jump to navigation

Dr. Lewis Dartnell, Friday, 8-21-15 August 22, 2015

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

Dr. Lewis Dartnell, Friday, 8-21-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2537-BWB-2015-08-21.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. Lewis Dartnell. Topics: Rebooting civilization after a cataclysmic event & extrapolating to starting a space settlement. 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. Lewis Dartnell to discuss his book, “The Knowledge: How To Rebuild Civilization In The Aftermath Of A Cataclysm,” then applying it to starting up a space settlement regardless of where the settlement might be located. During our 68 minute discussion, Dr. Dartnell started out by giving us the background to his having written the book, some of the applicable constraints for the book, and that it was written for terrestrial events though there were ways to extrapolate some of it to space settlement issues. Dr. Dartnell explained what it would take to reboot civilization depending on why it was destroyed. He listed three possible sources of destruction. One was a viral epidemic or pandemic, another was nuclear war, and another was being hit by a large asteroid or something similar. He also said it might be easier to reboot after a pandemic because infrastructure would still be standing and largely available for use whereas with the other two, destruction would be overwhelming. We talked about skill sets needed to reboot, then we talked about the minimum size for a new community to start over. Here we extrapolated to space, exploring what it would take to start a space settlement. The initial numbers were high but not as high as what would be needed later on. The need for genetic diversity was also high. Several times he referred to needing more women than men for breeding to seed the new settlement, but without genetic diversity and in light of possible in-breeding to get the early numbers up, generations of humans might be born that were genetically weak and that could be a problem. Genetic diversity, needing more women than men, microgravity and radiation issues were just a few of the challenges for the new space settlement. Past the initial number to get the settlement going, to sustain it there would be a need for thousands in the community. You don’t want to miss this discussion as it was an eye opener. Don’t miss why he said he would rather start a new Earth settlement even after a horrific cataclysm than a Martian settlement. He said the Earth settlement would be far easier no matter what the challenges than the Mars settlement. Dr. Dartnell then talked about the possibility that someday an Earth-like exoplanet would be discovered so we compared starting a settlement there as opposed to Mars. To make this comparison, we zeroed out all issues relating to space transportation. You might be surprised by what Dr. Dartnell concluded. Later we compared a lunar settlement with the other two. Much of our discussion revolved around the fact that Earth was and is habitable and even after the horrific event, would remain habitable. Mars is not habitable nor is the Moon. That fact alone is a huge contributor to complexity and challenges. Listeners emailed and called to ask Dr. Dartnell questions ranging from the number of skilled people needed to start a space colony to having sperm banks in space for the genetic diversity required for the new settlement to how free floating habitats might be different in their requirements as compared to planetary settlements. Questions were asked about the problems resulting from human exposure to unfamiliar biology, human contamination of the planet, and the planet contaminating the humans. These were all interesting discussions so you definitely want to hear the full 68 minute program.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog above. You can contact Dr. Dartnell through me or The Knowledge website, http://the-knowledge.org/en-gb.

 

 

Charles (Charlie) Precourt, Friday, 8-7-15 August 8, 2015

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

Charles (Charlie) Precourt, Friday, 8-7-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2521-BWB-2015-08-07.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: Charlie Precourt. Topics: Human spaceflight, SLS-Orion, Mars, Moon, technology & 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 Charlie Precourt back to the show to discuss SLS-Orion progress and milestones, human spaceflight, technology advancement, & much more. During our one segment 63 minute discussion, I first asked out guest about the Orbital ATK merger and business under the combined companies. We soon shifted to the SLS-Orion discussion which included information on the 5 segment solid rocket booster (SRB), tonnage to escape which our guest explained, possible missions, and opportunities that will become available as a result of having this heavy lift rocket available for missions that need the lift & high energy capacity of SLS. We talked about shorter travel times, larger payload mass & volume, plus higher energy transfer orbits using SLS as compared to an EELV. Charlies was asked about SRB safety for human spaceflight. Don’t miss his comments on this issue. He talked at length about the benefits of marrying the SRB for lift out of a gravity well to liquids for propulsion once in space. Our guest provided statistics on SRB launches and uses to support what he was telling us. Charlie also talked about his Space Shuttle flight experience and the Shuttle’s SME, especially when there was an SME problem on one of his shuttle flights. We talked about going BLEO and he introduced us to the concept of One Space. As a result of listener questions, our guest talked about SLS costs, its design for multiple destinations and missions, and the launch “sweet spot” that it would fill. BJohn asked if there were uses for an SRB or solid rocket motor in space. Charlie said for liftoff from a gravity well, yes, but otherwise the SPI for a solid was likely too low for in-space propulsion. I asked our guest about Orbital ATK meeting the SLS -Orion milestones and upcoming flight testing. Jeff from Tucson called in about the use of modern technology including light weight epoxy material for SRBs & other spaceflight hardware. Near the end of the program, I asked Charlie about the justification for HSF to see what he had to say about it. Don’t miss his reply. We then talked about technology challenges in going to Mars, choices that were made to do the shuttle and ISS over deep space missions, and destinations that were still Earth dependent as compared to those being Earth independent such as Mars. Jack emailed in a question based on a show earlier in the week where the guest said that for putting SPS infrastructure in space, SLS was too sophisticated. What was needed was big rockets that had a 2% failure rate as that rocket would be lots cheaper than an SLS. Charlie did not specifically comment on SPS infrastructure but did take issue with the notion that it would be fine to have a rocket with a high failure rate to make it cheaper than something like SLS. Listen to how he explained this. Tell us what you think on TSS blog. As the show was about to end, a listener ask Charlie, based on his F15, Air Force, and test pilot experience, what he thought of the new F35 Joint Strike Fighter and the shortcomings of the new fighter that are reported in the press. Charlie had interesting comments about this so don’t miss them.

 

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above. You can reach Charlie Precourt through The Space Show.

Hannah Kerner, Tuesday, 8-4-15 August 5, 2015

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

Hannah Kerner, Tuesday, 8-4-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2520-BWB-2015-08-04.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: Hannah Kerner; Topics: Hannah’s op-ed “The Space Destination Debate Gets Us Nowhere…Literally,” NewSpace movement. 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 to the show Hannah Kerner for this 61 minute discussion about here recent space.com op-ed, “The Space Destination Debate Gets Us Nowhere…Literally.” You can read her op-ed at www.space.com/29659-debating-space-destination-is-grounding-exploration.html. Hannah is also the incoming new Executive Director of The Space Frontier Foundation (SFF) so we talked with about her ideas on space advocacy as well as SFF. We started out with a focus on the space destination debate which Hannah said was frustrating, not productive, and helped to create the situation where nobody goes anyplace. She also suggested that regardless of the destination, all space destinations benefit one another. The Stepping Stone Approach was discussed, especially in terms of what makes most sense from both the TRL and economic perspectives. Later in the segment, Hannah talked about the impact of the current go nowhere human spaceflight program on young people or millennials in school and entering the job market. This was a very interesting discussion from the millennial perspective so don’t miss it. As an example, our guest compared career options with NASA to those with companies such as Microsoft, Google, Apple, and other tech giants. We talked about their quick turnaround time with projects as compared to really long space projects, maybe up to a decade or more, with the risk of delays and even cancellation. Using the Europa mission as an example, I asked her how that would be viewed by a person in school wanting to do something important but seeing how long it would take plus the risks of delays or even project cancellation. She talked about devoting one’s career to a life long project like that and how that might be viewed by today’s students and graduates. For the balance of the program, we turned to The Space Frontier Foundation (SFF) and space advocacy in general. Hannah told us about an informal survey SFF conducted at the recent NewSpace Conference asking people how they viewed space players like Russia, China, India, the US, etc., either in terms of tension or innovation. She said 70% of those responding viewed participation by these players as spurring innovation, not adding to national or global tensions. The Linda Billings Scientific American article came up and Hannah gave us a different perspective than we have been hearing. She did not think it was an attack on SFF but rather the author was not that well informed about the Foundation or NewSpace. We then talked about the changes in the Foundation and space advocacy in general, diversity which is improving, the increase of women in the movement, having access to advocacy organizations, ideas, and information. Hannah said the new breed of space entrepreneurs and advocates are not promoting space settlement and issues the way it was promoted in years past which is what Linda was describing. We talked about the diversity among the NewSpace attendees which is vastly improved from the past, especially with women and Asians. In this context, we discussed technology, space settlement, Manifest Destiny, and much more. Hannah indicated that this new group of advocates was looking to establish more collaborative space eco-systems. Listeners emailed Hannah about diversity issues and finding ways to involve more minorities in space advocacy. Space attorney Michael Listner called to talk about advocacy and related issues from his perspective which was different than what Hannah was describing. Don’t miss this discussion. Hannah left us with closing comments you will certainly want to hear.

 

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above. You can reach Hannah through me.

 

 

Rand Simberg, Bill Simon, Monday, 7-20-15 July 21, 2015

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

Rand Simberg, Bill Simon, Monday, 7-20-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2508-BWB-2015-07-20.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: Rand Simberg, Bill Simon. Topics: July 20th celebration, Evoloterra.com, U.S. space 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 back Rand Simberg and Bill Simon to the show to discuss the importance of July 20, 1969, our having landed on the Moon leaving Earth behind, and their ceremony, Evoloterra (www.evoloterra.com). During the first segment of our 1 hour 26 minute program, Bill and Rand talked about the creation of the Evoloterra ceremony, what it signifies and what it honors. They talked about the importance of storytelling and why they modeled Evoloterra on the Passover Seder. Both guests talked about the importance of leaving Earth’s gravity well for the first time for another planet though later Rand offered a correction to that statement since the Moon orbits Earth and the Apollo crew was always in the sphere of influence of Earth. Rand said going to Mars would be the first time humans will have left the influence of our home planet. This discussion covered a large part of the first segment. Next, we got into space policy and theoretical discussions such as what the world would be like, including US space policy, had the Soviets beat us to the Moon and established a permanent lunar base there. Both our guests offered speculative views of alternative time lines & realities had something like that actually happened. Getting into the Evoloterra relevance today, Rand took the lead and had much to say about our current space policy, how we should be doing things and why we should not be trying to recreate Apollo. In addition, our guests talked about going to Mars and at one point it was said that there was probably no path to Mars without going through the Moon. We talked about the press conference today announcing the new Return to the Moon plan. You can download and read the plan at www.scribd.com/doc/272096719/NexGen-report-on-leveraging-commercial-rockets-to-return-to-the-moon. Rand had interesting comments about it though given it had just come out a few hours before our show today, none of us had yet read the 100 page plus report. However, It will be the subject of our next Open Lines show. Rand made several points that doing great things in space did not have to come about due to a policy based on war, referring to Apollo and the Cold War. Skipping over to the second segment, we talked about previous reports regarding space policy and Rand noted that these earlier reports did not advocate a national policy for space settlement. We then discussed space settlement for a good part of this segment, with our guests explaining why it should be our national policy. For future missions, Rand kept saying they did not have to be based on battles and wars. Bill said we needed the challenges & to win. Several catalyst type events were mentioned including asteroid threats. Rand talked about addressing many issues including space mining, property rights and affordability. Both guests offered excellent closing comments, don’t miss them. Post your comments/questions on TSS blog above. You can reach Rand and Bill through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Dr. Jack O. Burns, Tuesday, 7-14-15 July 15, 2015

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

Dr. Jack O. Burns, Tuesday, 7-14-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2507-BWB-2015-07-14.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. Jack Burns. Topics: Lunar missions, lunar policy, lunar commerce, public-private partnerships, international lunar 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. Jack Burns to the program to discuss lunar policy, public and commercial missions, the international momentum for going to the Moon and more. During the first segment of the 1 hour 23 minute show, Dr. Burns responded to my initial question as to why we have not returned to the Moon since Apollo ended. He provided us with a comprehensive overview going back to the Cold War period, our technology readiness level at the time, the costs involved in going to the Moon, and much more. He also talked about the unique drivers at the time for space, drivers which don’t exist today. We then discussed today’s drivers for both public and private/commercial programs along with today’s economic and technology readiness level. Don’t miss his analysis. Dr. Burns did say (several times during our discussion) that international support for lunar missions, both robotic and human, was growing. He also referred to The Global Exploration Roadmap (www.nasa.gov/pdf/591067main_GER_2011_small_single.pdf) several times during the discussion. Later, lunar exploration was discussed and Dr. Burns talked about scientific drivers and the stepping stone concept. He said the Moon was a crucial stepping stone to other solar system projects and destinations. Listener Jerry sent in a note based on the YouTube video of our guest about using the Moon for the exploration of the cosmos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BrhYOaAkko). Dr. Burns took time to describe his DARE project (The Dark Ages Radio Explorer). For information on this project, see http://lunar.colorado.edu/dare/mission.html. Listeners asked our guest to explain why the lunar farside was so good for communication and various arrays. Don’t miss his explanation. Later in the segment we talked about cislunar space, Orion missions, timelines, and even lunar communication latency. We also talked about Mars missions and at one point our guest said going to Mars without first learning things on the Moon increases risk for the mission and those going to Mars. Doug called with a series of comments, then BJohn asked why lunar landings were so rare (from his perspective).

In the second segment, Catherine asked Dr. Burns for his top three science missions and commercial mission were he in charge of lunar policy. After Dr. Burns responded to Catherine’s question, Connie wanted to know about new theories on how the Moon was created. BJohn asked about the launcher selected for the DARE project plus other lunar related propulsion and primary/secondary payload requirements. I asked Jack about the use of cubesats in lunar missions and just how it important was it for the general public to support a return to the Moon policy. Doug called to take issue with the missions Dr. Burns preferred because they would essentially eat up the budget leaving little or nothing for missions that Doug preferred. This led to a budget and choice discussion, then I chimed in with a minor rant from an economic perspective about using public money better so we did not have to make choices regarding this or that mission or project. I ranted on about the difference in an expense and investment at the federal level. I admitted to this being my space cadet fantasy as I know we are not headed for economic deployment as I wished for in my comments. Don’t miss the final questions of the program and the concluding comments offered by Dr. Burns.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above. You can reach Dr. Burns through his university websites or me.

Dr. Robert Kooima, Friday, 7-10-15 July 11, 2015

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

Dr. Robert Kooima, Friday, 7-10-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2504-BWB-2015-07-10.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: Robert Kooima. Topics: 3D moon & planetary body imaging and rendering. 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. Robert Kooima to the program to discuss his 3D imaging and software work, especially for the Moon and planetary bodies. Visit his website and www.kooima.net, then click on Applications, then click on Panoptic. This will enable you to follow along with our discussion. In the first segment of our 1 hour 22 minute program, Dr. Kooima started out by telling us how he developed the software he uses for his 3D renderings and images. Note that the software is freely downloadable from his website on the Panoptic page. Also, its Open Source and Dr. Kooima is interested in your feedback if you use it. His email address is on most pages of his website. Keep in mind if you do download the software, you still have to download the database & those are very large files as you will hear toward the end of the first segment. Dr. Kooima shared with us his motivation for doing this, then he explained the pixels and resolution and why the object needed to be spherical. Our guest was asked about side effects using 3D including Oculus Rift and here, our guest had much to say, plus he explained many of the problems by helping us to understand human brain perception. Listeners asked about computer power and faster speeds, latency and rover motion.

In the second segment, our guest told us about his YouTube channel and how to find it. He suggested we watch the “LRO & The Real Time 3D video as well as the “Tour of the Moon on the Oculus Rift.” BJohn wanted to know about the ability to image irregularly shaped objects such as Comet 67P. Be sure to listen to what Robert said about this. Other listeners wanted to know the ease of rendering 3D from the Moon or Mars, then someone asked about using all the radar and other data to create a 3D image of the surface of Venus through the clouds. Our guest talked about the complexities of atmospheric rendering and the fact that Moon had much more data available so it was by far the easiest to render. Dr. Kooima then brought up issues revolving the focus of an object as this is very important to the imaging. Another listener wanted to know if the path to this work was through computer science and graphics or astronomy. You might be surprised by his answer. Our guest also mentioned other software available including the USGS Isis Planetary Image Processing Software and the Celestia Planetary Software. near the end, I asked or guest where this field might be in ten years from now. Don’t miss what e said about the future, the time table, even the investment. Don’t miss his closing comments.

Please post your questions/comments on TSS blog above. You can reach our guest through his email address which is on most pages of his website.

Jim Muncy, Monday, 7-6-15 July 7, 2015

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

Jim Muncy, Monday, 7-6-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2502-BWB-2015-07-06.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:  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.

Dr. Bruce Cordell, Friday, 6-19-15 June 20, 2015

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

Dr. Bruce Cordell, Friday, 6-19-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2497-BWB-2015-06-19.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. Bruce Cordell.  Topics:  Maslow Windows, economic growth, the start of a new space program era.  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 Dr. Bruce Cordell for updates to his Maslow Window theory predicting an upcoming era of new space development and expansion.  During the first segment of our 2 hour 2 minute discussion, Dr. Cordell started out with an example that he said showed Russian’s interest and importance in space.  I’ll let it be a surprise, you decide.  From there, Dr. Cordell explained the basics of the Maslow Window conditions but rather than going back decades and centuries in history as he has done in past shows to confirm the cycles and the big projects coming after the cycles, he started with President Kennedy, his economic policy, the return of ebullience to the country, and eventually our moon program.  Bruce then jumped forward to recent times, pointing to milestones in our economy and national mindset over the years since Apollo and why he thinks conditions are right today to see a new major space program develop as part of economic and forward growth for the country which again, he suggested might be just around the corner.  Much of the first segment was devoted to his explaining why what I just wrote is so.  There were several email questions from listeners.  For example, Jerry challenged Dr. Cordell by saying that things were very different today than in the time of JFK and the Apollo program.  He said that today there would have be a refocus of the entire nation to overcome the lack of any ebullient feelings in the country or to kindle a desire to spend big money on space anything.  Bruce agreed with Jerry but listen to his full explanation & rational for his theory.  Bruce cited the lack of ebullience throughout the country, polls showing that most Americans have a negative view of things right now and for the future, and said this was all part of the coming turnaround leading to economic growth and major development projects that take place twice a century. Bruce received some questions about not wanting a government program but letting the private companies or commercial markets do the next big projects.  He thought dependency on the government for big projects would continue for years to come due to the costs but welcomed commercial industry support and public private partnerships.  Later in the segment, Bruce assigned a high degree of importance to the Chinese space program suggesting it might be part of the turnaround needed to return ebullience to the country to set the stage for a large project which he suggested might be a competitive space project due to China’s space program.  Bruce also took this opportunity as he did in the next segment to advocate returning to the Moon as the next logical step in our space development program.  He also cited recent comments made by the new Director of ESA that he said supported the coming Maslow Window.

 

In the second segment, Bruce returned to a question asked earlier by Bill about the possible impact of the 2016 presidential election on triggering this new, great space project.  Bruce spoke directly to the idea of presidential impact & potential policy changes.  He was asked if any of the candidates would strongly support such policies in the primaries and he and others suggested it would likely be done after a new president was elected, not during the campaign.  Listen to his reasoning for this.  This prompted me to get in there with my two cents worth on this discussion which was very different from what Bruce was talking about.  Fortunately, my comments/rant did not go on for too long but see what you think of it.  Post your thoughts on the blog, thumbs up or down. Bruce told me after the show that he appreciated my engaging him as I did in this particular show.  During this segment, Bruce mentioned other examples of space events and happenings to support his overall theory.  Later in the segment to support his thesis on the return of economic growth, he cited a recent Wall Street Journal article, “The Return of Growth Economics”(www.wsj.com/articles/the-return-of-growth-economics-1434063021).  I supported the idea of the return to growth economics but in my comments I mentioned above, I took it further saying that a space project might be seen as a tool to benefit the national industry and spur economic growth.  I also said it would not come from a space advocacy perspective but rather space would be used as a tool for national policy and benefit.   Dennis Wingo recently addressed the economy in his article  “Secular stagnation and space: a way beyond our current economic plateau” which you can read at http://room.eu.com/articles?id=88.  Dennis is returning to The Space Show next month to discuss this and other items of interest.  As our program was drawing to a close, Dr. Cordell offered us some takeaway points and a good set of concluding remarks.

 

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  Bruce can be reached through his website, http://21stcenturywaves.com or through me.

Dr. Bruce Damer, Friday, 6-12-15 June 12, 2015

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

Dr. Bruce Damer, Friday, 6-12-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2492-BWB-2015-06-12.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

Guest:  Dr. Bruce Damer.  Topics:  Sustainable space exploration to Mars & elsewhere per his two TEDxSantaCruz talks.  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. Bruce Damer back to the show to discuss his two new TEDxSantaCruz talks regarding sustainable space exploration and new theories on the origins of life.  Watch the first of his two TEDx talks on sustainable space exploration at www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLMHcUg36yc.  His second TEDx talk addressing new theories on the origins of life can be viewed at www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qiW4aUqtvA.  In the first segment of our 1 hour 28 minute discussion, Dr. Damer introduced us to his concept for sustainable space exploration, including round trips to Mars.  His spacecraft is the S.H.E.P.E.R.D   which he fully explained with great animation in the TEDx talk.  This is a method for capturing and enclosing a small but valuable asteroid between Mars and Jupiter, using a chemical process to mine it for volatiles and to fill special tanks with the volatiles and return the cargo to where it is needed, Mars, the moons of Mars, cislunar space, the Moon, or an orbiting space station.  Bruce spent the first segment of our program discussing this technology and the concept, plus explaining how it can be used to facilitate and enhance human spaceflight including human exploration of the solar system.  The YouTube video is just under 10 minutes so be sure to watch it.  Listeners asked him many questions to fully understand the concept so the YouTube talk and his Space Show discussion go hand in hand with one another.

 

In the second segment, Bruce as asked about the cost to develop, launch, and operate S.H.E.P.E.R.D for a humans to Mars mission.  Bruce did not have costs available but used the Rosetta Mission as an approximate guideline for estimating costs. Also in this segment, he noted the use of inflatables in space and the long history of success in using them back to the early days of the space age and the Echo communication satellites.  He also referenced Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 on orbit through Bigelow Aerospace.  He then said that inflatables would be safer for humans due to less radiation.  Don’t miss his comment on this issue.  Bruce then talked about water and shielding.  As the program was nearing its end, Dr. Damer discussed the second TEDx talk regarding new theories on the origins of life.  He also connected the dots for us with both talks so don’t miss what he had to say. By the way, the sustainable space exploration talk opened the TEDx session and his origins of life talk was the closing talk at the event.  Toward the end, he talked about outreach with his new idea and said he would be giving a FISO talk on S.H.E.P.E.R.D June 24 so those of you who listen to FISO talks be sure to catch this one live or on archives.  Before the show ended, Bill emailed in a question asking him if he had a compelling rational for Martian HSF.  Don’t miss what he said about this.  A Phoenix listener asked Dr. Damer if his concept would help Mars One.  Then a series of questions came in asking Bruce about the use of his idea for going to the Moon, cislunar development, the moons of Mars or someplace else in the solar system.  Bruce said it would support all of these missions and explained why.  Jim asked Bruce to explain why he thought mining an asteroid would be so difficult and far out yet he was mining volatiles from the asteroids he covers up with his plan.  Bruce explained that he was using a chemical process to free up the volatiles, not mining them.

 

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.

 

 

Dr. Ian Crawford, Friday, 5-29-15 May 30, 2015

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

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

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2482-BWB-2015-05-29.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

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.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 77 other followers