jump to navigation

Dr. Jim Logan, Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, Friday, 11-20-15 November 19, 2015

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

Dr. Jim Logan, Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, Friday, 11-20-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2589-BWB-2015-11-20.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:  Dr. Jim Logan, Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist; Topics:  Humans to Mars, exploring vs. pioneering & more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed back Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist, and Dan Adamo for a 1 hour 45 minute discussion about humans to Mars and a critique of the  “NASA’s Journey to Marts: Pioneering Next Steps in Space Exploration (Oct. 2015).”  Please note that our program completed in one long segment without a break.  We started off by asking Dr. Logan to summarize the recent New World Space Conference he attended in Austin, Texas.  Jim pointed out that there were lots of young students there and they seemed eager to hear his message and did not consider him a Debbie Downer.  Jim is an evidence based guy when it comes to space policy and programs, he is also well grounded in the sciences and engineering so he does not typically hang out in the usual space cadet la la land of make believe.  We noted that older, more seasoned space cadets often dismiss those with similar messages based on evidence and fact,  but Jim was impressed by the willingness of the younger group to consider evidence and facts. The other guests plus myself had much to say about this particular issue, then we moved on to Dan who wanted to talk about the paper he has uploaded on TSS blog containing his analysis and comments re the NASA Journey to Mars Document. If you have not yet read it, please do so at this time.  For Dan and our guests, there were issues about a poorly defined definition for exploration vs. pioneering, confusing the two in the Journey to Mars document, the need for congressional action to change the mandate to pioneering, then asking for the rational for pioneering or Martian settlement. Much was said about there being no business case or rational case at all for humans to be on the surface of Mars.  This was an overriding theme for the entire discussion.  Our guests kept asking the question, “why are we doing it.?  This referred to humans on the surface of Mars for pioneering purposes.  Note the definitions Dan used for exploration and pioneering earlier in the show.  Note also the differences Dan suggested for exploration.  Our guests talked about the challenges that make Martian settlement or pioneering beyond our reach at this time.  Dr. Jurist brought up radiation and microgravity issues along with other human factor issues.  Dr. Logan supported what John was saying and called for the need to know the gravity prescription.  Without knowing it, we cannot possibly be serious about sending humans to mars.  Our guests talked about nuclear thermal propulsion and several times they referenced the Aquarius Concept (www.spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/tag/aquarius-concept).  Cognitive decline was also discussed as a leading challenge.  The matter of the Twin Study on the ISS with astronaut Scott Kelly came up.  Jim said a sample size of one does not help as it would only lead to insufficient information.  Our guests talked about radiation shielding, its cost, and added mass.  Dan mentioned a recent Aviation Week article from a September issues saying that nuclear propulsion may have a timeline for development around 2022-24.  John had much to say about this.  John also brought up the economy, potential interest rate rises and the impact on space and NASA. Jim said we needed a 10% growth rate for our interplanetary work.  We addressed the economic issues for several minutes as it was an important part of our discussion.  Later, I mentioned the recent interest I was seeing from Space Show listeners regarding the pioneering of Venus with some sort of settlement in the upper atmosphere. Our guests pointed out the pros and cons for this & we contrasted it with pioneering on the surface of Mars.  Joe sent in an email asking for the action plan or steps to be taken to pioneer Mars.  Don’t miss how our guests responded to Joe’s question.  This provided the opening for more discussion about cislunar development.  Here, our guests had much to say, including rescue opportunities, the lack of a redundant vehicle in contrast to even Apollo 8. Dan talked about this issue in technical terms so don’t miss it.  Near the end of the program, SLS came up but in the context of problems with it regarding mass, the stages, Orion, abort and rescue, black zones and more.  Don’t miss what Dan had to say about SLS and technical problems and issues.  The issues Dan raised are not the typical issues one hears discussed when talking SLS.

Please post your comments on TSS blog.  You can reach either of the three guests through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

 

                                                                                                    JTMcommentaryR1A

Dr. William (Bill) Rowe, Sunday, 8-23-15 August 24, 2015

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

Dr. William (Bill) Rowe, Sunday, 8-23-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2539-BWB-2015-08-23.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. William (Bill) Rowe: Topics: Possible magnesium deficiency for space walks, cardiology issues for astronauts. 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. Bill Rowe back to the show for this nearly two hour discussion regarding medical risks for spacewalks and astronauts. During the first segment, Dr. Rowe focused on a possible astronaut magnesium deficiency that would cause cardiovascular problems, especially with a space walk. Dr. Rowe explained why, talked about the adrenalin levels being 2 times those on Earth plus decreased plasma levels. He spent some time explaining these issues, their relationships to one another and why he believes them to be risk factors. In his discussion, he referenced health conditions for some of the Apollo era astronauts, plus he talked about microgravity issues and a possible mitigation strategy of using I.V. saline with the astronauts in space. At times the discussion was medically and technically complex but Bill broke it down for those of us not in the medical profession. He also talked about his experience over decades of practicing medicine and being a diagnostician, referencing many of his relevant patient studies along the way, including for example his work with Sy Mah. Dr. Doug sent in an email regarding dehydration and a headward fluid shift. Toward the end of the first segment, Dr. Doug called in to suggest that if an astronaut did an EVA in a pressurized rover vehicle rather than an Apollo era spacesuit, adrenalin levels and other risks would be mitigated. This was an interesting discussion with Dr. Rowe who did not agree with Doug’s premise. Listen and let us know what you think by posting on TSS blog.

In the second segment, Dr. Rowe started off saying more about the use of I.V. saline with astronauts, a topic he discussed in the first segment. . BJohn had several email questions asking about spacesuit gloves and exoskeleton gloves given what Dr. Rowe was saying about finger tips and related items. Other topics discussed in this segment included the ISS, the one year Twins Study, Vitamin D usage in space, iron risks for spaceflight, plus the implication for some of these space risks to the problem of terrestrial urban pollution. As he has done before, Bill advocated for the need to have subcutaneous pharmaceutical administration for astronauts, then he addressed issues relating to the calcium-magnesium ratio. Bill provided us with a good set of concluding comments, plus he suggested healthy guidelines for our lives right here on Earth.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above. You can find out more about Dr. Rowe’s work by visiting his website, www.femsinspace.com.

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.

 

 

Dr. Julie Robinson, ISS Chief Scientist, Friday, 7-31-15 August 1, 2015

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

Dr. Julie Robinson, ISS Chief Scientist, Friday, 7-31-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2517-BWB-2015-07-31.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. Julie A. Robinson. Topics: ISS research, the ISS 1 year study, the Twins Study, ISS science 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 Dr. Julie Robinson, ISS Chief Scientist, to the program. During our 71 minute discussion, Dr. Robinson provided us with an overview of science on the ISS, specifically identifying two goals: 1: Research for BLEO; 2: Developing LEO for long term space use and for benefiting life here on Earth. We discussed the logistics of science on the ISS, the ISS international partnership and how ISS resources are allocated to the partners for science as well as other projects. Our guest further broke this down between Russian and the U.S. and then said that for the U.S. segment, the U.S. has about a 76% usage allocation of ISS resources. We talked about the science done on the ISS, the mix with government and commercial projects, then we started talking about the 1 year study with the Russian cosmonaut and American astronaut while at the same time doing the Twin Study with astronaut Scott Kelly on the ISS with his brother Mark Kelly here on the ground. Dr. Robinson spent much of the balance of our interview time going into the specifics of these concurrent studies, the investigation categories for each study, and more. Our guest fielded questions about the length of time for the study being fixed at one year rather than being longer and objective oriented. As you will hear, ISS logistics, using the Soyuz as a lifeboat, and the overall ISS operations and other experiments going on all contribute to why a one year study was settled on rather than a long duration study or one based on achieving certain accomplishments or objectives. Dr. Robinson talked about the possibility of future studies given that they anticipate issues and information from this first study suggesting more refined studies to be undertaken in the future. Listeners emailed our guest several questions including asking her about the assumed low science productivity on the ISS, a statement Dr. Robinson refuted with evidence. BJohn also asked about low gravity issues. Later, in a follow up question, BJohn asked about a Phobos mission and doing human spaceflight mission simulations on the station. Don’t miss Dr. Robinson’s response to these questions. Dr. Bill Rowe called to talk to her about CO2 buildup, oxidative stress, EVAs, and possible magnesium deficiencies in astronauts while in space. We talked radiation issues, the OSHA rules for maxing out on radiation, and finding astronauts for the long mission that would not be disqualified due to the OSHA radiation rules. Vision problems, fluid shifts and other complications were discussed throughout our interview with Dr. Robinson. A listener commented that both participants in the 1 year study were men and wanted to know about gender differences which Dr. Robinson addressed. Another listener wanted to know about shared access of the information and if it would be made available to the commercial industry, the space tourism industry, even Mars One as an example. Later in the segment, Dr. Robinson went into much more detail regarding the investigation categories for both the 1 year and the Twin Study. When talking about fluid shifts, she was asked about differences in the Russian approach as compared to the American approach. One example that she provided us was the Russian use of their Chibis suit which sucks fluid back down to the legs. In making additional points in reference to space settlement questions, Dr. Robinson talked about comparisons with space to early oceanic exploration and said that people are not living at sea for their entire life even today. Don’t miss this discussion. Based on other questions, the human gravity RX was discussed along with the use and challenges regarding centrifuges in space, alternative propulsion to get to a destination much quicker, and the fact that even a low gravity body is better for people than no gravity. Again, don’t miss the discussion. We talked more about behavioral studies, Dr. Doug asked a series of three questions that took us through to the end of our program with other listeners asking questions in-between Doug’s. For example, cognitive issues came up as did timelines and influences to making rapid research progress including money and financing. As we were about to end, I did ask about genetic screening, experimentation, and modification. Don’t miss what our guest had to say about this and why. As we were ending, I inquired about research plans once the ISS was deorbited. Again, don’t miss the options that were discussed with us. Dr. Robinson left us with thoughtful concluding comments you will want to hear, plus she provided us with the social media contact information to follow ISS research on a regular basis.

Please post your comments/questions for this show on TSS blog above. You can reach Dr. Robinson at NASA or through me.

 

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

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

Dan Adamo, Sunday, 6-7-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2488-BWB-2015-06-07.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you rate shows on live365.com, email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guest:  Dan Adamo.  Topics: Mars human spaceflight, robotic exploration, space policy, heavy lift economics, and much more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

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

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

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

AffordingMarsIIcommentaryR1

John Putman, Friday, 2-27-15 February 28, 2015

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

John Putman, Friday, 2-27-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2424-BWB-2015-02-27.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:  John Putman.  Topics:  Neurofeedback and EEG to improve peak performance in both short & long duration spaceflight.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed John Putman to the show to discussed neurofeedback in the context of astronaut peak performance training for both long and short duration spaceflight missions.  During the first segment of our 1 hour 26 minute program, Mr. Putman explained biofeedback and the specifics of neurofeedback, neuro-diagnostics and electroencephalography (EEG).  He also explained the linkage of this research to astronauts for both long and short duration human spaceflight missions.  Much of our fist segment provided the groundwork for our discussion, addressing the fight or flight response which is automatic, sensorimotor rhythm (SMR), and more.  Our guest explained how the training is conducted and how it works.  Also discussed was seizure disorder and space adaptation syndrome (space sickness).  Listeners had many questions for our guest including if it was being applied to or made part of suborbital flight training for participants.  Beverly wanted to know if astronauts would have time to do this type of training given how their schedules are planned.  Microgravity came up and John spoke to the fact that humans were 1g and it was simply not known what type of effects would befall humans in prolonged microgravity, up to ten years or more, even with some artificial gravity for mitigation.  As the result of another listener question, John spoke to the fact that the Moon was much closer, only three days away and possibly a good training ground for understanding microgravity, neurofeedback in space and more.  Michael Listner called to support Mr. Putman’s comments and then he brought up the Mars One project which both John and Michael discussed for a few minutes.  As the segment was about to end, a listener asked if the astronauts would be too “macho” to do neurofeedback training.  John said it was actually peak performance training & that much had changed today so he did not see attitude as a problem.  He even cited training feedback with Edwards AFB test pilots and the need to disengage from your stressful activity.  BJohn got in a question about rotation and artificial gravity and Kelly called from Phoenix to inquire about the training and its impact on fluid redistribution related to microgravity.

In the second segment, BJohn led off with another question about using the training to overcome sensitivity to bad smells thinking about sulfur on Mars as a possible example.  John was also asked about integrating neurofeedback training into missions using newly designed hardware such as the Dragon V2, Orion, CST`100, and Dream Chaser.  We talked about technology improvements and the likelihood of soon being able to do some of the training on a small device such as a smartphone.  I asked John about other space agencies doing astronaut training in this area.  He mentioned ESA as well as the Dept. of Defense and athletes interested in peak performance training.  Joan asked him about ISS experiments.  He said none yet and explained the difficult challenges he has had as a small business getting an experiment on the ISS.  We talked about possible gender and race differences but he said there were none and then we talked about sleep loss and how the training mitigates that problem.  John also talked about NASA, I asked about any interest by private space companies such as Bigelow and SpaceX, plus I asked if there had been an experiments with the Navy and submarines.  Visit his websites, http://www.eeginfo.com and http://www.jputmaneeg.com for more information.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.

Dr. Haym Benaroya, Friday, 1-9-15 January 10, 2015

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

Dr. Haym Benaroya, Friday, 1-9-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2390-BWB-2015-01-09.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. Haym Benaroya.  Topics: Reality check for lunar settlement construction & habitat.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed back Professor Haym Benaroya to take us through the steps necessary to establish a lunar settlement, the challenges, our initial TRL and more.  During the first segment of our 97 minute program, Dr. Benaroya advocated for the Moon before Mars and stated his reasons which he repeated several times during the interview.  We talked about the size of the launch vehicle needed for establishing a lunar outpost and then launch costs came up, especially with regards to the proposed Falcon Heavy.  Our guest was asked about one way lunar missions which he did not think possible anytime soon and here he referenced the history of psychological problems encountered by many in spaceflight.  At this point, let me say that we received a few cell phone calls with unacceptable audio on their phone.  Since Dr. Benaroya could get most of what the caller was saying (I could not), I tolerated the poor quality calls for as long as possible and then terminated them.  Listeners, please, use a quality phone line to call the show.  If your call is garbled, I will disconnect you.  Doug called from S. California to talk about consumables being the largest part of the mass. He talked about reducing the mass by using lunar water, recycling, etc.  Dr. Benaroya explained that would not happen right away so for the early stages of an outpost, mass from Earth will be the name of the game. Other topics in this segment included the use of lunar robotics, TRLs today and for the future, & incremental engineering. Dr. Bill Rowe called to talk about medical issues such a heart attack in space, mall absorption of drugs in the GI system, & the need for subcutaneous pharmaceutical administration in space.  Lunar dust was an issue & John from Ft. Worth called to ask our guest to talk about the dust & why it was so challenging to deal with re astronauts and equipment.

In the second segment, we talked about the role of structural and civil engineers, how they go about defining the environment they will be working with and more.  All of this was in response to the question of how does one actually go about building a lunar outpost given one does not exist.  Haym talked about radiation, microgravity and the likelihood that the first crews would be there for six month and return and live in a pressurized cylinder of some sort.  Lunar manufacturing was a discussion topic as was ISRU, 3D printing & the maintenance and repair of lunar equipment.  Haym responded to a question about possible Moon-Mars synergy.  Doug email in questions about inflatable structures and Haym talked about the need to make them rigid.  Doug also asked about duplicating 1/6th g here on Earth and the use of a short arm centrifuge.  Near the end of the show, Haym said the barriers were really political decisions, not the engineering, physics, medical, etc.  He also said it would a long time to build out a lunar outpost and we should be patient.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.

The John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars, Wednesday, 10-22-14 October 23, 2014

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

The John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars, Wednesday, 10-22-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2342-BWB-2014-10-22.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: John Batchelor, Mike Snyder, Dr. David Livingston. Topics:  Topics:  The Made In Space 3D printer on the ISS.  You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog. Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Written 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 do not permit the commercial use of any Space Show program or part thereof, nor do we permit Space Show programs to be edited, placed on YouTube, or other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted in news articles, papers, academic & research work but must be cited or referenced in the proper citation format. Contact Dr. Livingston for questions about our copyright and trademark policies which we do enforce. This program is archived on The Space Show website, podcasting, and blog sites with permission from John Batchelor. Please visit the John Batchelor Show website for more information about this fine program, www.johnbatchelorshow.com.  Remember, your Amazon Purchases Can Help Support The Space Show/OGLF (www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm).  For those of you listening to archives on live365.com & rating the programs, please email me the reasons for your rating. This will definitely help improve Space Show programming. Thank you.

 

John Batchelor and I welcomed the head of R&D for Made In Space, Mike Snyder, to discuss the placement of a 3D printer on the ISS. We covered the printer, the source material for this demo printer, ABS plastic, the effects of microgravity on 3D printing & how Made In Space resolved them, plus the future for 3D printing in space.  Important to the future will be the benefits from printing spare parts for long duration spaceflight, including future Mars colonization missions.  While today 3D printing in space is a demo project, tomorrow it might prove to be an important problem solver and risk mitigation tool for BLEO spaceflight.

 

Please post any comments/questions you might have on The Space Show blog. You can contact any of  us through me.

The NRC Pathways HSF Study Panel Discussion, Sunday, 10-12-14 October 13, 2014

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

The NRC Pathways HSF Study Panel Discussion, Sunday, 10-12-14

Featuring Dr. Jim Logan, Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2334-BWB-2014-10-12.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you rate shows on live365.com, email me your rating reasons to help improve the show

Guests:  Dan Adamo, Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics:  Our three guests reviewed the NRC “Pathways To Exploration HSF study.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

Welcome to this 2.5 hour Space Show Classroom discussion with Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist, & Dr. Jim Logan regarding the recently released NRC “Pathways To Exploration: Rationales And Approaches For A U.S. Program Of Human Space Exploration.”  You can download the report for free at  http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18801.  In addition, the project referred to in the last part of this discussion by Dan and Jim, the “Aquarius interplanetary HSF transport” paper can be freely downloaded at  http://www.spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/2014/07/aquarius-a-reusable-water-based-interplanetary-human-spaceflight-transport.  Please note that our panel members used cell phones which caused audio issues which you may hear during the discussion.  Finally, as this program will also be archived on both The Space Show and The Space Show Classroom blogs, there will be two papers uploaded to each blog, one by Dan Adamo & the other by caller Dr. James Dewar. I will mention both in the summary below.  In the first segment, our panel members opened with their perspective on the NRC Pathways HSF study.  While there were similarities in their perspectives, there were also noteworthy differences.  After this comprehensive introduction, I asked our panel members about the study and space settlement or pioneering.  Each panel member had much to say on the settlement issue, including the need to solve the gravity prescription for long duration HSF or settlement.  Our panel members  said that for the most part, space settlement was out of scope for this report.  In this part of the discussion much was said about microgravity issues & the need to do on orbit experiments to determine the HSF gravity prescription.  Deimos was discussed as an initial better choice that the surface of Mars re microgravity issues.  Our guests spoke to the need of a short arm centrifuge on the ISS.  Jim spoke to the specifics of such an experiment such as 1 G at the head., 2.5 g’s at the feet for two hours a day to see how it serves as a microgravity countermeasure.  Our panel members mentioned that there already was such a short arm centrifuge built years ago by NASA and Wiley, http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/slsd/about/divisions/hacd/laboratories/short-arm_centrifuge_laboratory.html.  The guests talked about unknown human factor challenges for going to Mars and long duration spaceflight.  Jim provided us with interesting statistics on human spaceflight totals since the beginning in 1961.  The panel members had much to say about the budget issues discussed in the NRC study.  Another point brought up was the study’s assumption that if we are not going to the surface of Mars, why even do HSF?  Near the end of the first segment, listener Carl brought up the well known plans for Mars settlement with Elon Musk & SpaceX.  This sparked quite the discussion so don’t miss it.

In the second segment, our panel talked about the value of the Pathways study, international partnerships and what they saw as contradictory statements, especially regarding the mission cost impact of such partnerships.  John mentioned the study’s reference to NASA education & public outreach which he thought was more focused on STEM & the development of more engineers rather than on educating the general public to be more knowledgeable about science.  The panel members  noted that there was little attention paid to the societal impact of not even having a human spaceflight program.  Dan & Jim agreed on the importance of educational outreach and shared their experiences with us from the employment with NASA.  Adrian in San Diego sent in an email suggesting the panel was being pessimistic and that China would not overthink issues and just do missions without full disclosure.  All three panel members had much to say in response to Adrian’s charge of being pessimistic.  They talked about being reality based, not pessimistic & why it was so important to be reality based.  The panel hit back hard on the charge of being pessimistic.  Dan & Jim said to be other than realistic was reckless and irresponsible.  Jim also said that being called pessimistic suggested to him that reality had violated the person’s ideology.  Jim would be happy to debate the issues with anyone in open forum.  This discussion brought Jim and Dan to talking about their Aquarius project which you can download at the above URL.  They spent some time discussing the benefits of their approach, noting how it addresses & mitigates many of the problems associated with a HSF mission to Mars.  They also spoke to the need for nuclear propulsion and talked about using water as fuel and very high ISP ratings with high temperatures.  During this discussion, Dr. Jim Dewar called in to suggest their ISP ratings were low, he explained why, and he talked about starting small to start flying and then improving as you go.  We did not know it but we lost John from the connection but Jim, Dan, and Dr. Dewar spoke to the NERVA project, and specifics about nuclear propulsion.  This advanced nuclear propulsion discussion was close to a half an hour near the end of the program.  Dr. Dewar was a guest on the program in 2008 & 2009 regarding nuclear propulsion & its history. He also authored two books on the subject.  Use the GuestSearch tool on our website to find his interviews which I suggest you listen to if you have not already done so.  I will also upload to both blogs the paper Dr. Dewar referenced in his discussion.  After the nuclear discussion, Adrian sent in another email titled “rebuttal.”  He challenged the panel members to do the experiments, not just to talk about them.  Jim, Dan & I challenged Adrian for his solutions to doing many of the needed & essential experiments. All of the panel members supported doing the needed experiments & have said so for decades.  Getting funding for the experiments, NASA approval, etc. is a challenge.  I then challenged Adrian to come to The Space Show as a guest with his solutions for doing the essential work & experiments rather than his just talking about how badly they are needed per his second email.  I hope Adrian does have answers and will contact me about coming on the show to discuss them with us.  Jim & Dan each provided closing comments focusing back on the study report.  They thought the report was worth it from the taxpayer perspective and that it would be used for references.  Jim did think the report was not as good as other government studies he had seen because it was so speculative, something all three guests addressed in their opening remarks.  An 11th hour call came from SLS John to talk about the ISP formula & temperatures Dan and Jim used in their paper Aquarius paper.  Dan authorized me to upload to the blog his written comments on the NRC Pathways study so you will find that document on both blogs as well.

Please post comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can reach the panel members through me.

A Technical Note on Nuclear Rockets-1

PathwaysCommentaryR3

Erik Seedhouse, Monday, 9-15-14 September 16, 2014

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

Erik Seedhouse, Monday, 9-15-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2316-BWB-2014-09-15.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:  Erik Seedhouse.  Topics:  Erik’s latest book, “Beyond Human: Engineering Our Future Evolution,” & human modification for long duration spaceflight.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed Erik Seedhouse back to the program to discuss his latest book “Beyond Human: Engineering Our Future Evolution.”  During the first segment of our 90 minute program, Erik talked about long duration spaceflight and critical issues in radiation and microgravity that he believes may force changes or modifications in humans in order to survive the trips and live on Mars or another celestial location.  He also talked about changes here on Earth such as advances in bioprinting, especially for organs.  Our guest spent lots of time on the radiation challenges, shielding, and the need for possible genetic modification.  Another point he made was for nuclear propulsion to cut the travel time to Mars and other locals down and make the voyage safer.  His favorite advanced propulsion system was Vasimr.  Dr. Rowe called in and brought up his concerns with the cardiovascular  (CV) system in space, a subject Bill has talked about on many Space Show programs.  Erik’s research did not focus on the CV system so he was unable to comment on what Dr. Rowe was discussing.  Next, Erik spoke about muscle atrophy and other microgravity challenges and suggested human modification would address those areas as well.  He also talked about animal and human cloning, then a listener brought up a subject from our recent open lines program re pregnancy, childbirth, and kids in space.  Erik suggested there might be sterilization as a requirement or abortive medication on board.  I commented that this would cause a firestorm with the public, especially on publicly financed missions.

In our second segment, our lead off topic was a Posthuman/Transhuman future.  Erik cited examples and also used the classic movie Gattaca as an example.  Listener Paul sent in an email about the ethics behind what Erik was talking about.  Erik was asked about the lifespan of humans that might live on Mars or the Moon, then Ben asked if long duration spaceflight and humans in space were an economic driver for human genetic engineering.  Erik said no, that it was a very small part of the industry with organ printing as one of the major drivers.  Todd inquired about exercise and this led Erik to talk about genetic screening to select the most qualified people for the spaceflight missions.  As we neared the end of the show, Erik told us about his next book about expeditions, then he talked about Virgin Galactic and XCOR.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  You can reach Erik through me. Also, when buying the book, use the Amazon OGLF portal so Amazon will contribute to The Space Show.