jump to navigation

Dr. Jeff Foust, Monday, 8-5-13 August 6, 2013

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

Dr. Jeff Foust, Monday, 8-5-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2062-BWB-2013-08-05.mp3

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

Guest:  Dr. Jeff Foust.  Topics:  Space news, space policy, NewSpace, budgets, Mars, & you name it! It’s all here today.  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 www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.

We welcomed back Dr. Jeff Foust for this comprehensive space policy, news, and budget discussion.  During the first segment of this1 hour 49 minute show, Jeff brought us up to date with Armadillo Aerospace and the decision by John Carmack to put the company into “hibernation.”  Jeff’s report was comprehensive and we hope that John is able to raise additional capital to resume his work.  Our next topic focused on the partisan budget fight regarding the 2013 NASA Authorization.  Jeff reported on this in the current issue of The Space Review (see www.thespacereview.com/article/2342/1).  Again, this was a very comprehensive discussion on the NASA 2013 Authorization and Appropriation bills, and the partisanship in congress. Among listener questions were those wanting to know if NASA was being signaled out for special budgetary treatment or getting the same treatment as other parts/branches of the government.  You don’t want to miss this discussion.  Also discussed was the potential impact of NASA and civil space issues on commercial space and the NewSpace industry.  Jeff then received some questions about the NewSpace 2013 Conference which he attended.  Before going to break, I asked Jeff to go over the criteria for submitting an article to The Space Review.  He suggested contacting him with your idea at jeff@thespacereview.com, plus he went over the main article requirements.

In the second segment, Dr. Foust was asked about SLS, then we talked about crowd funding.  A listener asked him if there was any research showing how many crowd funding success stories actually used the money raised as intended in their offer.  Neither Jeff nor I had that information but we would welcome it if any of you know those stats. Ron emailed us about the potential economic boom from NewSpace & commercial space, a possible Netscape moment, and would such an economic boom be noticed & well received by congress.  Our guest had much to say about the Netscape Moment theory for NewSpace which led to a discussion on how government can both enable and hinder space development.  We then discussed Curiosity one year after landing on Mars (see his Space Review article on this at www.thespacereview.com/article/2344/1).  From here, we talked about HSF and Mars, specifically Mars One and Inspiration Mars.  Jeff told us about attending the recently held Mars One event at GWU last week, plus he had much to say about the proposed mission.  We talked about the idea of going to Mars rather than the first to the Moon, then to Mars.  As the program was ending, Jeff mentioned the upcoming DC-X 20th anniversary celebration in New Mexico (www.dc-xspacequest.org).

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can email Dr. Jeff Foust at the email address listed above for The Space Review.

Space Show 2000th Program & 12th Anniversary Tribute, Tuesday, 5-7-13 May 8, 2013

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

Space Show 2000th Program & 12th Anniversary Tribute, Tuesday, 5-7-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2004-BWB-2013-05-07.mp3

Guests:  Dr. John Jurist and Dr. Doug Plata served as co-hosts.  Topics: This program honored The Space Show for its more than 2,000 programs and its upcoming 12th anniversary.  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.

This Space Show program stands out among all Space Show programs as it honors The Space Show for having passed the 2,000 program mark plus the upcoming 12th anniversary of the program later this month.  Dr. Plata and Dr. John Jurist organized this program, much of which was a surprise to me.  Dr. Plata set up a special tribute email address, honordrspace@gmail.com and they both contacted guests and listeners for their comments on the program and what they believe The Space Show has meant to them, the space world, and to our space development efforts.  Our 1 hour 47 minute program was in two segments but this summary will not be divided by segment as topics overlapped one another. Dr. Jurist asked me lots of questions about how the program started, how it has changed over the years, how the audience has changed, and how I’ve changed.  After asking one or two questions and getting my long winded responses, Dr. Plata read some great emails sent in by guests and listeners.  This was the format for the entire program.  Honestly, I was really surprised by the comments, the statements of support and meaning for The Space Show and by those of you that took time from your busy schedules to say a few words about the program.  It was a very humbling experience for me and I am glad it was an audio only program rather a webinar as I was really moved by the outpouring of support for the program and me.  Doug did not have time to read all the emails that came in but we intend to post them to the blog and will continue posting them to the blog as they come in.  Please use the special email address above but for those of you that use the regular program address, I will copy and post them to the blog as well.  John asked lots of questions about the economic impact on space, both here and around the world, about private space, NASA, human spaceflight, and such.  I spoke about public/private partnerships, the need, in my opinion, for American leadership in science and space, and why.  We also took phone calls from listeners wanting to comment on this special Space Show program.  As our program was drawing to a close, John asked me about library quality archives for research with a truly searchable, interactive academic data base.  We talked about this, what it might take to do it given the number and average length of Space Show programs.  If any of you have actual library, research and multimedia academic catalog search experience, we would like to hear from you to find out about creating a truly researchable, academic Space Show catalog/library.  If you have that type of specialized experience, please contact me using drspace@thespaceshow.com.  Perhaps we will create a funding mechanism to create the library for our archived programs and new programs coming up.

We welcome your comments/questions and more so post them on The Space Show blog.  I look forward to many more years with The Space Show, to continuing to provide a civil and credible forum for the discussion of all perspectives and points of view, and to give a voice to many of you that have much to say but are without a microphone. This program was number 2,004 and as I said on the air, the program would not exist without you the listeners and with you the guests who so freely give of your time to help us all learn more about space, science, and all that we talk about and share on The Space Show.  Thank you very much and as I said on the show and as many of you said as well, the next 2,000 shows will be even more valuable to us all than the first 2,000!  The Space Show only exists because of you the listeners and you the guests.  I never lose sight of that.  I never will.

Tribute emails are posted here:  Space Show Tribute Emails

Dr. Armen Papazian, Friday, 12-21-12 December 22, 2012

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

Dr. Armen Papazian, Friday, 12-21-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1918-BWB-2012-12-21.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Armen Papazian.  Topics:  Creating money via wealth not debt to finance space development. 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. Armen Papazian to discuss his space financing theories based on creating money in our global economy through wealth rather than by debt and debt instruments.  I urge you to read his papers and see his presentations on this subject at www.isdhub.com. Definitely download and reach “Money Mechanics For Space” which you will find on the left side of the website under the Planetary Referendum box.  Also, do vote on the Planetary Referendum, an issue our guest brought to our attention several times during our discussion.  You will also find additional presentations and papers of interest to us and this subject on the isdhub.com website so do check them out.  While our program was in two segments, the overriding discussion focused on how we presently create money by debt, why this is a problem causing methodology, and why we need to move to alternative ways to create money, both in the U.S. and around the world.  Since we do focus on lots of economics, having his papers and presentations handy to supplement our discussion will prove useful.  Dr. Papazian explained how we create money today and the problems our current methodology causes as it is based on the concepts of scarcity, risk, and time.  We spent considerable time talking about scarcity and time in economics, in the practical administration of government policy, academia, and why we need to move away from these concepts. Our guest suggested an alternative scenario in which money is created through wealth with space as the leading wealth creating industry because space represents abundance, not scarcity. A wealth based money creating economy does away with scarcity as the underlying foundation, replacing it with abundance. In this discussion, he introduced us to Public Capitalization Notes (PCN), a very important tool & part of this alternative approach to creating non-debt money. We fielded listener emails and calls with many questions for our guest.  Listeners wanted to know if there was a cost for money and how would that be handled?  What about the time value of money, risk & inflation?  Armen made it clear that he was not suggesting a disruptive change in our economic systems, instead, he was advocating a parallel economic system and an evolutionary approach toward wealth and abundance based money creation using PCN tools.  Near the end of our discussion, we applied what our guest was saying to space investments such as recent projects discussed on The Space Show and their very significant infrastructure requirements.  From this discussion, we learned how space can be a game changer and rather than banks, governments, and individuals owning debt, these financing parties would own equity or assets in the space project.  In Armen’s closing comments, he urged us to vote in the Planetary Referendum for Cosmic Awareness and to be supportive of their crowd sourcing program.
     Please post comments/questions on The Space Show blog. If you want to email Dr. Papazian, you can do it through me or the Contact page on his website.

Jim Keravala, Shackleton Energy Co., Friday, 12-14-12 December 15, 2012

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

Jim Keravala, Shackleton Energy Co., Friday, 12-14-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1914-BWB-2012-12-14.mp3

Guest:  Jim Keravala.  Topics:  Shackleton Energy’s cislunar economic development plans.  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 Keravala to the program to talk with us about the Cislunar development plans for Shackleton Energy.  To learn more, visit their website at www.shackletonenergy.com. Jim started our discussion with an overview of Shackleton Energy and their Cislunar development plan.  As you will hear throughout our discussion, the plan involves the propellant depots near the ISS and in other locations, water ice development at the lunar north and south pole, the use of insitu resources and eventually Shackleton industrial astronauts.  Our guest spent most of the first segment describing the plan, the various stages of development, the use of robotic technology leading up to human spaceflight and benefit sharing ideas.  He talked about being able to solve or at least significantly contribute to solutions to our global energy usage problems which he said would be around 30 terawatt hours(TWh).  He talked about the viability of SSP at that point based on the cislunar Shackleton Energy development program. Jim also mentioned the risk of reaching the Kessler limits regarding space debris.  Ben sent in an email asking Jim for his thoughts on benefit sharing, a subject put forth on The Space Show by recent guest Dr. Edythe Weeks.  Jim was supportive of benefit sharing through technology exchanges and transfers as well as in helping under developed nations build an industry to allow them to compete and have a presence in the expanding space industry.  He cited his work with Surrey Satellite Company and their African space development program as an example, plus he talked about sharing to make sure everyone benefitted from space development which could significantly improve life in these countries.  We talked about government corruption problems and ITAR as issues that might get in the way of benefit sharing, but Jim was steadfast in the need to reach out to third world countries to engage them in space development for the commercial and industrial benefits.
     In our second segment, Doug called to ask about transitioning from telerobotic missions to human missions.  Here, Jim did a comprehensive explanation of the different phases of their development plan leading up to industrial astronauts in cislunar space. He talked about trades with humans based at EML1 as compared to the lunar surface regarding repair and maintenance missions of lunar surface hardware.  Charles wanted to know about their choice of launch vehicles.  Jim also got questions about their timeline and capital acquisition plans.  Randy wanted to know if they would be able to meet the 2020 timeline referenced in their website video.  Near the end, Jim got questions about the requirements for becoming an industrial astronaut.  In summary, Jim talked about their ambitious project, TRLs, and the importance of the project from many different perspectives.
      Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. If you want to email Jim Keravala, you can do so through me.

Brent Sherwood, Tuesday, 7-24-12 July 25, 2012

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

Brent Sherwood, Tuesday, 7-24-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1821-BWB-2012-07-24.mp3

Guest:  Brent Sherwood.  Topics: Human spaceflight to Mars: Is it on the path or a distraction?  You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Transcripts of Space Show programs are not permitted without prior written consent from The Space Show (even if for personal use) & are a violation of the Space Show copyright.  We welcomed Brent Sherwood back to the show to discuss his GLEX paper and ideas regarding human spaceflight (HSF), Mars, and alternative NASA goals/missions regarding HSF.  His GLEX paper, “Mars-On the Path or in the Way” is posted on The Space Show blog following this program summary.  Please read & review his paper as it contains far more detail regarding his proposal, analysis and his conclusion than what we were able to discuss during our program.  In our first segment, Mr. Sherwood provided us with the background and context for his having written this paper and for his conclusion that HSF to Mars is not the right path. He then outlined alternative paths for HSF missions that he believes can better “regain the cultural centrality of human space flight and grow by attracting private capital.” Our guest talked about the value proposition of a HSF mission to Mars, plus the value proposition of the alternatives he describes in his paper & on this program.  The value proposition is understood to refer to the value received by sending humans to Mars (or the alternative HSF missions) as compared to the value of the mission costs, the opportunity costs, risks, etc.  Mr. Sherwood assesses the value proposition for all of his alternative HSF proposals which include the Explore Mars mission, lunar settlement, space passenger travel, and SSP.  For most of this initial segment, Brent outlined his ideas and explained why he has concluded that HSF to Mars does not measure up as a value promise & why SSP is his first choice.  We began taking listener email questions and phone calls after he summarized his position  & as you can imagine, most all the listener questions/comments were of the challenging nature to his conclusion that HSF to Mars was not in the best interest of our space program.  I urge you read his paper and to pay attention to the technical, cost, time line, and historical information shared with us by our guest.

In the second segment of this nearly two hour program, Brent took questions and expanded more as to why he supports other options than HSF to Mars.  He also explained why he is calling for a debate on this issue within the space community.  At the start of this segment, I asked him if he thought discovering life on Mars would change his opinion and the value proposition.  He said no but did say it would expedite the Martian sample return mission, but would not alter the variables & unknowns involved in the magnitude of technology challenges needing resolution before sending humans safely to and from Mars.  Toward the end of our discussion, I asked how he might move forward to implement the industry debate he has called for on this show & in his paper.  Suggestions on how to do this are wanted so if you have any, post them on the blog.

Brent would like your feedback so after listening to this program and reading his paper, please post comments/questions on the blog.  You can email Brent Sherwood by sending your note to me & I will forward it to him.

Brent Sherwood’s GLEX Paper:

Mars-On the Path or In the Way?

 

Wes Oleszewski, Sunday, 12-11-11 December 11, 2011

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

Wes Oleszewski, Sunday, 12-11-11

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1670-BWB-2011-12-11.mp3

Guest:  Wes Oleszewski.  Topics:  Commercial versus government launch vehicles, space policy, civility.  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.  The Space Show/OGLF is now engaged in its annual fundraising drive. Please see & act upon our appeal at http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/space-show-2011-fundraising-campaign. We welcomed back Wes Oleszewski to the show to discuss space policy, commercial as compared to government launch vehicles and much more.  Follow his space cartoon Klyde Morris at www.klydemorris.com.  You can also read the Aero-News article we discussed, “U.S. Spaceflight: Commercial Versus Federal at  www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=b3a012c0-812b-46d7-b58c-fb8959bd3509.  Our first segment was about 70 minutes out of this 2.5 hour show. We talked about the lack of civility in the space advocacy/enthusiast community as well as the Kool-Aid and lack of realism in some parts of the advocacy/enthusiast organizations.  This applied to space fans as well.  This discussion soon gave way to the SLS topic.  Our guest was supportive of it but got several listener questions stating why so many objected to it.  We talked about its lack of a mission but Wes did define its mission as a preliminary mission in that it was being built for beyond low Earth orbit (BLEO) with the rest to be decided later.  I asked our guests about the likelihood of it being built given the track record of NASA and Congress plus OMB in canceling these projects.  Wes then talked about the roles of Congress and OMB and our space budget. This brought us to our national spending and budget crisis and the space program in general  Other listeners phoned in and emailed us citing the NewSpace perspective on SLS. Don’t miss what Wes had to say about this.  Next, Space X came up as did the process of taking government money and how that might separate a new “commercial” company from other aerospace contractors.  Marshall called us about risk and demo flights, and then we got into a detailed discussion of thrust oscillation (TO) for the Ares 1.  We talked about some advocates making ATK into a villain and Space X and other new companies into saints.  I had much to say about ATK as being evil and Dr. Jurist called in to again tell what happened when he did real due diligence with ATK on the TO issue.  All three of us were very clear and definite in saying the attacks on ATK and other proven companies were unwarranted.  In our second long segment, Wes said we should not have retired the shuttle.  We talked about Mars missions and the origins of the MRI medical device.  Atlanta John called in to be supportive of SLS and its mission.  Jim sent in an email explaining why many are supportive of heavy lift but not supportive of SLS.  We talked about the lack of public awareness regarding space matters.  I then got off on one of my rants about the value of space which took us to STEM education.  We again returned to his theme that we in the advocacy/enthusiast community should be far more united.  When asked about individual organization goals such as the Moon, Mars, the frontier, etc, Wes clearly recommended we subordinate these interests to the overall good of speaking with a untied voice.  For his concluding Pearls of Wisdom, he cautioned us against being space groupies so to speak or running with the cyber pack.  We should avoid group think.  He said space was a team effort requiring all of us to be involved in supporting the team.  If you have questions/comments for Wes, please post them on the blog URL above.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68 other followers