John Strickland, Monday, 3-19-13 March 20, 2013Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: air breathing rockets, Base Load Barrier, China’s space policy., cislunar space transportation, cryo boil off, cryogenic cooling, cryogenic transfer, Earth-Moon L1 & L2, Falcon Heavy, ISDC, ISS, John Strickland, low cost space transportation, lunar base, lunar settlement, Mars HSF, National Space Society, NSS Roadmap, Propellant Depots, reusable launchers, SLS, space logistics, space settlement, space solar power, terrestrial power requirements, Texas spaceport, VAPAK.
John Strickland, Monday, 3-19-13
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
Elliot Pulham, The Space Foundation, Friday, 1-11-13 January 12, 2013Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: "Pioneering: Sustaining U.S. Leadership in Space, aerospace industry, Apollo Program, commercial space industry., Elliot Pulham, ISS, lunar settlement, NASA Commission, NASA Jobs Program, NASA Long-Term Plan, NASA management, NASA Pioneering Doctrine, NASA purpose, NewSpace, pioneering, policy implementation, space exploration, Space Foundation, space policy, space settlement/colonization
Elliot Pulham, The Space Foundation, Friday, 1-11-13
Guest: Elliot Pulham. Topics: The Space Foundation’s White Paper, “Pioneering: Sustaining U.S. Leadership in Space.” 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 Elliot Pulham, CEO of The Space Foundation (www.spacefoundation.org) to discuss their new White Paper, “Pioneering: Sustaining U.S. Leadership in Space.” You can download both the Executive Summary and the actual paper at www.spacefoundation.org/programs/research-and-analysis/pioneering. Our guest was with us for the first hour of the program. During our time with him, we discussed the Pioneering white paper, the reason for it, and its approach to sustaining U.S. space leadership. Mr. Pulham defined pioneering for us and when asked, we learned that it was broader and more inclusive than the more frequently used terms of settlement or colonization. We talked about why NASA needed a purpose, one that was clearly defined and articulated throughout the organization, plus the congressional and executive branches of government. We talked about basic NASA management improvements plus a host of strategic and tactical recommendations to improve our civil space policy and program. Listeners had many questions for our guest ranging from how reforms within NASA and our political systems would actually be implemented to needing general public support for Pioneering to become the NASA organizational purpose. Other issues that came up included how to transition from one year funding battles to long term project financing. The NewSpace segment came up as did space advocacy organizations with listeners asking if the advocacy proponents need to speak with a more unified voice than from their respective and often diverse positions. In the last few minutes of our discussion, I asked our guest for the implementation process. Here, we learned what the Space Foundation has been doing since going public with their policy proposals and their plans for continuing to push for the Pioneering purpose and program. We also talked about the role each of us can play in pursuing this type of seed change within NASA, Congress, and the Executive Branch to implement space policy changes for the better. We did return after the hour for a very short second segment in which I announced some date changes for programs given the start of my teaching my UND commercial space graduate class.
If you have comments/questions for Mr. Pulham about the Space Foundation White Paper, please post them on The Space Show blog URL above.
Brent Sherwood, Tuesday, 7-24-12 July 25, 2012Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: " SpaceX, Apollo Program, Bigelow Aerospace, Brent Sherwood, Elon Musk, Explore Mars, Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX), human spaceflight (HSF), insitu resource usage, Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL), life on Mars, lunar settlement, Mars settlement, Mars technology challenges, Martian sample return mission., NASA, NASA budget, NASA goals, Near Earth Objects (NEO), Planetary Defense, rare Earth elements, space habitation, Space Solar Power (SSP), space tourism, space vision, U.S. economy, value proposition
Brent Sherwood, Tuesday, 7-24-12
Guest: Brent Sherwood. Topics: Human spaceflight to Mars: Is it on the path or a distraction? 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 Brent Sherwood back to the show to discuss his GLEX paper and ideas regarding human spaceflight (HSF), Mars, and alternative NASA goals/missions regarding HSF. His GLEX paper, “Mars-On the Path or in the Way” is posted on The Space Show blog following this program summary. Please read & review his paper as it contains far more detail regarding his proposal, analysis and his conclusion than what we were able to discuss during our program. In our first segment, Mr. Sherwood provided us with the background and context for his having written this paper and for his conclusion that HSF to Mars is not the right path. He then outlined alternative paths for HSF missions that he believes can better “regain the cultural centrality of human space flight and grow by attracting private capital.” Our guest talked about the value proposition of a HSF mission to Mars, plus the value proposition of the alternatives he describes in his paper & on this program. The value proposition is understood to refer to the value received by sending humans to Mars (or the alternative HSF missions) as compared to the value of the mission costs, the opportunity costs, risks, etc. Mr. Sherwood assesses the value proposition for all of his alternative HSF proposals which include the Explore Mars mission, lunar settlement, space passenger travel, and SSP. For most of this initial segment, Brent outlined his ideas and explained why he has concluded that HSF to Mars does not measure up as a value promise & why SSP is his first choice. We began taking listener email questions and phone calls after he summarized his position & as you can imagine, most all the listener questions/comments were of the challenging nature to his conclusion that HSF to Mars was not in the best interest of our space program. I urge you read his paper and to pay attention to the technical, cost, time line, and historical information shared with us by our guest.
In the second segment of this nearly two hour program, Brent took questions and expanded more as to why he supports other options than HSF to Mars. He also explained why he is calling for a debate on this issue within the space community. At the start of this segment, I asked him if he thought discovering life on Mars would change his opinion and the value proposition. He said no but did say it would expedite the Martian sample return mission, but would not alter the variables & unknowns involved in the magnitude of technology challenges needing resolution before sending humans safely to and from Mars. Toward the end of our discussion, I asked how he might move forward to implement the industry debate he has called for on this show & in his paper. Suggestions on how to do this are wanted so if you have any, post them on the blog.
Brent would like your feedback so after listening to this program and reading his paper, please post comments/questions on the blog. You can email Brent Sherwood by sending your note to me & I will forward it to him.
Brent Sherwood’s GLEX Paper:
Ed Buckbee, Friday, 4-20-12 April 20, 2012Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: "The Real Space Cowboys, Chinese Space Program, Commercial Crew, Ed Buckbee, human spaceflight, ISS, lunar commercialization, lunar settlement, Mars, NASA, SLS, Space Shuttle, space vision, U.S. Space Camp, Wernher Von Braun
1 comment so far
Ed Buckbee, Friday, 4-20-12
Guest: Ed Buckbee. Topics: Wernher Von Braun, NASA, Space Policy, SLS, commercial crew, HSF. 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 Ed Buckbee back to the show to discuss NASA, Wernher Von Braun’s influence on our space program, and the future of human spaceflight. To learn more about Mr. Buckbee’s activities, visit his website, www.air-space.com. Ed started us off with a brief history of human spaceflight going back to the flight of Alan Shephard. He had much to say about the early period of NASA’s history being fertile grounds for young people, inspiration, and motivation. I asked him about his recent award received in Munich, Germany, the Wernher Von Braun Gold Medal for Promotion and Support of Human Spaceflight. Ed had much to say about receiving this award and its significance. As a key player in the U.S. Space Camp program, I asked him many questions about space camp and as you will hear, we strongly recommend it if you have or know kids of the appropriate age for attending it in Huntsville. Listeners asked many questions about the influence of Von Braun on our space program as well as his part in the SS in Nazi Germany. Ed talked about this throughout our program. Another issue that was heavily discussed was the Chinese space program. Listeners had many questions for him about the Chinese program, how it was viewed by NASA, Congress, DOD, as well as their costs for space access & program development. Another listener asked him about space tourism, both orbital and suborbital tourism. Ed thought it would prove interesting but did not think we should depend on it as a killer app for economic or industrial development. Terry called and asked Ed the interesting question of how the younger Germans viewed Von Braun given his being part of the SS and then coming here to lead the development of our space program. Ed said the older Germans definitely see him as being part of the Third Reich. The younger Germans see him as part of technology and in past history. Don’t miss the full discussion with Mr. Buckbee regarding this question. Toward the end of our first segment, we talked about Von Braun and going to the Moon with Ed suggesting today he would be promoting it as an international mission with 5-7 countries taking part in it.
In the second segment, we received a listener email asking what President Eisenhower said if anything in private about Von Braun. Ed seemed to think Ike was OK with Von Braun given his appointments and positions once NASA was created. About this time during the show, I received the Cosmic Log email notice which was about the retirement of the shuttle so I asked Ed about shuttle’s retirement. You will want to hear what he had to say about it. The issue of the NASA budget came up and I brought up the subcommittee hearings from earlier in the week with recommendations to reduce commercial crew funding in favor of the Mars exploration program, SLS, and JWST. We talked about the importance of commercial crew and the need to keep it on track to restore U.S. HSF capability. Both of us plus several listeners expressed the opinion that it would be the private sector taking us back to the Moon and for commercial reasons. Near the end of the program, a listener asked about the Von Braun family and their interest in today’s NASA and space program. I think you will find what Ed had to say to be most interesting regarding Von Braun’s children and his wife and how they view space.
If you have any questions or comments for Mr. Buckbee, please post them on The Space Show blog.
Dr. Jeff Bell, Monday, 2-20-12 February 21, 2012Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: " Phobos Grunt Mission, Anatoly Zak, Bob Zubrin, Chinese Space Program, Curiosity, Delta 2 program, Dr. Jeff Bell, Dragon, EELV, Falcon, human spaceflight, ISS, James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), Kepler Space Telescope, Lavochkin, low cost space access, lunar settlement, Mars Polar Lander, MSL, NASA science missions, National Lab, NewSpace, Phobos 88, Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos), Russian management, Russian space industry, Sergei Korolev., Soyuz, Space Launch System (SLS)., Space X, Stratolaunch, ULA
Dr. Jeff Bell, Monday, 2-20-12
Guest: Dr. Jeff Bell. Topics: Dr. Bell’s assessment of NASA, the science missions, human spaceflight, the Russian space problems, & Phobos-Grunt conspiracy theories. 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. Jeff Bell back to the program for his assessment of space today in theUnited States, along with the problems facing the Russian space industry and the Phobos-Grunt conspiracy theories as to why the mission failed. Those familiar with Dr. Bell and his Space Show programs will not be disappointed as this two hour plus discussion is vintage Jeff Bell. Dr. Bell started with an assessment of the problems over the last year and half or so with the Russian space industry and its management. Jeff does a good job of summarizing their history of manufacturing, technology, and engineering problems going back to the time of Sergei Korolev. He also shares with us his experiences working with the Russians on the Phobos 88 mission. He said typical characteristics of Russian missions leading to problems include being too ambitious, costly for their budgets, and the labor allocated to the projects. He suggested that we in theU.S. do the same thing and cited MSL and Curiosity as an example. He had much to say about the early Soviet Venus probes and how their data was widely discounted outside of theSoviet Union. He then said Space X might be overextending and he cited several ongoing Space X projects which might distract from their primary mission at hand which is to get Falcon and Dragon operational. Listeners asked about the Russian problems driving customers away from doing business withRussia in favor of ULA in theU.S. Here, Dr. Bell had much to say about ULA pricing, overhead costs without NASA sharing them, and more. He also mentioned what was happening to Delta 2 given the GPS system needing larger rockets as an example of the impact of government policy/spending in space industries. Dr. Bell turned to the latest Phobos-Grunt conspiracy theories for the mission failure. At the end of this segment, Dr. Bell talked about the JWST & Curiosity in terms of overly complex and costly missions.
In the second segment, Jeff talked about the Newt space policy suggestions and the idea of the Moon as the 51st state. He had much to say about the ridicule in the media and was not surprised by it. He used this as an example to say reality “conflicts with the space cadet world view.” In talking about Mars missions, he said people had been conned by the Mars theory of life stories and promoters. He said that Mars and HSF were not worth it. Several listeners called in to debate Jeff on these comments but Jeff took no prisoners. He then talked about the ISS and its less than full utilization and that the entire idea of HSF had come and gone. At one point in response to a listener question/comment, Dr. Bell said that all Zubrin offered was a 60′s program! Jeff did have good things to say about the science and robotic missions, said our planet exploration would be with robots, not humans, and that we needed more missions like the Kepler Space Telescope. He repeated throughout the discussion that nothing useful has come form HSF nor would it. He offered that the basic technology was from the70′s and had not changed. He said overall interest in space had declined since Apollo. In his closing comments, he said he was still hopeful that NewSpace would decrease the launch costs as that would be a game changer.
If you have questions/comments for Dr. Jeff Bell, post them on The Space Show blog URL above.