Robert Sackheim, Monday, 4-1-13 April 2, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: " Saturn V, " SpaceX, Areas 5, Ares 1, Atlas 5, Bigelow, boosters, chemical propulsion, commercial space, Constellation, cubesats, Delta 4, electric propulsion, Falcon 9. , Falcon Heavy, fuel depots, GEO orbital satellites, Golden Spike, high speed rail, human spaceflight, hybrid rocket engines, Inspiration Mars, international space venture cooperation, liquid rocket engines, lunar space elevator., NACA, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, NewSpace, North Korean rockets, nuclear propulsion, public/private partnerships, Robert Sackheim, robotic missions, rocket propulsion, Russian rocket engines, satellite propulsion, SLS, solid rocket boosters, space advocacy, Space Shuttle, space tourism, spaceports, SSP, TRW Corp.
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. Doug Plata, Sunday, 2-24-13 February 25, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: " SpaceX, asteroid mining, Beyond Leo (BLEO), Cislunar space, Cislunar Transportation System, Dr. Doug Plata, Falcon Heavy, fuel depots, heavy lift, LCROSS., Lunar Cots, Lunar COTS Petition., lunar mining, lunar water ice, Mars, NewSpace, prizes, space advocacy, telerobotics
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.
Alan Steinberg, Friday, 2-1-13 February 2, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: "Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding, "Weapons in Space: The Need to Protect Space Assets, ABM, Alan Steinberg, ASAT, ASTROPOLITICS, beamed energy, cyber warfare, Dept. of Defense space, enforcement., international space law, NASA, PPWT, public opinion, self-defense, space advocacy, space debris, space weapons, U.N. Charter, U.N. treaties
2 comments
Alan Steinberg, Friday, 2-1-13
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1941-BWB-2013-02-01.mp3
Guest: Alan Steinberg. Topics; Protecting our space assets, weapons in space, space policy and public opinion. 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 Alan Steinberg to the program to discuss both is latest Astropolitics article, “Weapons in Space: The Need to Protect Space Assets,” and his 2011 Space Policy article, , “Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding.” Both of these articles are available for purchase by using Google the full title of the article. During the first half of the program, we focused on Alan’s Astropolitics article. As you will hear, the issue of protecting our space assets is not an easy one to address or solve. Furthermore, as Alan and listeners suggested, the response the U.S. might make to an attack on space assets is unclear, especially if the attacking party or nation had an excuse, said it was an accident, or denied intentionally doing the deed. Alan and listener Michael defined the term space weapon and Michael provided us with the PPWT proposed treaty language defining space weapons. Alan had much to say about protecting space assets and weapons in space in the context of the U.N. treaties. We talked about U.S. as well as international enforcement here and in other countries. Space debris was discussed, especially in light of the difficulty in diplomatic action leading to tangible action against a debris causing country or party. Also discussed was government being responsible for commercial space assets under its flag.
In the second segment, we mostly talked about Alan’s 2011 Space Policy article, “Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding,” although many listeners via email and the phone kept returning to the space weapons topic. Alan took lots of questions about the role and impact on policy of space advocacy and as you will hear, its not easy or clear to pin down. Alan had much to say on how best to influence members of congress but was clear in pointing out that space advocacy does not have the numbers of the larger and more powerful lobbying groups that are far more effective in influencing policy than is the space community. Another of his points focused in on the significant influence of the aerospace industry as compared to space advocates and enthusiasts. We also learned from his concluding paragraph that when researching this issue, “research on what influences space policy attitudes and even space policy public opinion is in short supply.” In addition, we learned that while Americans like our space program and NASA, they don’t have a good understanding of it, the actual amount of funding NASA gets in relationship to the budget, and that their liking of the space program simply does not translate to more funding and more programs.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. If you want to contact Alan Steinberg, you can do so through drspace@thespaceshow.com.
Dr. Albert Carnesale, Monday, 1-28-13 January 28, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: "NASA's Strategic Direction And The Need For A National Consensus, 2011 NASA Strategic Plan, Congress, Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC), Dr. Albert Carnesale, Executive Branch, human spaceflight, NASA centers, NASA communication, NASA efficiency, NASA funding, NASA Mission Statements, NASA national consensus, NASA national priorities, NASA organization, NASA partnerships, NASA strategy, NASA Vision, National Academies, National Research Council, NRC Human Spaceflight Study., sequestration, space advocacy
add a comment
Dr. Albert Carnesale, Monday, 1-28-13
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1938-BWB-2013-01-28.mp3
Guest: Dr. Albert Carnesale. Topics: The NRC study, “NASA’s Strategic Direction And The Need For A National Consensus.” 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. Albert Carnesale, Chair of the Committee on NASA’s Strategic Direction to discuss the National Research Council Report, their analysis of NASA, their findings, and their recommendations. You can download the pdf form of the study report at www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18248. We started our 1 hour 34 minute discussion with Dr. Carnesale introducing us to the National Academies and the NRC, then this specific study. We talked about its origins, its source of funding, its methodology, objectivity, and how it addresses issues within NASA, Congress, and the Executive Branch of the government. Dr. Carnesale talked about the study Statement of Task. We learned that it was equally important as to what they were to do as to what they were not to do. For example, the were not tasked to opine on what NASA should be, rather they looked at NASA’s current status and evaluated and reported on what they found. Also, the study was a fast track study completed over seven months. This is in contrast to an NRC-NASA Human Spaceflight Study spanning two years. You can get information on the HSF study at http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DEPS/ASEB/DEPS_069080. Dr. Carnesale went over their findings and you will hear constant references back to the NASA 2011 Strategic Plan. There were three main findings including the vision statement for the 2011 NASA Strategic Plan did not articulate “a national vision that is unique to the nation’s space and aeronautics agency,” that the mission statement in the 2011 Strategic Plan does not “articulate a mission unique to the nation’s space and aeronautics agency” and finally, that both the NASA vision and mission statements are so plain vanilla that they could apply to almost any part of the government. These findings can be found on page 31 of the study. Dr. Carnesale then discussed some of the specific findings and recommendations for the NASA program areas including human spaceflight, robotics, science missions, and technology. NASA funding was discussed along with Congressional control and the congressional role in making space policy. Our guest received questions about the value of space advocacy, its place in the study, and public feedback/commentary. One of the points made by our guest was that overall, most people they talked with seemed to think the ultimate HSF goal was Mars and that the Moon would be of value as a stepping stone in going to Mars. However, there was no strategy for this, nor was there a strategy or policy or even funding for an asteroid visit or program. We also discussed the gap which exists between the public’s liking the space program and the level of interest in congressional funding for NASA and its programs. Listeners asked about pork spending projects and related inefficient characteristics of the congressional & NASA administrative practices.
In our second segment, the subject of sequestration came up and our guest said most thought it would impact NASA on the margins. Dr. Carnesale got a question about getting NASA to focus on RLVs but something that specific was outside the scope of their study parameters. Lots of comparisons were made with the Defense Department in terms of efficiency changes, including applying DOD like BRAC reductions to helping make the NASA centers more efficient, perhaps even to consolidate them. Another listener wanted to know about the study suggesting NASA take on more frontline research such as in the earlier NACA. Here, our guest talked about JPL which has a somewhat different structure than other NASA centers & suggested it was one of the management and organizational models that could be considered in streamlining NASA for the future. Later in the segment, I asked what the methodology was for implementing the study findings. He talked about the need for strategy, goals, and objectives with consensus in NASA. Support and direction from both the Administration and Congress was essential. Don’t miss his outline for implementation of the study findings and conclusions. Throughout our discussion, we talked about the leadership role of NASA and the value of the contributions NASA has made to the nation and the world, looking forward to how best to see NASA continue in this light. We also talked about partnerships with other government agencies, the private sector, and international players, especially for something as expensive as a Mars mission. Toward the end of our discussion, Dr. Carnesale took a listener question about the need for better NASA communication to take the space story to the public. He said the weakness was not in the communications, the weakness was in the lack of the NASA vision. He cited outstanding communication from JPL and NASA regarding MSL and Curiosity. Our last caller was from Dave Huntsman, a 38 year NASA veteran. Dave raised some excellent points regarding what NASA could do on its own without Congress and the Administration. He talked about programs put in place since the Challenger accident, all with mixed results. The three of us took time to acknowledge remembering the Challenger accident on this day in history, January 28, 1986.
Please post your comments/questions about this program and the NRC Study on The Space Show blog URL above.
Jim Muncy, Sunday, 1-20-13 January 21, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: 2013 Congress, Atlas 5, Bigelow Aerospace, BLEO, Boeing CST 100, budget cuts, Cis Lunar Gateway, Commercial Crew, commercial launch indemnification, commercial space, Falcon Heavy, FY 13 NASA budget, human spaceflight, ISS, ITAR, James Webb Space Telescope, Jim Muncy, NASA, New Mexico spaceport liability issues, Orion, PoliSpace, sequestration, SLS, space advocacy, space race, Spaceport America, tort reform, U.S. space policy, Virgin Galactic, weather satellites
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.
Dr. Eligar Sadeh, Monday, 1-7-13 January 8, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: "Space Strategy in the 21st Century: Theory and policy, ASTROPOLITICS, civil space., commercial space, Department of Space, Dr. Eligar Sadeh, government space industries subsidies, GPS Technology, ITAR, launch industry. lowering launch costs, market drive space sectors, NASA, National Space Policy, Remote Sensing, space advocacy, space governance, space policy, space strategy, telecommunications
add a comment
Dr. Eligar Sadeh, Monday, 1-7-13
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1925-BWB-2013-01-07.mp3
Guest: Dr. Eligar Sadeh. Topics: Space policy & strategy for 2013, Dr. Sadeh’s new book, 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 back Dr. Eligar Sadeh to discuss his new book, “Space Strategy in the 21st Century: Theory and policy,” as well as space policy and strategy for 2013 and beyond. If you purchase his book from Amazon using this special URL, Amazon will contribute to The Space Show: www.amazon.com/Space-Strategy-21st-Century-Politics/dp/0415622115/ref=onegiantlea20. Dr. Sadeh also talked about the recent SWF sponsored Panel Discussion on Space Policy Challenges Facing the Second Obama Administration as he was a participant in these discussions. Dr. Sadeh started out with a space industry overview, noting that while there are plans and policies, there are no strategies for implementing plans and policies. We talked about commercial space and our guest made a point throughout the entire discussion that after decades, not only was there little or no strategy, but that commercial space was still in need of government subsidies. At one point I pushed Eligar for when he thought the turning point might come for the commercial space sectors so don’t miss his answer. We talked about the launch industry, the issue of launch costs, and heard our guest say that only the entrepreneurial sector was completely focused on lowering costs. Other sectors valued routine and reliable scheduling plus a very high launch reliability over lowering costs. Over and over Eligar cited the telecommunications industry as the one commercial market now able to stand on its own in a market driven sector. Other issues talked about with the listeners were GPS, Remote Sensing, Value Propositions of Space, civil space, DOD & National Security space, the U.S. economy, NASA, space agency budgets, and more.
In our second segment, Doug and I pressured Dr. Sadeh to tell us what his ideal space strategy would be were he the top dog in space. With some pushing, Eligar did outline a pathway to a quality national space strategy and said what he thought that strategy should contain. He also mentioned another small segment interested in lower launch costs, Operationally Responsive Space (ORS). Later in the segment, I asked for his 2013 scenario for space and he said it would be about the same as 2012, mostly for economic reasons. Later Doug called & we talked about public/private partnerships with Doug. As we were ending, we talked about the journal ASTROPOLITICS as Eligar is the editor of it. We also briefly hit upon space governance, and making space sustainable which represented his closing comments. As promised, I will post on the blog the public/private partnership paper Eligar and I wrote several years ago. Eligar also asked that I post the Table of Contents of his new book posted on the blog so you will find that there as well.
Post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. You can email Dr. Sadeh at esadeh@gmail.com.
Public Private Partnerships 2005 Space Strategy Book Introduction
Lt. Col. Paul Damphousse, NSS, Sunday, 1-6-13 January 7, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: AIAA, CASIS, commercial space, ISDC, ISS, ITAR Reform, Kickstarter., microgravity, NASA, National Space Society, New space enthusiasts., NSS Leadership Team, NSS Legislative Blitz, NSS Space Roadmap, Paul Damphousse, space advocacy, Space Ambassador, Space Exploration Alliance, space inspiration, space settlement policy
add a comment
Lt. Col. Paul Damphousse, NSS, Sunday, 1-6-13
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1924-BWB-2013-01-06.mp3
Guest: Lt. Col. Paul Damphousse. Topics: National Space Society and the upcoming ISDC Conference. 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 to the program Lt. Col. Paul Damphousse, Executive Director for the National Space Society (NSS). You can follow along with us by visiting the NSS website, www.nss.org and the ISDC website, http://isdc.nss.org/2013. We started our discussion with Lt. Col. Damphousse providing us with a brief overview of NSS followed by a short summary of ISDC 2012 highlights leading into this year’s ISDC which will be in May in San Diego, CA. In talking about this year’s ISDC, he mentioned special tours including the San Diego Air & Space Museum and the Mt. Palomar Observatory. For dates, registration, hotel information, visit the ISDC website above. We talked about NSS goals, objectives, and purposes. This included a focus on space settlement, inspirational space programs, and STEM educational outreach. Listeners asked Paul about the 2013 Legislative Blitz, the Space Exploration Alliance, the NSS Leadership Team, and becoming a Space Ambassador. Several times during our discussion, Paul suggested listeners with questions send them to NSS at nsshq@nss.org. Reference this Space Show program and you will be directed to the person or department that can best respond to your needs. Another question for Paul asked about the space advocacy community being too diverse and ineffective. Paul had much to say about this as did several listeners who commented on these two issues.
In the second part of the program, Doug called in to talk about the NSS Roadmap which is on their website. The Roadmap is just that, a set of pathways to developing and opening up space segments, industries, and niches. I strongly suggest you check out the NSS Roadmap on their website. Paul also told us about an upcoming NSS Kickstarter program to finance a short, inspirational movie on the benefits of both exploring and settling space. Watch their website for announcements about the program going live. Toward the end, Paul talked about ITAR reform, the renewal for one year of the launch indemnification for the commercial sector, and the Space Exploration Sustainability Act, all as examples of effective space advocacy organization work. We then briefly talked about LEO no longer being a frontier and ready for commercial exploitation while BLEO was the frontier for NASA and its focus. Finally, during our discussion Paul mentioned how the Space Finance Group was helping NSS with the NSS Kickstarter campaign. You can find out more about this organization at www.SpaceFinanceGroup.com.
Please post questions/comments on The Space Show blog above. You can email Paul Damphousse through me or the NSS email address listed above.
Walt Anderson, Friday, 10-5-12 October 5, 2012
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: " SpaceX, asteroid mining, Cislunar development, citizen science, commercial space, Dennis Tito, human spaceflight, ISS, Mir Space Station, MirCorp, NanoRacks, NASA, NewSpace, public/private partnerships, robotic space missions, space advocacy, space business management, space habitats, space investment, space investments, space resource allocation, space technology, space tourism, SSP, suborbital, Walt Anderson
2 comments
Walt Anderson, Friday, 10-5-12
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1866-BWB-2012-10-05.mp3
Henry Vanderbilt, Thursday, 3-22-12 March 23, 2012
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: " space politics, Beyond Low Earth Orbit, commercial space, FAA AST, Google Lunar X-Prize, Henry Vanderbilt, IPO, ISS, low cost space access, Mars, Moon, NASA budget, NASA Chief Technology Office, orbital fuel depots, Orion, Space Access Society, space advocacy, space entrepreneurs, Space Launch System, space policy, space tourism, suborbital research
1 comment so far
Henry Vanderbilt, Thursday, 3-22-12
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1740-BWB-2012-03-22.mp3
Guest: Henry Vanderbilt. Topics: Space Access Society Conference, Phoenix, ArizonaApril 12-14, 2012. 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 back Henry Vanderbilt to the program to discuss the upcoming Space Access Society Conference, April 12-14, 2012 to be held at the Grace Inn in Phoenix, Arizona. For the conference agenda, registration and full hotel information, visit www.space-access.org. During the first part of our initial segment, Henry provided us with an historical overview of not only the development and evolution of the Space Access Society meetings and conference, but also his own personal work in the space arena leading up to his excellent space activism of today which focuses on the space transportation issue. This is a comprehensive look at activities that have brought space exploration and development to today since about 1986. While Henry has been a frequent Space Show guest, this is perhaps the most detailed look we have had from him regarding his space evolution and the rise in importance of the Space Access Society (SAS). Later in this nearly hour long segment and until our break, Henry highlighted many of the speakers that will be at the conference. You can see the full list and the three day agenda at www.space-access.org/updates/sa12info.html.
In our second segment, we talked about more of the speakers but mainly focused on those that would address policy and budget issues as not all of the SAS speakers are on the business/entrepreneurial side of space development. Some of the highlights included the NASA Chief Technology Office, ULA, policies for going beyond LEO, and advocacy on issues supported by SAS. As part of this discussion, we talked about SLS, ISS, Space X, depots, and budgetary pressures on NASA and key members of congress.
If you have comments/questions, please post them on The Space Show blog URL. If you have questions for Henry about SAS, you can email him at space.access@space-access.org.
