jump to navigation

Jay Wittner, Ron Jones, Sunday, 10-18-15 October 19, 2015

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

Jay Wittner, Ron Jones, Sunday, 10-18-15


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: Jay Wittner, Ron Jones. Topics: The Integrated Space Plan which is a real and detailed timeline of our future in space for the next 100 years. Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://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. 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 both Jay Wittner and Ron Jones to the program to discuss the Integrated Space Plan (ISP), “a real and detailed timeline of our future in space for the next 100 years. Vehicles, Stations, Settlements, Moon, Mars, Asteroids.” You can see the ISP at https://integratedspaceanalytics.com/cms/plan and also their previously successful Kickstarter site, www.kickstarter.com/projects/486671231/integrated-space-plan-envisioning-humanitys-future. Wired Magazine did an excellent article on the plan which you can download and read at www.wired.com/2015/08/wildly-detailed-100-year-plan-getting-humans-mars.. Discovery also did a nice article on the ISP dated Oct. 16, 2015 which you can read and download @ http://news.discovery.com/space/private-spaceflight/isp-the-ultimate-plan-to-launch-humanity-to-the-stars-151016.htm. During the first segment, Ron provided us with the history of the ISP which goes back several decades. He explained its purpose and how it has changed and evolved over time. In fact, later in the show I asked our guests if the time had finally come for the ISP to come into its own given the developments and progress in space development. You will certainly want to hear this discussion which comes much later in the show. The first segment is mostly devoted to describing the ISP and responding to basic listener questions about it as it was new to most listeners. I also urge you to look at it on the web using the above links so you can be come familiar with the plan and its blocks. Remember, it is a broad enabling approach that includes many different paths to accomplish space development, exploration and a spacefaring economy/society. It is not about a specific program or project as we are used to discussing on The Space Show. Specific plans and projects can nicely fit in the appropriate blocks on the ISP as the ISP is a collection of logical and plausible multiple paths to space development without saying this or that specific plan is THE plan we must follow. Toward the end of the first segment, John in Freemont, CA asked about the Shackleton Energy plan as was recently discussed on The Space Show. This was a good example for our guests to show how the ISP could nicely accommodate the Shackleton plan but that the ISP was actually much broader and more inclusive than just the three part Shackleton plan discussed on The Space Show. As you will hear, there is no conflict between the two.

In the second segment, Jay was asked how people could get a poster copy of the ISP. Jay and Ron told listeners how to order a poster copy (the rolled version in a tube is the best way to get it). We also talked about support for the ISP by many from within all segments of the space industry. Later, much was said about outreach for the private sector and also the student population, especially through SEDS. Jay and Ron invited listener participation and feedback and they gave out their respective email addresses or told listeners how to find their addresses on their website, www.thespaceplan.com.   We talked about disruptive technologies and how they were represented on the ISP. GPS was used as an example since I referenced Uber from our Friday Space Show program. As part of our disruptive discussion, our guests talked about SpaceX, the Falcon Heavy, reusability, and more. A listener asked about cislunar development and how that was represented on the ISP. Frequent Space Show guest Gerald Driggers called in with many interesting comments so make sure you listen to his discussion. His call was followed by John from Ft. Worth asking about actual markets & customers for the businesses.  Our guests talked about the key to customers would be lowering the cost to orbit, then they mentioned space tourism and specific payloads. As our program was ending, both guests offered closing comments and take away statements.   Both made a final appeal for listener participation and feedback as the ISP is a continuingly evolving plan.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.



1. Matthias Hutter - October 20, 2015

In my opinion, the space plan shows what we could do, but not we can do or even we should.

The opinion of the presenters that most of the blocks will be self-sustainable through private funding seems wildly over-optimistic too me, as John Fort Worth already mentioned. Space advocates claimed the same about the ISS before it was launched, and it is as wrong then as it is now. Private investments and revenues in space have remained almost stationary the past years. I highly doubt that the business case of a lunar base.

In the same sense government I don’t see government budgets increasing to levels necessary for this space plan either, include possible cost reduction from reusable boosters or space tourism.

I don’t think we should aim to achieve all these blocks either. For example, space based solar doesn’t make economic sense as long as we aren’t space constrained on planet earth. And VASIMR isn’t competitive anymore. It’s thrust to weight density (α) is too poor, efficiency too low (η) and it’s exhaust velocity (V) too high for a moon or mars mission. It has been surpassed by hall thrusters like the X3 100-KW nested-channel hall thruster. the ideal exhaust velocity scales roughly with V = √( 2ηt/α)


So I’d rather we focus on a minimal architecture with a specific goal in mind (e.g. mission to moon/mars), like a hybrid chemical and solar electric propulsion architecture for mars (replacing SLS with commercial units where available)

[audio src="http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Oleson_3-6-13/Oleson.mp3" /]

Matthias Hutter - October 20, 2015

Correction “In my opinion, the space plan shows what we could do, but not we can afford or even we should.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: