Dr. Ian Crawford, Friday, 5-29-15 May 30, 2015Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: "Lunar Resources: A Review, 3D Printing, asteroid resource usage., cis-lunar development, Dr. Haym Benaroya, Dr. Ian Crawford, HE3, inflatable structures, international space policy, legal framework for lunar operations, LRO, lunar commercial operations, lunar dust, lunar exploration, lunar habitat, lunar mining equipment, lunar nitrogen., lunar remote sensing, lunar scientific potential, lunar water ice, Mars, PGM, polar volatiles, robotics, solar wind, The Global Exploration Strategy, The International Space Exploration Coordination Group, U.S. space leadership
Dr. Ian Crawford, Friday, 5-29-15
Dr. Haym Benaroya, Co-host
Download his paper here: http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~ucfbiac/Lunar_resources_review_preprint_accepted_manuscript.pdf
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. Ian Crawford, Dr. Haym Benaroya. Topics: Lunar resource and policy. 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 Dr. Ian Crawford to the program to discuss his work and paper “Lunar Resources: A Review.” This paper can be found on The Space Show blog for this date and show, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. In addition, Dr. Haym Benaroya co-hosted the program with me. During the first segment of our 1 hour 20 minute discussion, Dr. Crawford explained the motivation behind his research plus I asked him about any surprises he came upon during his research. Two areas that surprised him included Platinum Group Metals (PGM) and helium three (HE3). He referred to HE3 several times but he discussed it in more detail in the second segment so I will defer until then. We talked at length as to why the Moon was of interest. He talked about the scientific value of the Moon as well as learning how to do things in space that we will need later on gong to Mars or other destinations. He said the Moon was resource rich but that we were only beginning to learn what we can do on the Moon and how to benefit from its resources. Both our guests were asked if we were nearing the maximum point of benefit for remote sensing lunar operations. The answer was yes but we were not there yet as more improvements in HD resolution and other areas are yet to be realized. That said, robotic lunar exploration is now available as is human exploration. Both Haym and Ian said the format for lunar exploration would likely need to be public private partnerships, even with international missions. They also said we need to start doing it now. Haym said it was a bootstrap type of process and Ian said it was a learn as you do process. On the job lunar training! Haym also mentioned that 3D printing and robotic systems would lead the way before humans. He also suggested they might evolve to the point that they can do construction so astronauts going to the Moon do not have to be “construction workers.” As the segment was ending, Ian was asked about the needed legal infrastructure to commercialize lunar resources. He had much to say about this before the segment ended. As the segment was ended, an 11th hour question was asked about making rocket fuel from water ice & could we do it today.
In the second segment, Doug from S. California called & wanted to know if there was any resource needed for settlement on the Moon that was completely lacking or unavailable on the Moon. Ian said it was a complicated answer given that a resource might be there but the needed energy to use it might make it impractical. He said for a long time to come we would be making things on Earth and importing Earth products to the Moon but as Haym said earlier, it would be a bootstrapping and learn as you go and do process. Ian then talked about the solar wind and its deposits of material in the lunar soil such as nitrogen, HE3 and more. He talked some about polar ice, then told us why he did not think there was an economic case for HE3 and that its claims were vastly overstated. Doug got in a question about inflatable lunar structures and Haym said they would need to be made rigid but otherwise a good way to start. Doug did not like the Caterpillar analogy for lunar mining equipment given such equipment would not look like Earth equipment, especially since here on Earth equipment works in 1G. We talked about the likelihood that companies like Caterpillar would still have their orange paint and logo on the Moon because if there was an equipment business case to be made, existing companies would likely want to compete in that market & Caterpillar is an industry leader. Near the end of the discussion, Frank sent in a question asking him about his comments in his paper about cis-lunar being the first market available for exploitation. Ian responded to Frank’s question so don’t miss the answer. Jane emailed in asking if there was a resource case to be made for HSF to Mars. Another Frank emailed in from Dallas asking about U.S. space leadership and could the international community carry on a robust lunar development program with the U.S. sitting on the sidelines. Dr. Crawford talked for some time addressing this issue. He also pointed to additional resources by checking out the Global Exploration Strategy and The International Space Exploration Coordination Group. The latter has a document on its website outlining the major benefits of space exploration, www.globalspaceexploration.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Benefits-Stemming-from-Space-Exploration-2013.pdf. Before the program ended, he was asked about using asteroid resources so don’t miss his response on this timely topic. In closing comments, Haym made the case for the Moon being the logical next step on our space development timeline. Ian supported those comments adding even more rational to what Dr. Benaroya said.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog above. You can reach Dr. Crawford or Dr. Benaroya through their university websites or me.
Michael Laine, Monday, 2-4-13 February 5, 2013Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: CCP Games, climber contests, crowd source funding., Earth space elevator, EML1, Falcon Heavy, HE3, Kickstarter., LiftPort Group, lunar markets, lunar space elevator., Mars Space Elevator, Michael Laine, NASA, SLS, tethers
Michael Laine, Monday, 2-4-13
Guest: Michael Laine. Topics: Lunar space elevator updates. 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.
We welcomed back Michael Laine for LiftPort Group updates regarding the lunar space elevator. For more information, visit www.liftport.com. Michael started our two hour discussion talking about his very successful Kickstarter campaign last year. LiftPort started the campaign asking for $8,000 but raised $110,000! During this first segment, Michael talked about the plans to use the $110K, the experiments LiftPort would do and why additional funding was needed to advance the lunar space elevator project. I asked Michael lots of questions about the lunar space elevator market, his time table for transitioning away from being a Power Point project, & the LiftPort labor force. LiftPort is mostly volunteer labor. For now it is working on tether and balloon experiments. We talked extensively about using Kickstarter and even talked about the tax consequences for Kickstarter revenue. Michael did say that he thought the project would be a private project in that government would not be a major supporter, if at all. Michael then talked about his fact finding global missing seeking new financing and partners after the Kickstarter campaign. He had much to say about his visit to Iceland and the company CCI Games. When pressed, Michael suggested 8 years from last August to completion. Listen to the details supporting this timeline. Michael also outlined four areas needing resolve to move the lunar elevator project forward.
In our second segment, Michael described more of the elevator project, including the use of EML1 and why & how the elevator ribbon would work, including its logistics from EML1 to the lunar surface and EML1 back toward Earth. He also talked about their lunar surface elevator contact point on Sinus Medii. A listener asked him about the Google Lunar XPrize & Michael told us how a GLXP mission could benefit the LiftPort project. Also in this segment, we talked about costs. Michael estimated about $800 million for a robotic mission and maybe up to $1.2 billion for three astronauts roughly every three weeks. He compared these costs to the cost of shuttle launches and flights to the ISS. When asked about lunar markets that might economically justify the lunar elevator, he talked about the potential of HE3 mining and new uses for the material here on Earth, plus lunar SSP and solar panel manufacturing. Alex asked Michael to be specific about the transitional steps from Power Point to the beginning of a systems engineering project to develop the elevator. Emory emailed in more questions about tether use, Tim called (sorry for phone line issues on Tim’s call) regarding tethers and more. David Ben wanted to know about the Falcon Heavy and I expanded that to include SLS. A question came up about LiftPort’s interest in a Mars space elevator. Our discussion concluded with Michael suggesting that Kickstarter & similar crowd source funding organizations will play a bigger & more important role in funding space ventures in the future.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. Michael can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org. You can also subscribe to the LiftPort free newsletter from their website.
Dr. Jason Cassibry, Tuesday, 10-9-12 October 10, 2012Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: aerospace engineering, Alpha Centauri, boron, Cassini, Dr. Jason Cassibry, fusion energy, fusion propulsion, HE3, INSITU Resource Utilization, interstellar space flight, ISP, ITER, LEO, lithium deuteride fusion fuel, magnetic nozzle, Mars Missions, nuclear fear, nuclear propulsion, public policy, public science funding., thrust, Vasimr, Voyager mission, Z-Pinch
add a comment
Dr. Jason Cassibry, Tuesday, 10-9-12
Guest: Dr. Jason Cassibry. Topics: A technical description and the potential of fusion propulsion. 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 Dr. Jason Cassibry to the program to guide us in our discussion of the potential for fusion propulsion. At times, this was a very technical discussion. To assist in following it, I have uploaded to the blog his published paper delivered at the AIAA Joint Propulsion Conference, “The Case and Development Path for Fusion Propulsion.” In addition, below are the URLs for several articles on fusion propulsion that Dr. Cassibry shared with us: www.uah.edu/news/items/10-research/2501-slapshot-to-deep-space#.UDrKn-iPVuY;
www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/rockets/the-big-machine-that-could-lead-to-fusion-powered-spaceships-9450996; http://io9.com/5921673/nuclear-slapshots-could-propel-a-spacecraft-to-mars-in-just-weeks; www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=23442 and http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/10/zpinch-nuclear-fusion-pulse-space.html. Dr. Cassibry started out by providing us with a working definition of fusion propulsion. We talked about nuclear propulsion as well and the overall state of development for fusion energy. I asked Dr. Cassibry if in their economic projections for fusion propulsion, they considered the political and policy impact on fossil fuel pricing and supply availability. As you will hear, generally such factors are not included in their studies though he concurred with me that such policies can strongly skew the economics one way or the other. Several calls came in on a wide ranging group of associated topics. We talked about the main fusion fuel, lithium deuteride, magnetic nozzles, and the use of a nuclear fission reactor to start the fusion propulsion unit. Z-Pinch technologies were defined and discussed. As the segment drew to a close, I asked about funding sources for this research and we learned that most all of the funding is from public sources.
In our second segment, more listeners called in regarding insitu resource usage, nuclear propulsion to start the fusion unit, and the power consumed for all of this. We talked about using fusion propulsion for a Mars mission and what it did for travel times. Jason also put forth a suggested time line and path to follow to operation in perhaps 25 years, depending on funding. More calls came in with fuel questions, vibration impact, G force acceleration, thrust, and more. Another topic discussed was fusion propulsion for the launch vehicle. We then compared some real mission travel times such as Cassini, Voyager, and New Horizons, asking what the transit times would have been like using fusion propulsion. As we were ending the program, I asked about the students entering aerospace engineering at UAH, both the undergrad and graduate level, plus the gender mix of the students. There appears to be strong demand by the students to study these fields at all levels. In conclusion, Jason suggested that we could look for breakeven with fusion in about ten years, maybe less.
If you have comments/questions, please post them on The Space Show blog. Dr. Cassibry’s faculty page at UAH is www.mae.uah.edu/faculty/cassibry.shtml.
Walter Cunningham, Tuesday, 6-19-12 June 20, 2012Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: " Apollo 7, " SpaceX, "The All-American Boys: An Insider's Look At The U.S. Space Program, Apollo 7 mutiny, Apollo mission sounds, Ares 1, artificial gravity, asteroid mining, climate change, CO2, Columbia accident, commercial space, competition in space, economics, flight surgeons, fusion, global warming, HE3, international cooperation in space, liquid rocket motors, Mars Missions, NASA, NASA culture, physics, reckless behavior in space, return on investment, risk, risk averseness., rocket vibrations, safety, Saturn 1B, SLS, solid rocket motors, space medicine, Space Shuttle, space shuttle retirement, Wally Schirra, Walter (Walt) Cunningham
add a comment
Walter Cunningham, Tuesday, 6-19-12
Guest: Walter Cunningham. Topics: An inside view of the American space program from Apollo to today. You are invited to comment, ask questions, & discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, & any discussion must be relevant & 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 Walt Cunningham to discuss our space program from Apollo through today’s developing commercial space industry. For more information, visit his website, www.waltercuningham.com. You can buy “The All-American Boys: An Insider’s Look At The U.S. Space Program” from Amazon & they will make a contribution to The Space Show/OGLF if you use this URL: www.amazon.com/All-American-Boys-Walter-Cunningham/dp/1876963247/ref=onegiantlea20. I started the discussion by asking Walt about his perspective on Apollo 7 today, 44 years later. Walt had some interesting things to say about perspective, especially over the past 10-20 years as compared to when he actually carried out the mission. A few times during our discussion, questions came up about the so called “mutiny” with the crew & NASA ground control so listen to how Walt described what was mostly a non-event despite media & blog reports to the contrary. He did talk about Wally Schirra, his head cold & the Actifed commercials, but there was far more to the mission & to the significance of Apollo 7. Dr. Jurist asked about the ride on a Saturn 1B, professors & experiences while both were at UCLA. We discussed risk regarding his ride on the Saturn 1B. Walt had much to say about risk during the Apollo era as compared to now. We extrapolated from this discussion to Columbia’s foam issues. We talked about commercial space. Walt suggested that today’s commercial space efforts were not purely commercial given government funding & missions. He also said that retiring the shuttle when we did was a big mistake. He then took us through a cost analysis process to illustrate that space is & always will be costly. At the end of the first segment, one way trips to Mars & reality TV show funding were mentioned.
In the second segment, Terry called with questions about Von Braun. Walt had high praise & much to say about Von Braun & his experiences with him. Commercial space came up again & I asked him about asteroid mining. He did not think it would be a good investment & talked about the need to pay attention to the laws of physics. We talked about He3 on the Moon, fusion energy possibilities & more. I read an email from a London listener asking about the Apollo rocket & mission sounds on Apollo 7. We talked some more about the problems on board Apollo 7, this time regarding Wally & the TV broadcast delay & the wearing of the newly designed helmets during reentry. Walt talked about climate change & global warming, urging people to do their own research & examine the data rather than believing what people had to say regardless of their position. John in Atlanta called in about global warming & said that there was no practical mitigation strategy. Our guest shared what he perceived to be the true motivation of global warming extremists. John also talked about having built a next gen space shuttle from the old space shuttle to avoid retiring it or having to build an entirely new & very costly program. Walt supported that idea but history proved otherwise. Toward the end we discussed the pros & cons of international cooperation & competition, Ares 1 as a safe rocket for HSF, & the cost of the ISS being more due to international cooperation. Our final topic was risk versus reckless behavior & the difference between the two.
If you have comments/questions, please post them on The Space Show blog.
Homer Hickam, Friday, 4-13-12 April 13, 2012Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: " "Paco: The Cat Who Meowed In Space, " The Great Moonbuggy Race, "Crater (A Helium-3 Novel, biocellular, cellular structure spacesuit, Chinese Space Program, commercial space, fusion energy, Gillie, HE3, Homer Hickam, ISS, lunar commerce, lunar cycler, lunar dust, lunar mining, lunar space elevator., Mars, microgravity, slime mold, space regulation, Space X
Homer Hickam, Friday, 4-13-12
Guest: Homer Hickam. Topics: We discussed his new book “Crater” & how he developed the technologies & systems to make living on the Moon credible. You are invited to comment, ask questions, & discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, & any discussion must be relevant & 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 back Homer Hickam to the program to discuss his new book “Crater” & his new Kindle book, “Paco: The Cat Who Meowed in Space.” You can buy each book from Amazon using these special URLs & Amazon will make a contribution to The Space Show/OGLF: For “Crater,” use www.amazon.com/Crater-Helium-3-Novel-Homer-Hickam/dp/1595546642/ref=onegiantlea20. For “Paco,” use www.amazon.com/Paco-Meowed-Kindle-Single-ebook/dp/B007K1OC6K/ref=onegiantlea20. Homer explained that Crater (set 120 years in the future) was a teenage orphan working to mine HE3 which was sent back to Earth as Earth desperately needed it for fusion energy. While telling us about his book, we learned that Homer created solutions to many of the challenges to living on the Moon. For example, microgravity & radiation – listen to how he solved the problems. Muscle deterioration? He solved that one too. Transportation back & forth between Earth & the Moon? That one too. Spacesuits, the use of one atmosphere, all sorts of other challenges to our having a lunar settlement have a solution to make the Crater story credible. As you will hear, not only does Homer go into detail about the storyline, but he focused on the solutions & this makes the story both believable & credible. Issues such as lunar dust, children on the Moon, even pregnancy, well, there is a solution. Food & water too. We did go off the topic of his books to ask about space policy. As you will hear, Homer thinks the Moon will be developed by entrepreneurs for commercial value. He sees companies such as Space X changing the game for our space policy & does not see government space programs being what they once were though development of needed infrastructure is part of what government can & should do. The lunar transportation systems he talked about will be private commercial businesses. When asked how he came up with solutions to problems encountered when living on the Moon, he talked about a study he did in the 1990s which is on his website, www.homerhickam.com. Homer was asked why the Moon & not Mars. Don’t miss his response to this listener question. We also talked about the space programs for other countries such as China. Homer then told how he envisioned the world to be 120 years in the future. As you will hear, countries have broken up into smaller, more manageable nations, including the United States. The world is not as we know it today. Toward the end of the first segment, Homer was asked about the difference in times from when he grew up in W. Virginia to today given the listener said his son could not even fly an Estes rocket in their city. Part of his reply stressed the need to join rocket clubs today. Before the break, we talked about insitu resources, water, food, law, & justice on the Moon.
During our short second segment, Homer was asked about strip mining on the Moon & he had much to say about it. Don’t miss this discussion. He was also asked about other uses for the Moon besides HE3 including solar, radio telescopes, & manufacturing. As the show ended, he commented on the need to have better political leadership to lead us forward in space development. He also had more to say about slime mold which plays an important part in his book.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. Mr. Hickam can be contacted through his website.
Rick Tumlinson, Friday, 1-20-12 January 21, 2012Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: asteroids, Chinese Space Program, Congress, Deimos., EarthLight Institute, frontier development, Gerard K. O'Neill, HE3, human spaceflight (HSF), LEO transportation, Mars, Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle, NASA, New World Conference, NewSpace, Obamaspace, old space, Orion, Phobos, political leadership, Return to the Moon, Rick Tumlinson, Russian space program, Soyuz, Space Frontier Foundation, Space Launch System (SLS)., space leadership, space settlement, space to space transportation, space vision, Space X, SSP, STEM, Texas Space Alliance, traditional aerospace, Why Space?
Rick Tumlinson, Friday, 1-20-12
Guest: Rick Tumlinson. Topics: Why Space, space vision, NewSpace, SLS, opening the space frontier. 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 Rick Tumlinson back to the program for this nearly two hour discussion of space vision, leadership, programming, SLS, advocacy and more. In hour first 70 minute segment, Rick opened by talking about his ongoing op-ed series in the Huffington Post titled “Why Space?” So far he has two issues uploaded to the Huffington Post & I urge you to read them. You can see all of Rick’s articles on the Huffington Post at www.huffingtonpost.com/rick-tumlinson. During our discussion, Rick stressed the need for space settlement and talked about this during the entire program. Additionally, Rick focused on the big picture space vision throughout our entire discussion. In the first segment, SLS came up but it was also talked about later in the show. Rick explained why he thought it was the wrong project for this point in time and had much to say about private industry launch & space transportation systems as compared to government programs. When asked if he thought SLS could be appropriate as a placeholder, he said no but listen to what he had to say about this idea. He talked about not picking winners and advocating a common sense space plan. I asked him for his plan and how to implement it. He then outlined a plan in several steps during the balance of the segment. Don’t miss it. Listeners called & asked questions about the Chinese space program and cooperation and the same with the Russians.
In the second segment, Rick started us off with a discussion about the Frontier approach for space development. He also talked about going to the Moon and why, but also about asteroids & Mars. He said we need to develop the skills and the insitu experience for living & working in space. Several times he mentioned that on the Moon and Mars we would be living underground due to the radiation. Rick then talked about space habitats including O’Neil like space stations/habitats. Several listeners asked about the role of HSF in developing our understanding of the universe, specifically for 2012 and beyond. John from Atlanta called in to talk about the lack of civility coming from the NewSpace community toward old space. This produced a spirited give & take with Rick which in a way focused on “guarantees” for the commercial company success as compared to government rocket programs. John suggested it was a bit risky putting all the “eggs” in unproven commercial company baskets when we know the government launch vehicle will work as long as the program is not cancelled. Don’t miss what John and Rick had to say.. Toward the end, Rick talked about the Texas Space Alliance & his new organization, EarthLight Institute. He provided us with substantial detail about the EarthLight Institute plans, their website which is under construction, plus the book on asteroids that he is working on and will be out around the end of the year. He was asked about his continuing role with the Space Frontier Foundation & the activities of SFF.
Please post comments/questions on The Space Show blog URL above. Rick’s email address is email@example.com.