper we discussed near the end of the webinar. During the first hour of the webinar, Dan took us through the trajectory analysis to Earth-Moon L2 per his PDF document.  We talked about why EML2, libration points in general, and how such missions are planned.  If the resolution on the webinar video for the charts and tables used during this segment are difficult to read on your computer, please bring the document up on the PDF on The Space Show blog and follow along that way.  Dan took us through Table 1, HALO orbits, and the HOI as well as the Trans-Lunar Insertion points.  We talked about orbital characteristics, delta V, rocket size, and more  We also talked about the position of the Earth, launch windows, the Moon, & other factors influencing the planning of the mission.  While at times the discussion may seem a bit technical or overwhelming for those of us having never done mission planning at this level before, all of us will certainly have a better understanding of the factors considered and influencing both robotic as well as human spaceflight missions.  Near the end of the segment, we talked about the SLS and heavy lift & how payload capacity interacts with mission & trajectory analysis. 
 
     In the second hour of our webinar, Dan took us through his HD movie of the orbital trajectory talked about during the first segment, stopping it at intervals for specific explanations and questions.  The movie is in the QuickTime format but you can see it both on the webinar or by using the URL provided on the blog.  We took several listener calls & questions.  One asked Dan about the differences in planning for the robotic vs. the HSF mission using MSL & Curiosity as an example.  Dan pointed us to a YouTube video he made a few years ago with Dr. Logan using these tools for a Deimos mission (www.youtube.com/watch?v=X10GAqA4Ky4). Another listener called wanting to know the likelihood of an EML2 mission actually happening.  Dan explained why he believed this mission to be the next stepping stone in HSF.  More was discussed about SLS with Dan raising some concerns about its real capabilities & wondering if Congress is being sold unrealistic expectations. We talked about heavy lift in general & with the support of properly placed depots.  SLS and the difference with a Falcon Heavy were also discussed in terms of what the differences would mean in payload, number of launches, costs, risks, etc. 
 
     Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can contact either guest through me.
 
Dan’s PDF document is here:  Adamo EML2roundTripR2
 
 
In addition, to watch Dan’s QuickTime movie which he will be using during the webinar, please click on this URL and then select the file format .mov:

 https://spideroak.com/browse/share/DanAdamo/EML2roundTrip

Note that you must have the QuickTime player to play this movie if you intend to download it. You can watch it from the above URL without the QT player.

 

Dr. Vadim Rygalov, Annie Wargetz, Sunday, 11-4-12 November 5, 2012

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

Dr. Vadim Rygalov, Annie Wargetz, Sunday, 11-4-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1887-BWB-2012-11-04.mp3

Guests:  Dr. Vadim Rygalov, Annie Wargetz.  Topics:  Dietary impact & related nutritional issues for extreme habitats & spaceflight. 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. Vadim Rygalov and for the first time UND SpSt graduate student Annie Wargetz to discuss her exceptional research regarding dietary & nutritional requirements for deep space mission astronauts.  Using Earth models such as submarines, extreme habitats, historical explorations, the Antarctica habitats, plus the ISS, our two guests shined an important light on a seldom discussed set of issues regarding astronaut nutritional challenges for deep space missions.  In the first segment of this two hour discussion, Dr. Rygalov introduced the subject to us & then he introduced us to Ms. Wargetz to discuss her work, research, & findings.  Many topics & issues were covered in this segment ranging from a broad discussion about extreme historical exploration missions, Earth habitats, submarines, the ISS, & more.  We learned what is known about deep space nutrition & astronaut food, eating, & caloric issues.  Annie talked about what we have learned from the different terrestrial models referenced in our discussion, plus many other issues presenting challenges such as food preparation, the lack of anything fresh, the lack of color in food, & the use of processed & chemical foods as is the standard for today.  She also talked about plans to mitigate these challenges on deep space mission flights. Bringing fresh vegetables, seeds, even small animals on a mission are plausible & were addressed.  One caller asked for a definition of a closed life support system.  Both our guests went into detail about this, including partially closed systems, bioregenetive systems, physical/chemical systems, & hybrids.  Vadim brought us current with our existing technology & what is likely to be available in the near term.  This is a comprehensive discussion pertaining to deep space environmental systems.

We started the second segment with our guests answering a question from the firsts segment about married couples in space.  Don’t miss their response & what Vadim said was his choice for the first crew for a deep space mission & why.  Mars 500 & Biosphere 2 were mentioned in their response.  Two other issues that were discussed were transit times to Mars with the faster travel time mitigating some of the human factor challenges including nutritional issues.  Also, it was clearly stated that to take on board the right type of nutrition, fresh items, seeds, perhaps small animals like chickens, a heavy lift launcher such as SLS was needed as the nutritional/food items will consume payload on the mission.  Vadim said heavy lift was needed to carry out the mission in one launch given the need for substantive payload dedicated to food/nutrition & astronaut well being.  Gender differences were discussed which is why Vadim suggested an all male first crew.  Other questions were asked about artificial gravity, developing & using a nutritional pill for space missions, issues about why astronauts don’t eat much on the ISS & more.

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

Classroom: Dr. Paul Spudis, Dr. Jim Vedda, Friday, 10-19-12 October 20, 2012

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

Classroom: Dr. Paul Spudis, Dr. Jim Vedda, Friday, 10-19-12

Cislunar Space Development

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1876-BWB-2012-10-19.mp3

Guests: CLASSROOM:  Dr. Paul Spudis, Dr. Jim Vedda.  Topics:  Cislunar space development and economics.  You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blogs, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com and the Classroom blog, http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Written 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. We do not permit the commercial use of any Space Show program or part thereof, nor do we permit Space Show programs to be edited, placed on YouTube or other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted in news articles, papers, academic & research work, but must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact Dr. Livingston for questions about our copyright and trademark policies which we do enforce.  For this Classroom Space Show two hour program, we welcomed Dr. Paul Spudis and Dr. Jim Vedda for a comprehensive discussion on the importance of undertaking Cislunar space development as a major focus of U.S. space policy.  Our program was in two equal segments but since our topics crossed segments, our summary will reflect the entire program, not each segment.  Also, at the end of this summary, I have listed several relevant URLs for cislunar space development and our guests.  If you want more information on the subject, I suggest you visit the recommended websites and blogs.  Our guests described cislunar space for us and did an excellent job in letting us know why it is important to focus on a cislunar space development program.  In the process of addressing this very important issue, we talked about policy, the railroad model, the need for space infrastructure, insitu resource development and understanding, lunar water, lunar ice, lunar polar robotic exploration, the need to learn to live and behave in space, and much more.  Listeners called and asked email questions that drew out both our panel members so that our discussion was sufficiently thorough.  Side issues were discussed such as budget cuts, tight budgets, how to do cislunar space in a belt tightening environment, small businesses and contractors, even sequestration.  Our guests were very clear as to why cislunar development was much more preferable than “space stunt accomplishment” types of programs and projects.  Our guests presented a good case in letting us know why cislunar development is preferable over a humans to Mars mission at this time. Another issue brought up by a listener was to ask about “Plan B” if for some reason there was no water or there was insufficient water/ice on the Moon.  Dr. Spudis explained why that was not likely but both panel members talked about why cislunar development was important to even without sufficient water/ice resources on the Moon. Here are the URLs of interest I mentioned above:  First, Dr. Vedda’s new book, “Becoming Spacefarers: Rescuing America’s Space Program” is at www.amazon.com/Becoming-Spacefarers-James-A-Vedda/dp/1477130918/ref=onegiantlea20.  The Paris conference mentioned by Dr. Spudis is the ASTECH’s “Developing Space” Conference is at www.d-space2012.com. Dr. Spudis websites and blogs can be found at www.spudislunarresources.com; www.spudislunarresources.com/blog; http://blogs.airspacemag.com/moon.  His book, “Blogging the Moon” is at www.amazon.com/Blogging-Moon-Paul-D-Spudis/dp/1926837177/ref=onegiantlea20.  Other related websites of interest include www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=13404; www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=19999; www.spudislunarresources.com/Papers/The%20Vision%20and%20the%20Mission.pdf.; www.cislunarnext.org.

Please post your comments/questions on the blogs above.  If you want to contact either Dr. Vedda or Dr. Spudis, you can do so through me.

Dr. Jason Cassibry, Tuesday, 10-9-12 October 10, 2012

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

Dr. Jason Cassibry, Tuesday, 10-9-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1869-BWB-2012-10-09.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Jason Cassibry.  Topics:  A technical description and the potential of fusion propulsion.  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. We welcomed Dr. Jason Cassibry to the program to guide us in our discussion of the potential for fusion propulsion.  At times, this was a very technical discussion.  To assist in following it, I have uploaded to the blog his published paper delivered at the AIAA Joint Propulsion Conference, “The Case and Development Path for Fusion Propulsion.”  In addition, below are the URLs for several articles on fusion propulsion that Dr. Cassibry shared with us: www.uah.edu/news/items/10-research/2501-slapshot-to-deep-space#.UDrKn-iPVuY;
www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/rockets/the-big-machine-that-could-lead-to-fusion-powered-spaceships-9450996; http://io9.com/5921673/nuclear-slapshots-could-propel-a-spacecraft-to-mars-in-just-weeks; www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=23442
and http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/10/zpinch-nuclear-fusion-pulse-space.html.   Dr. Cassibry started out by providing us with a working definition of fusion propulsion.  We talked about nuclear propulsion as well and the overall state of development for fusion energy.  I asked Dr. Cassibry if in their economic projections for fusion propulsion, they considered the political and policy impact on fossil fuel pricing and supply availability.  As you will hear, generally such factors are not included in their studies though he concurred with me that such policies can strongly skew the economics one way or the other.  Several calls came in on a wide ranging group of associated topics.  We talked about the main fusion fuel, lithium deuteride, magnetic nozzles, and the use of a nuclear fission reactor to start the fusion propulsion unit.  Z-Pinch technologies were defined and discussed.  As the segment drew to a close, I asked about funding sources for this research and we learned that most all of the funding is from public sources.

In our second segment, more listeners called in regarding insitu resource usage, nuclear propulsion to start the fusion unit, and the power consumed for all of this.  We talked about using fusion propulsion for a Mars mission and what it did for travel times.  Jason also put forth a suggested time line and path to follow to operation in perhaps 25 years, depending on funding.  More calls came in with fuel questions, vibration impact, G force acceleration, thrust, and more.  Another topic discussed was fusion propulsion for the launch vehicle.  We then compared some real mission travel times such as Cassini, Voyager, and New Horizons, asking what the transit times would have been like using fusion propulsion.  As we were ending the program, I asked about the students entering aerospace engineering at UAH, both the undergrad and graduate level, plus the gender mix of the students.  There appears to be strong demand by the students to study these fields at all levels.  In conclusion, Jason suggested that we could look for breakeven with fusion in about ten years, maybe less.

If you have comments/questions, please post them on The Space Show blog.  Dr. Cassibry’s faculty page at UAH is www.mae.uah.edu/faculty/cassibry.shtml.

 

Cassibry et al case for fusion 072812

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68 other followers