Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: " SpaceX, Blue Origin, China, Cislunar space, Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act 2004, Europe, FAA, Falcon 9. , Falcon Heavy, Flexible Path, fuel depots, Google Lunar XPrize, India, international partnerships, ISS, Jim Muncy, learning period, lunar lander, Mars, Merlin engine, NASA HSF requirements, orbital spaceflight, political candidates and space, public private partnerships, RD180 engine replacement, regulation, sequestration, SLS, suborbital spaceflight, U.S. congress, ULA, USAF Assured Access To Space, Virgin Galactic, XCOR
Jim Muncy, Monday, 7-6-15
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
Guest: Jim Muncy: Topics: Space Policy, budget issues, company overviews, 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 Jim Muncy back to the program to discuss current space policy and budget issues before the U.S. Congress, company updates, and much more. During the first segment of our 1 hour 50 minute discussion, Jim provided us with the groundwork for most of our discussion by going back to the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, then the update to it known as the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004. He talked about both the House and Senate versions of the NASA and space budget bills and some of the differences between the two bills. One difference which he explained in detail early in the second segment had to do with the learning period which is important for the developing industry. Another difference between the two revolved around extending the ISS commitment to 2024 plus issues relating to BLEO space. When asked if he thought the final bill would be signed or vetoed by the president, he said it was nonpartisan and he did not see problems getting it signed into law. Listeners asked about funding SLS. Much was said about SLS in both segments but one listener asked Jim why so many supported SLS given its shortcomings. Jim explained the mindset of many SLS supporters in congress. As you will hear, SLS is hardly a black or white issue. This discussion led to a related discussion on developing a new rocket engine, the issues involved, the competitors, methane versus other fuel, and more. In particular, he used Alabama Congressman Mike Rogers as an example supporting is analysis of the situation. Jim was asked about the impact of the Falcon 9 failure which led him to address the need for multiple launchers and competition. Later, Alex asked him about his areas of concern regarding the pending budget legislation. He talked about sequestration, spending caps, delays, and the problem with operating on a CR which is likely. This is a lengthy but important discussion so don’t miss it. Before the segment ended, Jim was asked about the lunar lander. Jim then talked about the Flexible Path, Google Lunar XPrize, cislunar space development and Mars. Jim advocated the need for public private partnerships, then he was asked about international partnerships.
In the second segment, we started with an email question from Doug inquiring about the Augustine Commission presenting an option for returning to the Moon with landers developed in a public-private program context. After Jim’s response, I asked him to refer back to a comment he made in the first segment and to explain what was meant by the learning period. This was an important discussion so don’t miss it. As part of his response, he also provided a short overview of the suborbital industry and participants plus the orbital industry. A good portion of this segment focused on the importance of the learning period. Our last question of the evening was from Helen. She asked Jim if it would be beneficial to ask political candidates in the 2016 races space related questions assuming they know nothing about space. Jim supported the idea but he told us all to make the question broader than just what interests us in the space industry. He gave several examples of this. What he said made sense to me so I urge all of you who get a chance to question a 2016 candidate, ask your space question the way Jim suggested.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show Blog above.
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: antipode, BLEO, boiloff, capture, commercial space, cryogenic fuel transfer, Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, EML1, EML2, Falcon Heavy, Flexible Path, flight trajectory analysis, HALO orbit, heavy lift, human spaceflight, INSITU Resource Utilization, Lagrange points, Lunar farside, lunar flyby, lunar space elevator., lunar water, Mars, Moon, Neo, orbital planning and analysis., Orion, payloads to LEO, Propellant Depots, SLS, Stepping Stones, Trans-lunar insertion
Space Show Webinar with Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, Sunday, 11-25-12
Audio only: http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1900-BWB-2012-11-25.mp3
Video Stream: http://vimeo.com/channels/thespaceshow
Guests: Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist. Topics: Trajectory analysis to EML2, Mars, 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. You can view our webinar on our Vimeo Space Show channel, http://vimeo.com/channels/thespaceshow
. To follow along with Dan’s pdf, use
. We welcomed Dan Adamo back to the program and Dr. John Jurist as co-host for this special webinar addressing trajectory analysis for an EML2 mission and more. On The Space Show blog, you will find Dan’s PDF document used during the webinar, a link to the movie he played in the second half of the webinar, and his Phobos-Grunt analysis paper we discussed near the end of the webinar. During the first hour of the webinar, Dan took us through the trajectory analysis to Earth-Moon L2 per his PDF document. We talked about why EML2, libration points in general, and how such missions are planned. If the resolution on the webinar video for the charts and tables used during this segment are difficult to read on your computer, please bring the document up on the PDF on The Space Show blog and follow along that way. Dan took us through Table 1, HALO orbits, and the HOI as well as the Trans-Lunar Insertion points. We talked about orbital characteristics, delta V, rocket size, and more We also talked about the position of the Earth, launch windows, the Moon, & other factors influencing the planning of the mission. While at times the discussion may seem a bit technical or overwhelming for those of us having never done mission planning at this level before, all of us will certainly have a better understanding of the factors considered and influencing both robotic as well as human spaceflight missions. Near the end of the segment, we talked about the SLS and heavy lift & how payload capacity interacts with mission & trajectory analysis.
In the second hour of our webinar, Dan took us through his HD movie of the orbital trajectory talked about during the first segment, stopping it at intervals for specific explanations and questions. The movie is in the QuickTime format but you can see it both on the webinar or by using the URL provided on the blog. We took several listener calls & questions. One asked Dan about the differences in planning for the robotic vs. the HSF mission using MSL & Curiosity as an example. Dan pointed us to a YouTube video he made a few years ago with Dr. Logan using these tools for a Deimos mission (www.youtube.com/watch?v=X10GAqA4Ky4
). Another listener called wanting to know the likelihood of an EML2 mission actually happening. Dan explained why he believed this mission to be the next stepping stone in HSF. More was discussed about SLS with Dan raising some concerns about its real capabilities & wondering if Congress is being sold unrealistic expectations. We talked about heavy lift in general & with the support of properly placed depots. SLS and the difference with a Falcon Heavy were also discussed in terms of what the differences would mean in payload, number of launches, costs, risks, etc.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. You can contact either guest through me.
In addition, to watch Dan’s QuickTime movie which he will be using during the webinar, please click on this URL and then select the file format .mov:
Note that you must have the QuickTime player to play this movie if you intend to download it. You can watch it from the above URL without the QT player.
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: Aries V, Augustine, Columbia accident, Commercial Crew, congressional funding, Constellation, Cots, crew stress cardiac factors, deep space missions, developing space technology, Falcon 9 Heavy, Flexible Path, future space transportation, heat shields, HSF to Mars, HSF to NEO, human factors, ISS, James Schier, lunar development, lunar ice, lunar water, Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MCPV), NASA, NASA Commercial Space Team, NASA Human Spaceflight Architecture Team (HAT), new space hardware tests, nuclear space propulsion, Orion, Private Sector Space, Return to the Moon, space communications, Space Index Association, Space Launch System (SLS)., space medical challenges, standardized docking., U.S. space policy
James Schier, Sunday, 8-5-12
Guest: James Schier. Topics: U.S. space policy, NASA and human spaceflight goals, hardware, programs, and upcoming test flights, commercial space development. You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, https://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 NASA’s James Schier to the program to discuss the future of human spaceflight. As the NASA Chief Architect and Planning Systems Manager plus a team member of the NASA Commercial Space Team, Mr. Schier spent two hours with us discussing our human spaceflight programs & future in detail. In our first segment, we started back at the Columbia accident when a year later, it was announced that we needed a “bold new approach” to our HSF program. Constellation was being developed, we changed administrations and then the Augustine Commission concluded that either NASA needed more funding to accomplish the program in place or it had to be stretched out if the budget remained the same or shrunk. A flexible path was adopted and funding was left as is. Our guest said there were three goals of the program including private sector development & participation in our HSF program, operating a fully developed & functioning ISS to 2020 and possibly beyond, & implementing a crew flyby of a NEO around 2025 with a humans to Mars mission around 2030. This was the flexible path with a multi-program approach. Our guest talked about the ISS becoming fully operational as an exciting national lab and he received several listener questions asking him why so many have said or written that our space program is at best in a state of confusion & at worst in a state of deterioration as we were not hearing anything like that with our guest. Don’t miss this important discussion. When Jim talked with us about SLS, he got similar listener questions that differed from what we were hearing about the program, the commitment to it, and its progress. Again, don’t miss what our guest had to say about the SLS program, its mission, capabilities, & the ongoing planning with the project.
In our second hour, we took a call from John about SLS as well as the program being more a congressional program rather than the President’s program. SLS was compared to the cancelled Aries V, then we talked about the biggest risk to the program, ongoing congressional support & funding. Jim talked some more about Orion heat shield testing and reentry speeds, plus the upcoming heat shield test flight. Other Orion & SLS test flight programs were reviewed in this segment. Listener Terry wanted to know if Orion could be flown on the Falcon 9 Heavy if SLS got cancelled. Dr. Rowe called in to talk about specific cardiac stress issues for the returning astronauts. Mr. Schier then summarized many of the human spaceflight medical challenges facing us as we move out toward a lunar base, NEOs, and Mars. In this discussion, our guest did say that so far they were not seeing any show stoppers for extended long duration human spaceflight. Near the end of our discussion, we talked about future missions under study, deep space habitat elements & large in-space transportation systems plus faster space travel with nuclear & possibly solar propulsion. Standardized docking issues were mentioned along with international cooperation, citing the importance of the Russian support after the Columbia accident, highlighting the need for diverse crew space transportation.
Please post your comments/questions on the blog. You can email Mr. Schier through me & I will forward your note to him.