jump to navigation

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

Leland Melvin, Friday, 10-3-14 October 4, 2014

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

Leland Melvin, Friday, 10-3-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2328-BWB-2014-10-03.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:  Leland Melvin.  Topics:  Spaceship Earth Grant contest, The Overview Effect, space exploration, STEM.  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 former NASA astronaut Leland Melvin to the program to discuss Spaceship Earth Grants (SEG) (www.spaceshipearthgrants.com) as Leland is the president of the organization.  This program was a one hour show so there was no break as we had just one segment.  Mr. Melvin started out by telling us about SEG which he said was formed to do good in the world.  He talked about their contest for raising money to send people to space so that they will experience an orbital shift in perception (The Overview Effect) and upon return, do work and good with this new perspective of Earth.  They want this new perspective shared with others for the benefit of all.  He talked about the application for the contest and the fee structure which you will find fully explained on their website so see the above URL.  Leland explained that this was a crowd funding program though not like others that use specific crowd funding program such as Kickstarter or Indiegogo.  We also learned from a listener question that the contest winners will choose their own carrier for going to space and will need to comply with the rules & conditions set by that particular carrier.  Later, he mentioned that they would have a spaceflight training academy but details would not be announced until later in October.  The contest involves paying a fee which is on a sliding scale, submitting a video and writing an essay on why you want to go space.  I asked our guest why the average person needs to go to space.  Leland spent some time responding to this question so don’t miss this crucial discussion.  Leland was asked if students on a global bases seemed interested & inspired by space when he spoke to them.  He said yes & told us a great story about what happened with a Brooklyn student who slept through his talk.  We talked about international space cooperation, specifically with the Russians even when our non-space relationship with Russia was at a low point.  Regarding their contest, Leland talked about some of the benefits early adopters get by filling out an application, submitting the video, essay, and fee.  A listener asked if they would market their space flights for adventure as do the space tourism companies or are they only going after the change in perspective & Overview Effect benefits.  I asked Leland if he had experienced the Overview Effect on his two Atlantis flights. The same question was asked about his astronaut peers.  Leland had much to say in response to this question because when he went to space, he was not familiar with the Overview Effect but told us that what he experienced was the Overview Effect without putting a name to it.  Later in the program, we discussed SEG being founded on the principles of Muhammad Yunis, then Leland was asked by Kristin if SEG would focus on space settlement as well as tourism.  We learned that the organization was accepting applications from 156 countries.  In his summary, our guest talked about civilizations coming together through space, the orbital shift in perspective by just being in space, and the need to fund STEM programs/students.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can email our guest through the SEG website or me.

Dr. Mark Shelhamer, Tuesday, 7-22-14 July 23, 2014

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

Dr. Mark Shelhamer, Tuesday, 7-22-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2286-BWB-2014-07-22.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:  Dr. Mark Shelhamer.  Topics:  A look at the risks associated with long duration human 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. 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 Dr. Mark Shelhamer, Chief Scientist of the NASA Human Research Program to the show to discuss the critical risks associated with BLEO long duration HSP. You can hear his FISO talk on this topic from April 2, 2014 at http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Shelhamer_4-2-14/Shelhamer.mp3.  His associated Power Point can be downloaded at http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Shelhamer_4-2-14/Shelhamer_4-2-14.ppt.  During the first segment of our 95 minute discussion, Dr. Shelhamer started off saying  we would be talking about beyond low earth orbit only and that many of the risks are unknown since we have very little experience with BLEO.  Much of what we do know is extrapolated from our current knowledge base plus our Apollo experience.  Next, our guest defined three major areas/issues.  First he listed medical issues which he later described as onsite medical treatments for various complications, illnesses, surgical needs and such.  He classified physical deconditioning issues such as muscle and bone loss issues, cardio vascular issues in a different category.  The second group he identified had to do with radiation, and the third group included psychological-social issues.  I asked about Microgravity not being in the top three and he said because those issues are likely a constant for both LEO and BLEO missions.  He then talked at length about the challenges needing countermeasures/mitigation.  He did not say these were showstopper challenges but they do require effective countermeasures.  For example, he said humans could probably survive a trip to Mars today providing the hardware & life support was up to the job but their goal is to get the crew there in good condition, to be able to do effective work, and to return safely.  He did not think those goals could be obtained today.  I asked if money was a primary issue and it was not though he said more money is always helpful. He talked about the time needed for some human studies, team studies, and research, sometimes extending even longer than a year.  He then took us through the three categories to tell us what NASA was doing & how it was doing in that research area. You might be surprised by what you hear.  I certainly was.  Later, we talked about ocular/vision issues which are now getting front page attention.  He explained the latest theory causing the problem as possible fluid shifts.  Listen to this discussion.  Note that once we start with BLEO HSF, we may find other problems that do not now show up now.  Also, we may develop a countermeasure for one problem but that opens the door to lots of other problems currently unknown.  One tool he talked about that was being tested on the ISS Russian sector was lower body negative pressure.  Artificial gravity was a big part of our discussion.  While everyone is enthusiastic about it, he made the point of saying we don’t know the needed spin rate nor do we know what level of gravity is needed for humans or for how long. Just spinning a spacecraft without knowing this information is unlikely to be successful let alone cost effective or economic. He also pointed out that artificial gravity is costly, requires lots of energy, a huge spacecraft which means lots of mass to orbit, & to do it, it needs to be done in a way that maximizes the benefits for the crew.  Without knowing the precise spin rate and gravity needs for humans plus how long the crew needs to be in artificial gravity, it is likely it won’t be done just for cost and economic reasons alone.  Charles emailed in about bed rest analog studies.  Joe sent in a question about lower back pain & spine issues.  As the segment ended, I asked him if humans were lousy candidates for BLEO spaceflight.  Don’t miss his answer.

In the second segment, we took a call from Dave about nuclear submarines as an analog for HSF studies.  Our next topic was space radiation which our guest discussed in detail.  I then took two email questions from B John in Sweden.  He asked about the benefits of microgravity for disabled folks, then I read a longer email from him suggesting solutions for the microgravity, psychology, and radiation issues already existed and why was NASA not proposing and developing “these simple non-medical solutions to the problems you describe.”  Dr. Shelhamer responded to his email item by item. For the most part, he agreed with what B John was saying except that his information and perspective were limited and missing key components of the scenarios he was talking about.  Mark explained why our listener’s comments were way too simple and cited some scenarios to illustrate this.  It was a fascinating reply to what many of us believe are already effective countermeasures.  Unfortunately, while what many of us suggest is correct, what we suggest does not go far enough and does not contain the specifics and details of what is actually required to make a specific countermeasure work.  Otherwise, the countermeasures are far more complex than what B John asked about in his email which you will hear me read on the program.  I asked Mark about genetic modification and that took us to the subject of personalized countermeasures.  We talked about pioneering/space settlement, childbirth & children in the space environment, even gender differences for BELO HSF.  I asked about the differences from his perspective of doing HSF to the Moon, an asteroid, Mars, or Deimos.  There are differences, don’t miss his response.  As the program was ending, I asked if a commercial company without gov. funding could decide to do a BLEO mission without all the costs and safety concerns of NASA.  Mark said it might be possible though the costs of the missions and the technology needed would make it very hard for a commercial company to carry out.  He said a short cut bare bones mission might be achieved by a commercial company but the risks for the crew would be extreme.  If you were running a commercial company and funding such a mission, would you accept these risks, plus the risk the crew might not be able to do much or be effective once they got to their destination? As the commercial company CEO, would that be a good use of company money or would you dismiss what people like our guest today have to say about these issues.  Let me know your thoughts by posting them on the blog.

Please post comments/questions on TSS blog above. Mark can be reached through me or through his PPT presentation address.

The John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars, Wednesday, 7-2-14 July 3, 2014

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

The John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars, Wednesday, 7-2-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2273-BWB-2014-07-02.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: John Batchelor, Dr. Frank Martin, Dr. David Livingston.  Topics:  The NRC study “Pathways to Exploration: Rationales and Approaches for a U.S. Program of Human Space Exploration.” You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog. 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 in the proper citation format. Contact Dr. Livingston for questions about our copyright and trademark policies which we do enforce.This program is archived on The Space Show website, podcasting, and blog sites with permission from John Batchelor. Please visit the John Batchelor Show website for more information about this fine program, www.johnbatchelorshow.com.  Remember, your Amazon Purchases Can Help Support The Space Show/OGLF (www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm).  For those of you listening to archives on live365.com & rating the programs, please email me the reasons for your rating.  This will definitely help improve Space Show programming. Thank you.

We welcomed to Hotel Mars Dr. Frank Martin who was part of the study team for the National Research Council’s “Pathways to Exploration: Rationales and Approaches for a U.S. Program of Human Space Exploration” study.  You can download a free copy of the 280 page report as a pdf document at www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18801.  Dr. Martin introduced us to the report which focused on the goal of human spaceflight to Mars.  During our Hotel Mars summary of the report and related issues, we discussed the problems with constrained budgets, the risks it poses for our human spaceflight program, and the leadership vacuum it creates in the U.S.  human spaceflight program.  John asked Dr. Martin about radiation, the use of the ISS, using the Moon to facilitate Mars, and the incremental approach to going to Mars.  At the end of the 11.5 minute segment, Dr. Martin was asked about the private sector doing the Mars human spaceflight mission, particularly SpaceX.

Please post any comments/questions you might have on The Space Show blog.  You can contact any of  us through drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Dr. Doug Plata, Monday, 6-30-14 July 1, 2014

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

Dr. Doug Plata, Monday, 6-30-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2271-BWB-2014-06-30.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:  Dr. Doug Plata.  Topics:  Lunar Cots & cislunar space development, policy, Mars, & much 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. 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 back Dr. Doug Plata for this two hour two minute discussion.  NOTE THAT THREE SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENTS FROM DOUG WILL BE UPLOADED TO THE BLOG.  During the first segment, Doug introduced us to the topics he discussed at the recent ISDC conference in Los Angeles.  He talked about SpaceX and both the Falcon 9 & Heavy, Lunar ice, hollow ice, a concept he calls Moon for Mars, and more.  He also suggested that the Moon was not necessary for a Mars mission.  Additionally, while he certainly support a return to the Moon, he does not believe bringing back the VSE and Constellation is the way to do it.  I asked him how he got is interest in and start in space advocacy about 4 years ago.  Doug told us an interesting story, including how he was influenced by the LCROSS mission.  Michael Listner called to ask Doug about the WHY for the missions & projects he was advocating.  This was an interesting discussion though Michael got cut off due to a glitch at his end.  Tony wanted to know if Doug might be considering a start-up around his ideas in the near future.  Other first segment topics included ISRU, what makes space sustainable, and gaining the public interest and trust.  I asked him what among his ISDC topics was the least popular.  Listen for the answer.

In the second segment, Doug said people could find the lunar cots petition at http://www.lunarcots.com.  Doug addressed a question submitted by Tony regarding the use of water for radiation shielding.  Doug corrected some misunderstandings from his previous comment & went through the calculations in support of his conclusions.  We talked about a recent Mars One announcement for payloads for their planned 2018 mission.  Doug talked lunar cots, telerobotics, & benefits which he had sent me on an earlier show.  It is the three benefits documents that I will upload to the blog.  Doug had more to say on LCROSS & its impact on him.  He also told us about his newly made NASA HQ and commercial space contacts regarding lunar cots and cislunar.  As the program was ending, he talked about doing a special Flagstaff conference next year with a media event at nearby Meteor Crater.  Several times during our discussion, Doug cited Hops Blog for lunar and Mars lander/hopper ideas.  See http://hopsblog-hop.blogspot.com.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  You can reach Doug through me or his lunar cots page.

AboutLunarCOTS

LCOTS_Benefits-Commercial

LCOTS_Benefits-NASA

 

Dr. Paul Spudis, Friday, 6-20-14 June 19, 2014

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

Dr. Paul Spudis, Friday, 6-20-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2266-BWB-2014-06-20.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:  Dr. Paul Spudis.  Topics:  Dr. Spudis provided us with an overview and analysis of the NRC “Pathways to Exploration: Rationales and Approaches for a U.S. Program of Human Space Exploration.”  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 back to the show Dr. Paul Spudis to discuss the NRC Human Spaceflight Study report recently released. You can download the report for free at http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18801.  Please note that this program was broadcast and recorded live on Wednesday, June 18, 2014.  It is being archived on Friday, 6-20-24 as there will be no live show on Friday due to the host travel schedule.  During the first segment of our 1 hour 36 minute program, Dr. Spudis first walked us through the NRC nearly 300 page study, hitting the highlights, raising questions, talking about what was good in the report and disappointing in it.  We talked about the rational for human spaceflight, for Mars, also the Moon.  We noted the absence of economic development in the report and this gave Dr. Spudis several openings to talk about his ideas for cislunar economic development.  Listeners asked lots of email questions ranging from budget issues, to SpaceX and rocket reusability.  Paul described much of what the study suggested as a form of “Apollo to Mars.”  Near the end of this segment we talked about public/private partnerships and learned that the Pathways study was only addressing public programs.  A listener asked Dr. Spudis what he thought the impact of the study might be and sitting on a shelf somewhere seemed a plausible answer.

In the second segment, Dr. Spudis focused on the response to the report and ways to actually develop a quality space program.  He talked about the need for a space transportation system, space infrastructure, and to use an incremental approach.  Robotics were discussed, we talked about the space media, and Dr. Spudis reminded us a few times that if there is no infrastructure, there can be no institutional use and capability.  We also compared the Apollo period and JFK’s goal for the Moon compared to now.  Its an interesting discussion, especially since we no longer have many of the skill sets we had back then.  The value of the Moon and commercial space came up & we talked about promoting the value to policy makers.  In supporting his incremental approach, Paul referenced a bit of US naval history.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  Check out Paul’s blog, http://www.spudislunarresources.com.  You can contact Dr. Spudis through his blog or me.

Ed Wright, Friday, 6-13-14 June 15, 2014

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

Ed Wright, Friday, 6-13-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2262-BWB-2014-06-13.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support The Space Show/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:  Ed Wright.  Topics:  Citizens in Space, Lynx Cub Payload Carrier, U.S. Rocket Academy, commercial 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. 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 Ed Wright back to the show to discuss Citizens in Space and the new U.S. Rocket Academy Lynx Cub Payload Carrier they developed with the Texas A&M Space Engineering Research Center.  For more information, visit http://www.citizensinspace.org.  During the first segment of our 1 hour 34 minute program, Ed talked about space settlement per his recent talk at ISDC 2014 in Los Angles.  After introducing us to the topic, he talked about how space settlement needs to evolve to a permanent base by starting smaller and boot strapping along the way.  He explained the process as he visualized it and outlined how such a process, including how both suborbital and orbital flights would lead to job creation, eventually job creation in space.  As part over his overall strategy, he includes the Maker Faire movement and contrasted Maker Faire to a typical space conference where Maker Faire draws thousands of people and a typical space conference draws a few hundred to maybe a thousand people.  We talked about the role to be played by ISS, military space, and the challenges presented by the human factors medical issues as well as other technical challenges.

In the second segment, Doug emailed asking about the ISDC reception Ed got regarding his talk at ISDC.  Also, Charles emailed in during both segments to suggest the Microlaunchers approach and to once again voice his doubt about suborbital tourism becoming a successful industry.  We also talked about the Citizens In Space New Space Research Platform which is ready for flight testing, the Lynx Cub Payload Carrier developed with the Texas A&M Space Engineering Research Center and XCOR.  The carrier will be used on 10 Lynx mission and made available to XCIR customers as ready to fly hardware or even as open-source hardware.  You can read about it at http://www.citizensinspace.org/2014/05/lynx-cub-payload-carrier-ready-for-flight-test and at http://www.citizensinspace.org/2014/05/lynx-cub-payload-platform-will-be-unveiled-at-makercon.  Ed then explained how Citizens In Space is broader than his earlier program, the original Teachers in Space program, and that now preference for being flown to space goes to those submitting science experiments for the upcoming suborbital flights using the Lynx Cub Payload Carrier.  He offered excellent closing comments.

Post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can contact Ed through me or his website.

Frank Van Renesselear, Tuesday, 6-10-14 June 11, 2014

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

Frank Van Renesselear, Tuesday, 6-10-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2260-BWB-2014-06-10.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support The Space Show/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:  Franklin (Frank) Van Rensselaer, Jr.  Topics:  Schafer Corp Aerospace & Strategic Business Development, commercial space, markets, capital.  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 Frank Van Rensselear to the program to discuss Schafer Corp and various commercial space topics and issues.  Our program was an hour long so we had only one segment.  We started our discussion with by talking with our guest about his experience as an Apollo Flight Controller and he described his position as The Booster.  He shared some of his experiences with us, especially for Apollo 8 and Apollo 12 which was hit by lightening shortly after launch.  Frank was also on the job through Skylab and the ASTP.  Listen and enjoy the history.  We then jumped into his experiences in commercial space and his having developed over $300 million in new business when he was with the Harris Corporation.  Our guest was asked about the newly released NRC Pathways Human Spaceflight Study and he said he basically agreed with it in that we do not have enough money, we can’t do meaningful and inspiring projects, and overall he suggested this was demeaning to the country.  We talked for several minutes about tight budget issues for NASA and the way congress and the American people set priorities which do not seem to include human spaceflight.  I suggested this is a choice & asked how we get policy and budget pros within the system to make different choices in support of HSF. Frank was asked if Constellation had not been cancelled if we would be in a similar position today with our dependency on Russia and related issues.  He did not think so but listen to his full response.  We talked about the RD-180 engine and the likelihood that congress will appropriate funds to make a U.S. replacement engine.  This brought up the need for such an engine if we have Delta and soon will have Falcon 9 which still gives us two independent launchers for high value national security payloads.  Frank had lots to say on this subject, on SpaceX and ULA, along with the importance of these national security satellites and launches.  John in Tucson emailed him about SLS on which our guest also had much to say.  But as long as we are focused on tight budget issues, the program has been & will be disappointing. Again, you don’t want to miss all of his comments on this issue.  Military space was a discussion topic as was public opinion suggesting space is not that relevant any more. We talked about Inspiration Mars being able to inspire but we both doubted it would happen.  Tony called in to ask about reusability & why the space shuttle was compromised and reusability taken out. In the end, our guest suggested that reusability would be key to our space future.  Next, we talked about Schafer Corp and its activities.  We learned that they consult and work with several NewSpace companies and they are hiring but typically they go for experienced engineers, not fresh out college grads.  I asked Frank for his perspective on the recently announced Google purchase of Skybox Imaging for $500 million.  This too was a most interesting discussion you do not want to miss.  Other topics during our program included billionaire space investors, suborbital tourism, space settlement, and commercial space growth by sectors.  Here we talked markets, needed infrastructure and capital acquisition for lunar projects and the like.  Our guest talked about the need for government sponsored infrastructure in advance of lunar commercial projects and suggested only government was capable of footing the bill for the needed  infrastructure.  He said raising the actual capital was a challenge and that at this time, it would really be uphill for lunar ventures.  In his concluding remarks, he said he was bullish for commercial space and private space companies and that going commercial was a good thing as it has & will bring in fresh ideas & projects.  His final question was about 3D printing for space.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  You can reach our guest through the Schafer Corp website, http://www.schafercorp.com or me.

James Pura, Aaron Oesterle, Sunday, 6-1-14 June 2, 2014

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

James Pura, Aaron Oesterle, Sunday, 6-1-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2253-BWB-2014-06-01.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Can Help Support The Space Show/OGLF (www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you are listening to archives & rating programs on live365.com,  email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guests:  James Pura, Aaron Oesterle.  Topic:  The Space Frontier Foundation’s (SFF) Space Settlement Enabling Test (http://spacefrontier.org/settlement-enabling-test).  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 James Pura and Aaron Oesterle to the program to discuss The Space Frontier Foundation’s Space Settlement Enabling Test (see http://spacefrontier.org/settlement-enabling-test).  During the first segment of our 90 minute program, James and Arron went over the history of how the Space Settlement Enabling Test got its start within the SFF.  We also learned that it is in response to public space programs, not private programs though parts of the test would be applicable to private ventures but applying it that way is not a purpose of the Foundation.  The SFF Board votes on the projects being applied to the test with the results being published on the SFF website (http://spacefrontier.org).  We learned that the test consists of 21 questions in seven categories with each question having a voting range of 1-5.  There is a score for the project being subjected to the test but there is no pass or fail.  For example, the Foundation applied the test to the now defunct Constellation program and its score was 36.5%.  Our guests explained in detail how the test worked and during this segment and part of the second segment, they went through the questions in each of the seven categories.  Listeners had many questions for them including how they planned on measuring the effectiveness of the test and the outcome.  Our guests talked about both the inside and outside means of using the test and getting the results out to the market, policy makers, etc.  One listener asked James & Aaron if the test was jumping the gun since space settlement is far off into the future.  Don’t miss the reply to this question offered by both our guests.  Doug called to talk about applying his Cis Lunar 1 project to the Space Settlement Enabling Test.  Prior to the end of the segment, our guests talked about the importance of insuring sustainability for space settlement and how that was reflected in the test.

In the second segment, we finished going through the balance of the test and then we opened up the discussion for questions.  In discussing the final categories, our guests brought up the issue and importance of space property rights, competition, and the need for a tax payer ROI on public space ventures.  We talked about what may contribute to a public sector ROI.  In the question segment, nuclear propulsion was brought up, our guests were asked if they had applied SLS to the test.  Each of our guests offer us important closing comments and take aways from our discussion.

Post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  You can reach our guests through the SFF website or me.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 71 other followers