jump to navigation

Brian Altmeyer, Friday, 10-24-14 October 25, 2014

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

Brian Altmeyer, Friday, 10-24-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2343-BWB-2014-10-24.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you rate shows on live365.com, email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guest:  Brian Altmeyer.  Topics:  We discussed the guest’s article posted on the Oct. 6, 2014 issues of The Space Review:  “The Strange Contagion Of a Dream.”  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. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed Brian Altmeyer to the program to discuss his Oct. 6, 2014 Space Review article, “The Strange Contagion of a Dream: How Space Visionaries Hijack Governments to Change the World (see http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2611/1). During the first segment of our 1 hour 27 minute discussion, Mr. Altmeyer introduced us to the background behind writing this article, how he got the idea for it, plus he explained the overall impact space visionaries have had on him and his interest in space development.  Our guest took us back in time to the V2 program, Von Braun, and the politics of beating the Soviet Union to the Moon.  He made the case that both the Soviet Union’s and the US space program fed off each other in the form of competition to not only develop military space resources and ICBMs, plus our civil space programs as well.  I then asked our guest if he thought competition with China over their lunar and long range plans would result in a similar push for civil and commercial space.  His response was very interesting.  Ellen in Portland sent an email suggesting we did not have inspirational or effective leaders today like we had with Von Braun and others.  Brian disputed that and made reference to Elon Musk at SpaceX several times during our discussion.  Gerald Driggers called to talk about the impact of the International Geophysical Year on our early program.  Gerald worked in the early space program & had much to say about the main space personalities of the time along with the early rockets.  Our guest was asked about vision and Mars One, again he brought up SpaceX, and then he talked about exoplanets.  I asked him about the second to last paragraph in his paper regarding leadership issues and many waiting or expecting a new leader to come on the scene in a future election.  Don’t miss his comments on this issue.

In the second segment, Brian was asked about space budgets serving as a limiting factor & if SpaceX was carrying too much of the burden for our moving forward with space development.  Listeners asked him about sustainable space projects inspired & pushed by advocacy.  Do the projects continue or eventually die off?  Allison sent in a note asking our guest why we even needed HSF.  For his response, he cited reasons often provided by Elon Musk when he gets this question or one like it.  Near the end of the program, Ron emailed our guest to challenge his visionary outlook by asking if he had considered the reality of applying  human medical factors, engineering realities, orbital mechanics, & the known science for rockets & human spaceflight regarding the type of visionary statements made by Brian during the show.  This proved to be an interesting discussion as Brian said there were two ways to resolve such issues.  One way would be through testing and incremental progress to resolve or mitigate problems and the other way would be to just do the flight and sort of learn on the job, realizing there would be lots of casualties but at least we would be flying and learning.  I asked our guest if he was dismissing the known engineering &science including medical science.  He said he was not but clearly he preferred the second approach to problem solving. What do you think?

Please let us know by posting your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach our guest through me or the email address he provided at the end of his Space Review article.

Bruce Pittman, Monday, 10-13-14 October 14, 2014

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

Bruce Pittman, Monday, 10-13-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2335-BWB-2014-10-13.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you rate shows on live365.com, email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guest:  Bruce Pittman.  Topics:  The emerging commercial space industry and related topics.  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. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed Bruce Pittman back to the show to discuss the emerging commercial space industry. During the first segment of our 90 minute program Bruce said this was the most exciting time every for commercial space, certain in his 30 plus year career.  He talked about there being a paradigm shift underway, NASA challenges and the progress made in just five short years.  He cited examples with COTS, commercial payloads to the ISS, SpaceX, and lots of smaller companies working with small satellites.  Other examples included the 3D printer on the ISS, the growth of spaceports, the industry spreading out into multiple states, and investment capital coming to the industry.  I asked about human spaceflight (HSF) and he said it was more challenging and demanding but was optimistic that launch costs would come down, especially if reusability enters the market.  Reusability would greatly assist in bringing more commercial options to the table even for HSF.  Jerome in the UK emailed to ask about a commercial space industry outside the U.S.  Both Bruce and I commented on Jerome’s question.  Harry emailed Bruce to inquire if going public was essential for pushing the emerging commercial space industry forward.  Bruce was also asked what excited him the most in the industry.  Listen to his choices. I asked our guest if he saw SLS as an asset to the emerging commercial space industry, being neutral, or being a detriment.  He believes there will be synergistic enhancements for both SLS and the commercial space industry through the development of SLS.  Don’t miss his full comments. Bruce was asked about commercial space ventures being able to finally close a business case and having more than just government as the customer.  Allison emailed us asking Bruce to define paradigm shift.  This also proved an interesting discussion.  Near the end of the segment, our guest was asked bout NEOs and commercial opportunities.  We also talked about two NASA papers in this segment.  The first, “Pioneering Space: NASA’s Next Steps on the Path to Mars” from May 29, 2014 can be downloaded at http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Pioneering-space-final-052914b.pdf.  The second paper, “Emerging Space:  The Evolving Landscape of 21st Century American Spaceflight,” can be downloaded at http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Emerging_Space_Report.pdf.  Just before the break, Paul asked about fuel depots for the commercial space industry.

In our second segment, we started talking about space settlement, pioneering, and space exploration.  Bruce explained the differences with pioneering making it possible to have a permanent presence in space by getting in place needed infrastructure and the basics for living in space.  Space settlement would be established after pioneering.  Exploring goes forth to find out what is out there and to return to tell about it.  A listener asked if going to the Moon was a pioneering step on the way to Martian settlement.  Later, Bruce said that pioneering will be driven by economics. In this segment, we also talked about property rights and benefit sharing plus the impact these two issues might have on the emerging commercial space industry.  Risk averseness came up as well.  As we were drawing to a close, Bruce mentioned how all of the industry was in a transitional period, including traditional aerospace.  He suggested things to look for over the coming months included more commercial activities on the ISS, the upcoming Bigelow module for the ISS, & the Google Lunar XPrize.  In closing, we talked about Silicon Valley and the industry as well as the lowering of barriers to entry for emerging commercial space companies.  Bruce also mentioned the Next Giant Leap Conference in Hawaii, Nov. 9-13, 2014.  For more information, see http://2014giantleap.aerospacehawaii.info.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach Bruce Pittman through me.

The NRC Pathways HSF Study Panel Discussion, Sunday, 10-12-14 October 13, 2014

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

The NRC Pathways HSF Study Panel Discussion, Sunday, 10-12-14

Featuring Dr. Jim Logan, Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2334-BWB-2014-10-12.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you rate shows on live365.com, email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guests:  Dan Adamo, Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics:  Our three guests reviewed the NRC “Pathways To Exploration HSF study.  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. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

Welcome to this 2.5 hour Space Show Classroom discussion with Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, & Dr. Jim Logan regarding the recently released NRC “Pathways To Exploration: Rationales And Approaches For A U.S. Program Of Human Space Exploration.”  You can download the report for free at  http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18801.  In addition, the project referred to in the last part of this discussion by Dan and Jim, the “Aquarius interplanetary HSF transport” paper can be freely downloaded at  http://www.spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/2014/07/aquarius-a-reusable-water-based-interplanetary-human-spaceflight-transport.  Please note that our panel members used cell phones which caused audio issues which you may hear during the discussion.  Finally, as this program will also be archived on both The Space Show and The Space Show Classroom blogs, there will be two papers uploaded to each blog, one by Dan Adamo & the other by caller Dr. James Dewar. I will mention both in the summary below.  In the first segment, our panel members opened with their perspective on the NRC Pathways HSF study.  While there were similarities in their perspectives, there were also noteworthy differences.  After this comprehensive introduction, I asked our panel members about the study and space settlement or pioneering.  Each panel member had much to say on the settlement issue, including the need to solve the gravity prescription for long duration HSF or settlement.  Our panel members  said that for the most part, space settlement was out of scope for this report.  In this part of the discussion much was said about microgravity issues & the need to do on orbit experiments to determine the HSF gravity prescription.  Deimos was discussed as an initial better choice that the surface of Mars re microgravity issues.  Our guests spoke to the need of a short arm centrifuge on the ISS.  Jim spoke to the specifics of such an experiment such as 1 G at the head., 2.5 g’s at the feet for two hours a day to see how it serves as a microgravity countermeasure.  Our panel members mentioned that there already was such a short arm centrifuge built years ago by NASA and Wiley, http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/slsd/about/divisions/hacd/laboratories/short-arm_centrifuge_laboratory.html.  The guests talked about unknown human factor challenges for going to Mars and long duration spaceflight.  Jim provided us with interesting statistics on human spaceflight totals since the beginning in 1961.  The panel members had much to say about the budget issues discussed in the NRC study.  Another point brought up was the study’s assumption that if we are not going to the surface of Mars, why even do HSF?  Near the end of the first segment, listener Carl brought up the well known plans for Mars settlement with Elon Musk & SpaceX.  This sparked quite the discussion so don’t miss it.

In the second segment, our panel talked about the value of the Pathways study, international partnerships and what they saw as contradictory statements, especially regarding the mission cost impact of such partnerships.  John mentioned the study’s reference to NASA education & public outreach which he thought was more focused on STEM & the development of more engineers rather than on educating the general public to be more knowledgeable about science.  The panel members  noted that there was little attention paid to the societal impact of not even having a human spaceflight program.  Dan & Jim agreed on the importance of educational outreach and shared their experiences with us from the employment with NASA.  Adrian in San Diego sent in an email suggesting the panel was being pessimistic and that China would not overthink issues and just do missions without full disclosure.  All three panel members had much to say in response to Adrian’s charge of being pessimistic.  They talked about being reality based, not pessimistic & why it was so important to be reality based.  The panel hit back hard on the charge of being pessimistic.  Dan & Jim said to be other than realistic was reckless and irresponsible.  Jim also said that being called pessimistic suggested to him that reality had violated the person’s ideology.  Jim would be happy to debate the issues with anyone in open forum.  This discussion brought Jim and Dan to talking about their Aquarius project which you can download at the above URL.  They spent some time discussing the benefits of their approach, noting how it addresses & mitigates many of the problems associated with a HSF mission to Mars.  They also spoke to the need for nuclear propulsion and talked about using water as fuel and very high ISP ratings with high temperatures.  During this discussion, Dr. Jim Dewar called in to suggest their ISP ratings were low, he explained why, and he talked about starting small to start flying and then improving as you go.  We did not know it but we lost John from the connection but Jim, Dan, and Dr. Dewar spoke to the NERVA project, and specifics about nuclear propulsion.  This advanced nuclear propulsion discussion was close to a half an hour near the end of the program.  Dr. Dewar was a guest on the program in 2008 & 2009 regarding nuclear propulsion & its history. He also authored two books on the subject.  Use the GuestSearch tool on our website to find his interviews which I suggest you listen to if you have not already done so.  I will also upload to both blogs the paper Dr. Dewar referenced in his discussion.  After the nuclear discussion, Adrian sent in another email titled “rebuttal.”  He challenged the panel members to do the experiments, not just to talk about them.  Jim, Dan & I challenged Adrian for his solutions to doing many of the needed & essential experiments. All of the panel members supported doing the needed experiments & have said so for decades.  Getting funding for the experiments, NASA approval, etc. is a challenge.  I then challenged Adrian to come to The Space Show as a guest with his solutions for doing the essential work & experiments rather than his just talking about how badly they are needed per his second email.  I hope Adrian does have answers and will contact me about coming on the show to discuss them with us.  Jim & Dan each provided closing comments focusing back on the study report.  They thought the report was worth it from the taxpayer perspective and that it would be used for references.  Jim did think the report was not as good as other government studies he had seen because it was so speculative, something all three guests addressed in their opening remarks.  An 11th hour call came from SLS John to talk about the ISP formula & temperatures Dan and Jim used in their paper Aquarius paper.  Dan authorized me to upload to the blog his written comments on the NRC Pathways study so you will find that document on both blogs as well.

Please post comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can reach the panel members through me.

A Technical Note on Nuclear Rockets-1

PathwaysCommentaryR3

Dr. William Bainbridge, Friday, 2-8-13 February 6, 2013

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

Dr. William Bainbridge, Friday, 2-8-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1946-BWB-2013-02-08.mp3

Guest:  Dr. William Bainbridge.  Topics:  The Space Futures Space Questionnaire about space exploration and the next fifty years.  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. William Bainbridge to the program to discuss the Space Futures project which is to help define the future of space our space program for the next fifty years.  Perceptions of informed, interested, and space conscious individuals are sought for the Space Futures space questionnaire.  The questionnaire is based on years of prior research conducted by Dr. Bainbridge as well as other more recent surveys.  You can read about the Space Future Questionnaires (different platforms are available for it) at http://convergentsystems.pbworks.com/w/page/16444389/FrontPage.  If you use the Droid platform, click on the links that allow you download a free Droid APP which enables you to instantly transmit your survey responses to the survey data base. For everyone else, you can download the survey as a Word document which you can complete online and email to Dr. Bainbridge. The Word document questionnaire with 300 questions is at http://convergentsystems.pbworks.com/w/file/62227159/Space%20email%20survey.doc.  Make sure you click on the DOWNLOAD tab in the upper left corner.  There is a shorter 200 question Word document questionnaire on The Space Show blog.  During our discussion, Dr. Bainbridge provided us with the history of this project, how the information has been and is now collected, processed, and used.  We also talked about the importance of space aware people taking the time to complete the questionnaire.  Lots of listeners asked Dr. Bainbridge questions about who should participate from Middle School students to those in the general population to people outside the U.S.  All groups are welcome but as you will hear, it is very important to get the perceptions and opinions of those that have knowledge and expertise about space exploration and development.  We talked about question groupings such as around topics including the Moon or Mars.  We discussed changing trends overtime and current influences on our opinions such as today’s economic problems.  I brought up the decades old Syncon Process and how some attitudes and perceptions are even stronger today than they were decades ago with Syncon.  For example, attitudes including space benefitting all of humanity and more.  This topic took us toward the virtual world, gaming to help increase space awareness and expertise.  I mentioned the recent discussion re the lunar space elevator program this past Monday regarding CCI Games in Iceland. This was our cliff hanger as we went to our break waiting for Dr. Bainbridge’s comments about his being involved with CCI Games.

In our second segment of this 1 hr. 45 minute program, Dr. Bainbridge talked about his research with the CCI gaming product, EVE Online as he plays the game.  He had much to say about the space awareness of this game and the team in Iceland that created it.  He also said that Sean Smith, one of those slain in the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya was a player of EVE Online.  His game name was “Vile Rat” and there is a huge outpouring of support and comments about him on the internet. Google Vile Rat to see these comments & news stories.  We talked about other scientific games and new technologies for developing a space consciousness and expertise about space exploration.  We talked about space and innovation along with frontier development, pioneering & what it means to both continue it or stop it for the future of a nation.  John called to talk with Dr. Bainbridge about his surprise in taking the survey in finding out he was potentially more pessimistic about the future than he had thought he was because like so many others, he had expectations for more advancement in space exploration, development, even settlement than what exists with our present day reality.  Dr. Bainbridge helped put these thoughts and realizations into context with our actual space exploration and development over the past decades.  It’s a fascinating discussion and analysis, don’t miss it.  Near the end of the program, a listener asked how to realize space as an investment rather than just another government expense item.  We talked about better story telling by everyone concerned. Dr. Bainbridge also linked the survey questionnaires to this question because the results will help pinpoint our space insights along with the value stream.  While there is a March 1 questionnaire due date, this is not a hard date and Dr. Bainbridge encouraged people to participate, even if later than March 1.  Also, if someone wants hard copies of the questionnaire to distribute at a space conference or other event, perhaps even a Meetup, you can contact him for copies or you can download the questionnaire from the links provided above.  Another idea is to make a simple flyer with the basic information and the URLs for space or related event distribution.  I did the 300 questionnaire Word document and can’t wait to see the analysis. I certainly plan on bringing Dr. Bainbridge back to the program to discuss the project findings.

Please post your comments/questions on the blog.  If you do the questionnaire, share your thoughts with us on the blog.  If you want to contact Dr. Bainbridge, you can do so through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

  The shorter 200 question survey is available for download here:

Space Futures questionnaire

 

Elliot Pulham, The Space Foundation, Friday, 1-11-13 January 12, 2013

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

Elliot Pulham, The Space Foundation, Friday, 1-11-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1928-BWB-2013-01-11.mp3

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.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 71 other followers