jump to navigation

Brent Sherwood, Monday, 6-29-15 June 30, 2015

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

Brent Sherwood, Monday, 6-29-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2499-BWB-2015-06-29.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:  Brent Sherwood;  Topics:  NASA Discovery Missions, planetary exploration and more.  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 Brent Sherwood back to the show to discuss NASA planetary science missions and in particular the Discovery class missions.  During our nearly two hour discussion without a break, Brent started out by telling us how NASA selects Discovery class missions.  He talked about the two kinds of science but focused on the Discovery missions which have a $500 million budget not including launch or operating costs.  He said it was open season on the solar system other than the sun or Earth as they were covered by other NASA programs.  In speaking about the history of Discovery missions, he named a few that we are all familiar with such as Kepler, Grail, Deep Impact, Stardust, the Phoenix Mission, Dawn and the upcoming Insight Mission to Mars.  Brent then explained the proposed missions under the auspices of his team.  These proposed missions include VERITAS, BASiX, CORE, Pandora, Proteus, Psyche, Kuiper, and ELF.  Brent explained each proposed mission to us, talked about the P.I. for each mission, and the science to be gained from the mission.  Listeners had many questions for him including how the principal investigator (PI) was selected.  Brent explained the process, where the PIs come from, how a mission is proposed, is it coming from a university or academic setting, has it been proposed before, or is it coming from JPL or another NASA center or the Applied Physics Lab (APL).  Brent was clear that Discovery missions, given their limited resources, were not about developing and proving out new technology so in answer to my question about the TRL of completing these missions, he said they were all coming in with very high TRLs though the missions sound very futuristic, even bordering on science fiction.  As for timelines, Discovery missions approved now would fly in 2021 so they have about a six year time frame to be developed and flown.  In response to questions, our guest addressed this six year time line in some detail.  All of these missions sounded very exciting but as Brent said, it is a very competitive process and only one or two if any of them may be selected as other teams are proposing their Discovery projects as well and they are equally exciting.  Later in the segment, Brent was asked about the choice of launch vehicle for each project.  This was a very interesting discussion, don’t miss it as our guest explained in detail the role of the PI regarding the launch vehicle and how NASA actually selects a rocket for the mission.  In response to BJohn’s question about launch costs, they certainly factor into the mission planning. Doug asked a question about the Photos-Deimos mission and if the mission could identify a favorable small crater which could later be the site for a covered habitat and if it could identify frozen volatiles in the polar craters of those moons if they exist.  Brent said it might have such capabilities but that these missions only do the work specific to their actual project.  He had more to say on this so don’t miss all his comments.  BJohn asked why not a Uranus mission.  Brent said Uranus was too far out and too costly for a Discovery class project.  Near the end of the segment, BJohn also asked about the importance of miniaturization now and for the future with NASA and these missions.  Brent said it was very important and then updated us on all the cubesat opportunities and uses being integrated into NASA missions.  He spoke about the significance of cubesats for several minutes so don’t miss what he had to say about them.  Doug asked a question about realizing economic value from these missions or at least what was the rationalization behind these purely science missions.  Brent provided an excellent answer to Doug’s questions so don’t miss it.  We ended the show after Brent’s response.  See what you think of it and post your comments on TSS blog.  Doug sent in a final note saying “I agree with his answer re: the value of science.  I believe that it is worth a certain amount of our money to increase our knowledge for its own value.”

 

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog above.  You can reach Brent Sherwood through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

 

 

Dan Adamo, Sunday, 6-7-15 June 6, 2015

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

Dan Adamo, Sunday, 6-7-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2488-BWB-2015-06-07.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:  Dan Adamo.  Topics: Mars human spaceflight, robotic exploration, space policy, heavy lift economics, and much more.  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 back Dan Adamo to the show for this 2 hour 36 minute comprehensive discussion regarding HSF to Mars, the Second Mars Affordability and Sustainability Workshop report and much more.  During the first segment of our program, Dan started out by telling us the process used to engage him reviewing said report and writing his critique of it which is on The Space Show blog (https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com). Topics discussed in this segment included the use of Low Latency Telepresence (LLT) as compared to High Latency Telepresence (HLT), the absence of human factors and aerospace medical personnel in attendance and said issues missing from the workshop report.  Dan said the key missing information included radiation as well as microgravity concerns.  Dan then questioned the existence of a compelling rational for humans going to Mars.  This became a recurring discussion topic throughout today’s program.  Space settlement came up & so did a possible space race with China.  The subject of a rescue mission came up but there was a detailed rescue mission discussion near the end of the program in the second segment.  Dan was asked about the minimum crew size to operate an LLT program from Deimos or in orbit around Mars.  Several emails were sent in including one by Dr. Jurist addressing high acceleration upon return from Mars.  Dan then suggested the stepping stone approach, starting with cis-lunar space.  Doug sent in questions about heavy lift versus using already large commercial rockets.  Dan and Doug discussed this, then later in the second segment, Doug asked more questions on this topic.  For now they talked about going to Deimos with a Falcon Heavy.  Dan pointed out the need for many more launches and rendezvous missions as compared to one or two SLS type rocket launch.  He questioned if we can’t afford SLS launches, how do we afford even more launches and rendezvous missions.  Marshal emailed us wanting to know about the possibility of lava tube plans .  BJohn asked this guest about a possible Mars cycler & then we moved to the second segment.

In the second segment, I asked Dan what he thought the impact on space policy might be vis a vis the workshop being discussed on this program.  Don’t miss his reply.  Doug asked a question inquiring if for the same cost it would take to send humans to either Deimos or to the Martian surface, one could send many high-latency rovers to multiple locations far from each other to give the rovers many chances to discover evidence for life in different types of places?  This brought us several exchanges comparing LLT with HLT, heavy lift versus smaller rockets and more.  Doug and Dan has several exchanges during this segment, especially when the topic of rescue missions came up.  Ted in Boston asked about the rational for going to Mars, referenced the recent program with Dr. Zubrin, and the payoff or benefits for a human Mars mission.  Dan had much to say about this so don’t miss it.  John from Ft. Worth called to say we were not yet technically ready for Mars and we should use the stepping stone method and focus in cis-lunar development and exploration.  As an example, Dan & John talked about the need to know the actual gravity RX for humans. Dan said we should have a short arm centrifuge on the ISS helping to figure this out but that there was no policy to do that.  We turned to the topic of rescue and I told listeners what I found out about who pays for rescues when I did some quick and dirty research on this a few weeks ago.  The issue of rescue and how it might happen on a Mars mission or even in cis-lunar space came up with many listener emails including several by Doug putting forth various rescue scenarios.  For the most part, since we have no launch on demand, no rockets, pads or hardware sitting around ready to be used at a moments notice and we have to contend with launch windows, it does not seem feasible that a Mars rescue mission could be implemented, possibly not even a lunar rescue mission.  Doug suggested a scenario where multiple ships left for Mars at the same time and then if one got in trouble, the others could rescue the problem ship.  Dan talked about the physics and mass of what would be needed to do that. You decide if it might be feasible for such a rescue scenario to be implemented. Let us know your thoughts on the blog.  If the rescue party is already on Mars, rescue will be unlikely given the state of the art today.  Michael Listner suggested the absence of a realistic rescue plan may hinder the issuing of a launch license.  In his closing comments, Dan focused on the workshop critique saying that the sponsors would have been better served if participation had been opened up and had including human factors and aerospace medicine professionals.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  You can reach Dan Adamo through me.

AffordingMarsIIcommentaryR1

Matthew (Matt) Wallace, Tuesday, 12-2-14 December 3, 2014

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

Matthew (Matt) Wallace, Tuesday, 12-2-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2367-BWB-2014-12-02.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

Guest:  Matthew (Matt) Wallace.  Topics:  Mars science missions, Mars 2020, searching for lie on Mars.  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 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 Matt Wallace from our Hotel Mars program to his first appearance on The Space Show.  During the first segment of our 90 minute program, Matt talked about his early mission assignments when he first came to JPL, then his shift to the Mars program.  We also talked about how the science missions and rovers are designed, managed, and eventually flown.  I asked our guest several questions about the science missions such as how a Deimos mission might differ from a mission to the surface of Mars.  Later, a listener asked our guest about a Europa mission and how that would differ. While there are clearly differences in the missions to different destinations, the trade process, planning, team organization and such all work pretty much the same.  We did spend some time talking about a Europa mission as that mission is a favorite for many of us, our guest included Most of the Europa mission discussion was in the second segment.  Matt talked about the new science instruments that will be on board Mars 2020, plus the extensive use of heritage hardware. He also said about 70% of the original MSL & Curiosity team would be working on Mars 2020, an important fact in managing the mission, costs and assuring mission success.  Matt was asked why it was so hard to confirm microbial life on Mars now or in the past & if there was one instrument that could do that.  This proved to be a fascinating and detailed discussion so don’t miss it.  Many listener emails addressed the rover control process.  There is no real time communication with the rover so Matt explained how they send commands to the rover, how the rover processes those commands and the safeguards built into it to protect the rover from accidents, etc.  He also talked about communication windows with Earth, when antennas are pointed toward Mars, and the busy DSN.  Listener Alex asked him about the book “The Martian” and wanted to know that were an astronaut stuck on Mars or needing some sort of emergency gear or something, could a defunct Mars rover be cannibalized for parts and made to work for the purpose needed by the person on Mars.  Matt’s answer might surprise you.  Several listeners wanted to know about a human Mars mission being more efficient for finding life signs than a rover.  Matt explained the trades involved. Doug emailed in a similar question during the second segment.  Matt said its not either or.  Instead, the rovers and a human mission are synergistic with one another.  As the segment ended, our guest was asked if NASA/JPL would consider partnering with a private human mission such as Mars One to use Mars One crew members for science missions.

In the second segment, we talked about other Mars rovers and mission including Maven and Insight.  Next, the question came in about Europa that was mentioned in the earlier segment.  Doug not only asked his robotic vs. human question but he sent in another question regarding the sample return mission and what methods might be used for collecting multiple samples.  He suggested a few different collection methods.  Matt said they discuss these types of options but in the end the trades opt for simpler missions for a variety of reasons.  See what you think of his answer & post your comment on the blog.  John, a high school student, sent in a note about colleges and the best path to be able to work in the space industry.  Barbara sent in a note asking if the EDL would be Seven Minutes of Terror Part 2 since they were using the same system as used for Curiosity or would it be less stressful.  Matt said they would still be nail biting all the way down.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach Matt Wallace through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

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, 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 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

Drs. Jim Logan and John Jurist, Sunday, 7-13-14 July 14, 2014

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

Drs. Jim Logan and John Jurist, Sunday, 7-13-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2278-BWB-2014-07-13.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

Guests:  Dr. John Jurist, Dr. Jim Logan.  Topics:  EVAs, spacesuits, Moon, Mars, radiation, Aquarius HSF launch vehicle Space Enterprise Institute.  Please direct all comments & questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments & 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 &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 Dr. John Jurist and Dr. Jim Logan back to the show to discuss spacewalks (EVAs), spacesuits, human missions to the Moon and Mars, to the Martian Moon Deimos, the newly created Space Enterprise Institute, & the new Aquarius Reusable Human Spaceflight water based launch vehicle.  During the first segment of our 2 hour 5 minute program, our guests started talking about EVAs.  Early in the discussion, Dr. Logan provided us with important & interesting statistics regarding EVAs, then we discussed the challenges with them and spacesuits.  We talked at length about the difference in EVAs and spacesuits for the Moon, LEO, asteroids, & Mars.  We also talked economics for spacesuits given the need for a specific spacesuit depending on the destination/mission.  We talked about new designs for one size fits all & for mitigating dust problems.  Jim talked about the medical complications regarding both lunar and Martian dust.  Our guests then suggested that EVAs will likely be phased out for robotic missions.  Doug asked several questions about this via email.  Also, Jim suggested that EVAs will evolve to the concept of Forward Deployed Humans in the Loop for Telerobotic Operations.  This concept was discussed several times throughout our program.

In our second segment, Jim started with an announcement about the Space Enterprise Institute (SEI).  When it goes live in the next week or so, I will announce it on the show so you can follow it  He explained SEI, its purpose & goals.  He then talked about the concept that both Jim and Dan Adamo have developed over the past few years, Aquarius which is a reusable water-based interplanetary HSF transport.  As soon as the SEI website is online, listeners will be able to download their peer reviewed paper for free.  During this segment, Jim talked about Aquarius, John added in some details, we talked about the need for nuclear electric propulsion and why, plus the role of water with this launcher.  Both our guests explained the advantages of Deimos for the early missions, plus the return shielding and reusability as the return goes to a lunar orbit using existing water.  Radiation shielding was talked about, including the needed water and needed Radiation Protection (RP) levels.  John pointed out one advantage of Aquarius was the use of an open loop life support system.  John in Ft. Worth called about the temperatures that Jim said were needed.  Jim explained the need for 3,000 degrees C.  Both guests offered closing comments about EVAs & the direction we might be heading toward the forward deployed humans concept.  Both guests said the telerobotic concepts discussed would reduce risks, timelines, & overall mission costs.

Post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  You can reach our two guests through me.

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, 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 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

 

Dan Freyer, Taber MacCallum, Wednesday, 3-25-14 March 26, 2014

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

Dan Freyer, Taber MacCallum, Wednesday, 3-25-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2215-BWB-2014-03-25.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 the reasons for your rating to help improve the show.

Guests:  Dan Freyer, Tabor MacCallum.  Topics:  Space Tech Expo, World View Enterprises, HSF to Mars & more.  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 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 both Dan Freyer and Tabor MacCallum to discuss the upcoming Space Tech Expo to be held in Long Beach, CA from April 1-3, plus Tabor told us about World View near space balloon rides and their work on HSF missions to Mars.  There was only one segment for this one hour program.  We started with Dan who gave us an overview of the Space Tech Expo (www.spacetechexpo.com).  He talked about the free program, the paid program, the exhibits, and the B2B focus of the conference.  We went through the paid Expo agenda which you can find at http://www.spacetechexpo.com/conference/conference-program-2014.  Dan stressed the business 2 business focus of the expo, talked about the mix of aerospace, defense, military, satellite, launch vehicle companies and executives that will be attending. We also talked about the exhibitors and their ability to tell attendees about their products and services.  Taber jumped in to talk about the World View near space balloon rides which they will be talking about at their booth #4042.  Dan also went over the conference logistics and fielded several questions asking about NewSpace representation at the expo, the possibility for students & interviews, networking opportunities, lunches with the paid program, plus more.  Later in the segment, Tabor received several email questions about his work on the life support systems for human spaceflight missions to Mars.  He talked about going to Mars, Inspiration Mars, Mars One and a stepping stone approach that might include going to an asteroid and the moons of Mars.  We discussed the possible need to first go to the Moon to learn how to go to Mars.  We talked about closed loop systems, radiation & microgravity issues, plus the complexity of landing large payloads on Mars. We concluded our hour discussion by reviewing the Expo logistics, registration on their website, and the strong business focus for this conference.

Please post comments/questions on TSS blog above.  Questions for our guests can go through me or if you have Expo questions, use the Expo website contact information.

Classroom with Drs. John Jurist & Jim Logan, Tuesday, 12-17-13 December 16, 2013

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

Classroom with Drs. John Jurist & Jim Logan, Tuesday, 12-17-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2145-BWB-2013-12-17.mp3

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

Guests:  Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics: This was a Classroom show on radiation issues for deep space travel, Mars and Moon settlements.  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.

We welcomed Dr. Jim Logan and Dr. John Jurist to this special 2.5 hour Space Show classroom in-depth discussion on space radiation. We focused our discussion on deep space, Mars, the Moon and BLEO missions. Note that on both The Space Show blog (see above) and The Space Show Classroom blog (http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com),  Dr. Jurist has a Power Point presentation on radiation.  During the program, our guests referred to specific slides that you will want to check out.  In our first segment, Dr. Logan started out by telling us about his interest in the subject, why he has been writing a paper on the subject for publication, and how this Classroom show came about.  He cited our short duration spaceflight experience, the Apollo missions, Space Shuttle flights, and then how things started to change when we had six month ISS visits.  Dr. Logan also made it clear that space was not a benign emptiness type of environment.  He said the reality was that interplanetary space was a sea of disruptive ionizing radiation wrecking havoc on biologic systems.  We moved forward in our discussion from that point.  We talked about the findings of the MSL RAD instrument regarding radiation on the way to Mars and on the surface of Mars.  Both John and Jim spent some time putting the RAD numbers through analysis to let us know what this means for human missions to Mars.  We talked shielding, possible materials, passive and active.  We talked extensively about water and the use of hydrogen as well for shielding.  Our guests addressed the two types of radiation, the GCR (galactic cosmic rays) and the CME/solar flare.  Here, John suggested listeners look at his slide 13 as we talked about protons and neutrons.  Jim said there was no magic bullet and talked about shielding effects of Earth’s atmosphere.  Pay attention here as Jim introduced us to the  RP scale.  For being on the surface, he said nothing less than RP100 would suffice.  For the vehicle, an RP5 was required.  John introduced us to career limits for radiation for men and women astronauts of different age but the career limits are for LEO and not BLEO.  BLEO limits are expected to be more restrictive when made public in April 2014.  Earth Mars transit times were discussed, especially in the context of Brian’s email that suggested a 180 day transit time.  Both our guests said that was unlikely with chemical propulsion and all of us again stressed the need for nuclear thermal propulsion.  Microgravity was talked about, especially in the context of side effects due to the radiation environment.  Jim then brought up the EVA subject and spacesuits.  Briefly, Jim said that quite possibly the ISS construction represented the zenith of EVAs which may become a thing of the past.  Don’t miss why he said this plus his description of serious spacesuit limitations.  We talked about life support to Mars and here Jim suggested we should use Open Loop! Again, listen to the rational behind this recommendation.  Don’t miss what our guests said about theories & movies making it sound easy to go to Mars and that the radiation would be nothing more than just a few more cigarette packs a year.  Our last topic addressed informed consent issues.

In the second segment, I asked our guests for a readiness timetable were there sufficient funding and technology advancements.  I also inquired if Russia, China, and others assessed the radiation risks in a similar way to the U.S.  We then talked about radiation and space pregnancy, fetus development, birth, and informed consent for the fetus, a baby, and a child under 18.  Ethical issues regarding child birth and space pregnancy were talked about as well.  Curt had sent in email questions which our guests answered, especially about drinking irradiated water and microgravity DNA damage & what this may mean for radiation effects.  Next, I asked Jim and John to tell us their 2-5 steps for the start of designing a Mars human mission.  Jim went first and listed Day 1 and Day 2 activities, John listed his top three priorities which were different than those suggested by Jim.  Don’t miss this discussion as its very instructive as to how to do or at least start mission planning for a human mission BLEO.  Roger sent in a question asking if the crew should be senior citizens since they have more resistance to radiation.  Don’t miss what our guests said about this idea.  It may surprise you.  Our next topic was would going to Deimos be easier.  Yes, it would but it would be a very different kind of human  mission.  Jim had some great comments about Mars gravity.  Briefly, he said it was the “best.” Later, when asked to compare the Moon and Mars, our guests said lunar radiation was worse than Mars.  Also, the Mars atmosphere does provide limited shielding while there is no such thing on the Moon.  Jim had earlier talked about a sphere being the perfect shape for an interplanetary spaceship.  Shelia emailed in wanting to know if heavy lift made a difference and if the sphere was so good, why were capsules being used? Don’t miss the response.  We then talked about the complexities of rendezvous and docking, especially in the context of fewer launches (heavy lift) as compared to many more launches (smaller rockets).  Near the end, I asked our guests if either thought our nation, the public, NASA, our leaders and politicians were sufficiently motivated to do a human Mars mission.  Jim did not think so and had much more to say in reply to this question.  John was more pessimistic.  Both thought it was more likely that the private sector would mount a human Mars mission rather than our seeing a government mission, but raising the needed capital might turn out to be a show stopper.  The three of us then talked about what it was like growing up in the 40’s, 50’s, and 60’s as compared to today.  John and I (John is a bit more than 2 years older than me) were probably more harsh than Jim in our assessment of today, but we all realize that the younger generations will be taking us to space, building the next smartphone and more. I talked about my visits to Google, Apple, SpaceX, etc. and the excitement in the air in belonging in their work forces which does not seem to exist with NASA. This opened the door for Jim to put it on the line about his NASA experiences and the potential opportunities providing NASA can somehow reorganize.  He did not think the type of reorganization he was talking about would happen.  Both our guests left us with excellent takeaway points and concluding pearls of wisdom.

Please post your comments/questions on the blogs. You can reach either of our guests through me.

                                                  Radiation Biophysics and Human Spaceflight

Dr. Bruce Cordell, Friday, 12-6-13 December 7, 2013

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

Dr. Bruce Cordell, Friday, 12-6-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2137-BWB-2013-12-06.mp3

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

We welcomed back Dr. Bruce Cordell for this 1 hour 38 minute discussion of Maslow Windows suggesting the strong possibility of a large & successful expansion of our space program by 2016, including a possible large space project on the order of Apollo or even the turn of the century Panama Canal.  To find out more about Maslow Windows, visit www.21stcenturywaves.com.

In preparation for this program, Dr. Cordell posted this on his site:  http://21stcenturywaves.com/2013/11/21/bruce-returns-to-the-space-show-on-december-6.  Make sure to click on the link for his article “10 Space Trends for 2013-Featuring the Approach of the New International Space Age.”  During our first segment, Dr. Cordell provided us with a brief introduction to Maslow Windows and the historical trends supporting this analysis.  He compared economic and financial times of past large government projects and expansions to our recent times and how we are now evolving towards a large expansion project as was the case many times over the past 200 years.  A key ingredient needed to bring about the changes Dr. Cordell spoke about is the emergency of economic growth and a national ebullient feeling, both of which are absent today.  He also said he was looking to the elections of 2014 and 2016 to produce substantial change, opening the door to the possibility pointed to by his Maslow Window analysis.  In response to one of my questions, Dr. Cordell was clear that change did not necessarily mean changing political parties.  Bruce received several questions from the NewSpace segment of the community, challenging the need for a large government space program and for SLS.  Bruce talked about this at length in both segments as listeners kept this as a front and center topic for the full program.  We also talked about the need for advances in technology to be ripe in order for the expanded space program to happen.  John from Ft. Worth called in with questions related to the Chinese program and Bruce connected dots in this conversation to his analysis.  Among the many things he said, it was clear the project being alluded to did not have to be American and could be Chinese. He also strongly advocated international participation.  We talked about Mars and going first to Phobos or Deimos, then he talked about the failed Phobos-Grunt mission.

We started the second segment with our guest pointing out similarities in JFK’s time to today, including Iran today and the Cuban Missile Crisis for JFK.  Bruce commented about huge changes going on around the world, including here in the U.S. with energy production.  Space education came up, there were lots of comments about our Congress, the administration and public disconnect over space.  This has to change for the Maslow Window to open up and produce the space expansion project.  He also talked about how we live in turbulent times and at least for now, the public and most in government do not have the stomach for the large Apollo like space project.  He said change would bring wealth creation, a better economy, and the people would soon be in a better position to want to do something like another Apollo.  Near the end, we talked about the ISS and its success.  In his concluding remarks, he pointed out that we live in scary times and that global changes were happening very fast.  This fast rate of change is a key predictors of the coming space boom.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog above.  You can email Dr. Cordell through his website.

Robert Walker, Friday, 10-4-13 October 4, 2013

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

Robert Walker, Friday, 10-4-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2099-BWB-2013-10-04.mp3

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

Guest:  Robert Walker.  Topics:  Humans to Mars and other destinations in the solar system.  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.

We welcomed Robert Walker to the program for a 1 hour 28 minute discussion about his analysis, conclusions, and thoughts regarding humans putting colonies on Mars and elsewhere in the solar system.  You can read his articles at www.science20.com/robertinventor.  Robert has a YouTube channel at www.youtube/marsandspace.  I urge listeners to read his articles as they are thought provoking.  Though you might not agree with his conclusions, keep an open mind, his articles are very informative and what he has to say should be part of our human spaceflight to Mars discussion.  In other words, don’t dismiss or blow off what Robert and others are saying about the issues he brought to our attention today.  We started the discussion with his August 14th op-ed, “Ten Reasons Not To Live On Mars – Great Place to Explore.”  Rather than going through each of the ten items, for purposes of this summary and our discussion, we will talk about planetary protection and making sure humans do not contaminate any part of Mars for scientific exploration.  Robert referenced the UN as well as NASA and other nation’s Planetary Protection Policy against human contamination on Mars and the provisions in the Outer Space Treaty that impose this obligation on all signing countries.  Planetary Protection has been discussed before on several Space Show programs but Robert talked about it in the context of why humans to Mars missions will not be allowed and should not be undertaken.  He is much more supportive of orbiting missions such as Inspiration Mars or even going to Phobos and Deimos.  Most of our first segment is about this subject.  We also talked about sample return missions using the ISS or the Moon, exoplanets, lunar settlement, asteroid resources, and space exploration in general.

In the second segment, I opened asking him about his short article on the true color of a specifically discovered exoplanet which was cobalt blue as a result of a continuous rain of liquid glass.  Robert got several listener emails about planetary protection, Elon Musk and his plans to settle Mars, ways to avoid contamination, and more.  He even got a question or two asking why in the literature ETs that have come to other in the stories (maybe), etc. don’t seem to have a regard for avoiding contaminating Earth.  This was a fun discussion. Another listener asked him a question about his musical and math background and using music to communicate with ET in sci fi movies, wondering if there was any science in fact to the idea of musical communication.  Another fun discussion.  Jody asked about going to a dry part of Mars with humans to avoid contamination.  Don’t miss Robert’s reply to this scenario.  Robert also spoke about teleportation, saying it was key to space exploration.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can email Robert Walker at support@robertinventor.com.  His website is www.robertinventor.com.