jump to navigation

Dr. John Jurist & Kobi Hudson, Sunday, 4-19-15 April 20, 2015

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

Dr. John Jurist & Kobi Hudson, Sunday, 4-19-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2456-BWB-2015-04-19.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

Guests:  Dr. John Jurist, Kobi Hudson.  Topics:  Orbital ATK 5 segment booster test and the ISS Algae experiment.  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. John Jurist and Kobi Hudson to the program to discuss their recent experiences at the Orbital ATK 5 segment booster test in Utah and the ISS algae experiment Kobi and his teammates are working on at this time.  During the first segment of our 1 hour 58 minute discussion, John and Kobi talked about viewing the Orbital ATK 5 segment booster test this past March in Utah.  John has attended all the 5 segment booster tests but this was the first one for Kobi who is one of John’s students at Rocky Mountain College in Billings, MT.  Kobi described the test, what it looked like and how it felt from the viewing area, the networking opportunities he had with those attending the test including many executives from across our aerospace industry & NASA.  I asked John and Kobi if they sensed that the Orbital ATK team was aware of the controversy surrounding the final destination for the booster, SLS.  We talked about this for several minutes.  I think you will find what both John and Kobi had to say about this to be very interesting.  This discussion took us into an SLS discussion but from a slightly different perspective than our usual Space Show SLS discussions.  A listener asked our guests if either of them noticed a cultural difference in the test team given the Orbital and ATK merger.  Kobi was asked if the test and the experience inspired him to want to work in the aerospace field which it did.

 

In the second segment, Marshall called to inquire about the use of liquid rocket motors as compared to solids and wanted to know which type was more efficient. Both John and Marshall seemed to agree that it might depend on which type of propulsion system gets more launches and usage though the solids are far simpler.  As part of this discussion, the political dimensions of decision making were brought up as they play a role in the propulsion system and thus influence efficiencies.  Next, we turned to Kobi to explain to us the algae experiment he and others are working and which will fly to the ISS on the SpaceX 7 launch.  Behind this experiment is the goal of testing how well algae grows and how much carbon dioxide it consumes in a zero-gravity environment.  They want to see if it can influence the presence of oxygen in the spaceship.  The algae is grown in an agar solid media.  Kobi went into details on this experiment which I believe you will find of interest. When the team gets the data back from the 28 day test, Kobi will come back to the show to update us on what they found out.  Later in the segment, SLS John called in to follow up on our earlier SLS conversation and the proposed NASA ARM.  Several listener questions came in by email regarding both the issue of solids vs. liquids and the algae experiment.  Kobi also got a question or two about this work on the Firebird cubesat program.  He said it used a polar orbit , was then asked if cubesats could go to the Moon or elsewhere and he said probably but challenging. Doug called to talk closed loop life support and related issues.  The last question came from a high school senior asking Kobi about the need to attend a Tier One school and the consequences for going to a school not as well known and not as highly ranked.  All three of us, Kobi, myself, and John responded to this question saying about the same thing but in different words.  Both John and Kobi offered concluding comments you don’t want to miss.

 

Please post your comments and questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach both guests through me.

 

 

Dr. Erik Conway, Monday, 4-13-15 April 14, 2015

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

Dr. Erik Conway

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2452-BWB-2015-04-13.mp3

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

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

Guest:  Dr. Erik Conway.  Topics:  Dr. Conway’s book, “Exploration and Engineering: The Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the Quest for Mars”  & more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See 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. Erik Conway to the show to discuss his new book, “Exploration and Engineering: The Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the Quest for Mars,” JPL history, engineering, Mars missions, and much more all from the historical perspective.  In the first segment of our 1 hour 28 minute discussion, I asked Dr. Conway how JPL engineers did things that led to major Mars exploration breakthroughs.  He cited the Mars Pathfinder mission as an example and the decision to use airbags for the landing.  Dr. Conway took us through the process, the cost benefit analysis of the decision and the role played by budgets, the engineers, policy makers, and others contributing to the mission.  Our guest provided us with other examples as well from other Mars projects and missions.  Listeners asked our guest about human missions.  Here, Dr. Conway had much to say throughout our discussion focusing on the fact that humans are dirty with bacteria, planetary protection is a priority, and there is zero risk or near zero risk for a human mission.  When asked if the Moon required the same planetary protection policies as Mars, he said no though in the early days of lunar exploration, it did.  I asked our guest about the roles played by policy makers and engineers and this resulted is a very interesting discussion. Don’t miss it.  Listener Barbara in Seattle asked our guest about Curiosity cost overruns and how that would be reported on in history.  This led to a discussion about the impact of management and others on the initial design and budgets.  Later, Dr. Conway was asked why JPL had a focus on Mars in the first place.  Doug called in to ask about the humans vs. robot debate for science.  Don’t miss the response to this question by our guest.  Doug also brought up the issue of finding past or present life on Mars and what that might mean for future  Mars missions.  Dr. Conway agreed that probably all sides in the argument of avoiding Mars to avoid contaminating and disturbing life to the opposite perspective will be arguing the issues for a long time to come.  Dr. Conway addressed commercialization and while supporting reduced launch costs said the cost reduction needed to be magnitudes lower than even the lower costs of today.  Dwayne called and addressed planetary protection, then he turned his attention toward asking about the research opportunities at JPL for outside historical researchers.  Erik explained why these opportunities were limited, partly holding ITAR responsible.

In the second segment, Erik talked about the risk versus return on the costs.  He talked about there being almost zero tolerance for accidents and losses with Mars missions and human missions.  He also said the zero risk tolerance for these missions has been a significant cost driver.  Our guest had much to say on this subject with regards to Mars so don’t miss it as it covered most of the second segment. Later in this segment, Jake inquired about the early JPL history and its founders and their impact on the JPL of today.  Penny wanted to know about the Cal Tech-JPL relationship.  Dwayne sent in an email asking about the Faster, Better, Cheaper programs and what happened with the JPL programs using this approach.  This was an interesting way to wind up the show. As we were ending we learned that Goddard has no historian so their programs are not being recorded or document.  I sked Erik the difference in JPL and the APL.  Note how he explained the difference between the two labs, their risk tolerance, and decision process.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach Dr. Conway through JPL or me.

Dr. Bruce Damer, Tuesday, 3-31-15 April 1, 2015

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

Dr. Bruce Damer, Tuesday, 3-31-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2445-BWB-2015-03-31.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. Bruce Damer. Topics: The Shepherd concept for asteroids/icy planetesimals as a possible stepping stone for sustainable human 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 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 new concept for enclosing an asteroid with a Xenon gas filled enclosure, the Shepherd concept, to help make human spaceflight sustainable. During the first segment of our 83 minute program, Dr. Damer introduced us to the concept, compared it to the NASA ARM baggie option as well as the boulder option, plus the private sector potential for the mission even without NASA. You can read the paper we talked about during the show which was recently published in New Space, “Shepherd: A Concept for Gentle Asteroid Retrieval with a Gas-Filled Enclosure” at http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/space.2014.0024. During this segment, Dr. Damer talked about capturing fuel in space and talked about a demo project, possibly in LEO. Doug emailed in several questions and comments about the NASA ARM video, then asking if Dr. Damer’s idea could be used to extract the most valuable volatile thus only having to bring back a portion of the asteroid. Don’t miss what Bruce had to say in response to Doug’s comments and questions. Claire in Boston emailed in to voice her unhappiness with ARM and the fact that many others like her did not like the mission. She asked Bruce what the value was even with his idea rather than using the resources for returning to the Moon or going to Mars. Bruce suggested the mission would produce excellent science and enhance commercial spaceflight. Again, don’t miss his full answer to Claire’s question. One of the later topics in this segment dealt with forces on the asteroid in the baggie concept that could possibly destroy the asteroid. He explained why Shepherd would probably be different.

In the second segment, Dr. Damer talked about the Shepherd mining variant, the Shepherd biological variant, and the Shepherd fuel variant. I asked him if this was similar to 3D printing in space and he said it was, then he explained his answer. He also said the founders of the Shepherd idea were putting it out to everyone as Open Source as he said would be valuable to give it away to industry. Later he said the most likely to develop this technology would be NewSpace entrepreneurs. Jim in Denver emailed in about the applicability of Shepherd to human spaceflight to Mars. Here, Bruce talked about orbiting Shepherd models supplying the surface group below. He also said being on the surface may not be the best way to set up a settlement but listen to the total scope of his comments on this subject. He even cited Von Braun, Bonestell, Willy Ley and others for depicting this idea using a Mars transfer orbit. Tim called in with several questions about short period asteroid. When asked for concluding comments, Bruce said he was very excited about Shepherd as it represented 35 years of simulation and other work and now he was meeting with the right people with the right skills to make a project like this happen.

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

 

Dr. Arlin Crotts, Monday, 2-16-15 February 17, 2015

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

Dr. Arlin Crotts, Monday, 2-16-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2416-BWB-2015-02-16.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. Arlin Crotts.  Topics:  Lunar exploration, commerce, & human development in addition to many related topics.  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 Dr. Arlin Crotts back to the show to discuss his new book, “The New Moon: Water, Exploration, and Future Habitation” plus lunar related science and development issues & concerns. For more information, visit Dr. Crotts website, http://user.astro.columbia.edu/~arlin/research.html.  In the first segment of our 93 minute program, I asked Dr. Crotts to summarize lunar science and development progress since his last appearance on TSS, Oct. 27, 2009 through today.  Dr. Crotts had much say in this summary, especially with lunar water, hydroxyls, minerals, LCROSS, volatiles, and more.  Don’t miss this summary. Listeners asked many questions about INSITU Resource Utilization on the Moon, polar ice, water ice, volatiles, fuel possibilities, and more.  I asked if he had detected an increase in the public’s awareness of the Moon and many of these issues plus I wanted his thoughts on the private sector commercial opportunities and plans opening up for the Moon.  The balance of this segment featured calls and listeners emails asking about the lunar poles, volatiles, craters & the Resolve Mission.

In the second segment, Dr. Crotts was asked about the Lunar Mission One Kickstarter project and their wanting to drill 100m into the Moon.  Dr. Crotts did not comment on the project but did talk about why we needed more and deeper lunar drilling exploration.  Our guest also talked about his book in detail in this segment, saying it was very detailed, well documented and supported, and that readers would learn things about the Moon not previously known or written about given his access to original lunar exploration and Apollo documents.  Other topics in this segment addressed humans to Mars or the moons of Mars, the timing of human lunar settlement which he supported but not until we know much more about the Moon to do it safely and correctly.  We talked about this approach in some detail.  Space settlement was discussed and he said it would happen sooner or later but that we needed more lunar science first before we settled the Moon.  Near the end of the segment, Dr. Crotts was asked about NASA’s ARM project.  Space mining came up and then just before the program ended, Eric inquired about Transit Lunar Phenomena (see http://user.astro.columbia.edu/~arlin/TLP).  Tim was our last caller asking about the use of RTGs.  Dr. Crotts talked about reactors on the Moon and mentioned the smaller Toshiba 4G reactor.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach Dr. Crotts through his website or me.

Dr. Edgar Bering, Friday, 1-30-15 January 31, 2015

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

Dr. Edgar Bering, Friday, 1-30-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2404-BWB-2015-01-30.mp3

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

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

Guest:  Dr. Edgar Bering; Topics:  “Mars Rover Model Celebration and Competition,” Dr. Bering’s undergraduate student balloon projects, cubesat project to Mars.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See 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. Edgar Bering  to the show to discuss the “Mars Rover Model Celebration and Competition ” and his undergraduate student balloon projects to study the Northern Lights and more.  During our one segment one hour program, we focused the first half on the Mars Rover Celebration aimed at both elementary and middle school students while in the second part of the segment, we talked about Dr. Bering’s balloon projects and even a possible cubesat to Mars project.  Dr. Bering explained the Mars Rover Model competition which has the students doing a six week Mars course in preparation for their rover mock-ups.  You can learn more about this competition at their website, http://marsrover.phys.uh.edu/about.php.  Dr. Bering took us through the requirements, differences in the competition for the elementary school students compared to the middle school students and he even responded to a question as to how to get a six week Mars curriculum into the school program.  He said the rover categories included a free form model rover made of “stuff” plus a solar power model, and for the older students a radio controlled model made from the parts of an RC model car.  Our guest would asked if the model rover program would work for going to the Moon, not just Mars.  He said yes but don’t miss his full reply.

In the second half of our segment, we talked about his high altitude undergraduate student balloon projects to study the Northern Lights and its effect on the upper atmosphere.  He will be taking his students to Alaska to  see the Northern Lights and to conduct the balloon studies.  He talked about the significant improvements in miniaturizing with the needed electronics, sensors, and cameras, plus today’s high reliability of these components.  He point out that instruments capable of doing the work of today’s instruments would have weighed around 120 lbs. in previous years.  Now they are shooting for a total mass for the instruments of less than 6 lbs for doing meaningful science.  In 1985, the ultra-lute instrument package would have been 50 lbs.  Dr. Bering was asked if his students did cubesat projects and he told us about a possible Mars cubesat project.  He was confident they could get telemetry back from Mars with a cubesat and talked about new antenna improvements.  Toward the end of our discussion I asked if he had any stats on students doing these programs from elementary and middle school and if they went on to careers in space, science, etc.  Don’t miss his response.

Please post your comments on TSS blog above.  You can reach Dr. Bering through the Mars Model Rover website or me.

Dr. Andrew Rader, Tuesday, 1-20-15 January 21, 2015

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

 Dr. Andrew Rader, Tuesday, 1-20-15

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2397-BWB-2015-01-20.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

Guest:  Andrew Rader.   Topics: We discussed his videos, aerospace engineering lectures and much more from his website.  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 Dr. Andrew Rader to the show to discuss his aerospace engineering lectures and other material on his website, http://www.andrew-rader.com as well as his YouTube channel.  You can access all his material, his YouTube channel and his book through his website.  During our one segment one hour discussion, Andrew talked about his Mars cooking video regarding his eating bugs.  We had quite the discussion about this.  Crickets anyone?  Next, we talked about going to Mars and he introduced us to his YouTube channel which has 74 videos and more on it.  His aerospace engineering class lectures are there too and very popular with students, especially those wanting to see if aerospace engineering might be the path for their studies.   Joe asked our first email question about the necessity for a flyby or human orbital mission of Mars prior to humans landing on Mars.  We then discussed Mars, why a one way mission, and the Moon vs. Mars.  Other topics included spacecraft and rockets in general, Apollo, robotic missions, and more about human spaceflight.  At one point I asked Andrew how he stated the purpose for our going into space.  Bethany asked Andrew to explain what was meant by the term ecliptic. In response, Andrew offered a short explanation using basic orbital mechanics.  We talked about several specific videos on his YouTube channel including the Sagan Darkness video, the Ambien Space Music videos and the Star Trek and Darth Vader videos.  I asked him what he liked best and he said it was systems engineering because he liked putting and seeing how everything works together.  Human factors came up and he made an interesting statement to the effect that if we require 21st century medical care on our space missions, the technology itself may be an impediment to the mission.  We talked about the multi-systems failure risk being the biggest risk in his opinion and the steps taken to mitigate this risk.  I also asked about crew failure risks including medical and psychological issues.  Andrew offered us interesting observations about crew risks and issues so don’t miss what he said.  As the show was drawing to a close, we talked about his introduction to spacecraft videos.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog. You can reach Andrew through his website or me.

Bruce Pittman, Monday, 10-13-14 October 14, 2014

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

Bruce Pittman, Monday, 10-13-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2335-BWB-2014-10-13.mp3

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

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

Guest:  Bruce Pittman.  Topics:  The emerging commercial space industry and related topics.  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 Bruce Pittman back to the show to discuss the emerging commercial space industry. During the first segment of our 90 minute program Bruce said this was the most exciting time every for commercial space, certain in his 30 plus year career.  He talked about there being a paradigm shift underway, NASA challenges and the progress made in just five short years.  He cited examples with COTS, commercial payloads to the ISS, SpaceX, and lots of smaller companies working with small satellites.  Other examples included the 3D printer on the ISS, the growth of spaceports, the industry spreading out into multiple states, and investment capital coming to the industry.  I asked about human spaceflight (HSF) and he said it was more challenging and demanding but was optimistic that launch costs would come down, especially if reusability enters the market.  Reusability would greatly assist in bringing more commercial options to the table even for HSF.  Jerome in the UK emailed to ask about a commercial space industry outside the U.S.  Both Bruce and I commented on Jerome’s question.  Harry emailed Bruce to inquire if going public was essential for pushing the emerging commercial space industry forward.  Bruce was also asked what excited him the most in the industry.  Listen to his choices. I asked our guest if he saw SLS as an asset to the emerging commercial space industry, being neutral, or being a detriment.  He believes there will be synergistic enhancements for both SLS and the commercial space industry through the development of SLS.  Don’t miss his full comments. Bruce was asked about commercial space ventures being able to finally close a business case and having more than just government as the customer.  Allison emailed us asking Bruce to define paradigm shift.  This also proved an interesting discussion.  Near the end of the segment, our guest was asked bout NEOs and commercial opportunities.  We also talked about two NASA papers in this segment.  The first, “Pioneering Space: NASA’s Next Steps on the Path to Mars” from May 29, 2014 can be downloaded at http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Pioneering-space-final-052914b.pdf.  The second paper, “Emerging Space:  The Evolving Landscape of 21st Century American Spaceflight,” can be downloaded at http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Emerging_Space_Report.pdf.  Just before the break, Paul asked about fuel depots for the commercial space industry.

In our second segment, we started talking about space settlement, pioneering, and space exploration.  Bruce explained the differences with pioneering making it possible to have a permanent presence in space by getting in place needed infrastructure and the basics for living in space.  Space settlement would be established after pioneering.  Exploring goes forth to find out what is out there and to return to tell about it.  A listener asked if going to the Moon was a pioneering step on the way to Martian settlement.  Later, Bruce said that pioneering will be driven by economics. In this segment, we also talked about property rights and benefit sharing plus the impact these two issues might have on the emerging commercial space industry.  Risk averseness came up as well.  As we were drawing to a close, Bruce mentioned how all of the industry was in a transitional period, including traditional aerospace.  He suggested things to look for over the coming months included more commercial activities on the ISS, the upcoming Bigelow module for the ISS, & the Google Lunar XPrize.  In closing, we talked about Silicon Valley and the industry as well as the lowering of barriers to entry for emerging commercial space companies.  Bruce also mentioned the Next Giant Leap Conference in Hawaii, Nov. 9-13, 2014.  For more information, see http://2014giantleap.aerospacehawaii.info.

Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  You can reach Bruce Pittman 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

Michael Listner, Monday, 8-25-14 August 26, 2014

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

Michael Listner, Monday, 8-25-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2303-BWB-2014-08-25.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:  Michael Listner.  Topics:  Space law, ARM & property rights, SpaceX-AF litigation, RD-180 engine & more.  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See http://www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm.  For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience.

We welcomed Michael Listner back to the program for this update regarding specific space law issues and theories.  In the first segment of the this 1 hour 48 minute program, Michael talked about the proposed Asteroid Bill in Congress and how to maybe get some limited property rights for asteroid mining by being able to move a small asteroid as in the NASA ARM project.  Michael theorized that if one moves an asteroid, its no longer in its natural orbit and then no longer defined as a celestial body.  We spent most of the first segment and a good part of the second segment discussing this theory and why it might work.  When asked if it would apply to lunar property rights or other space property rights, Michael was clear that it only applied to a small asteroid that could be moved.  He also said it would require an administration to endorse such a plan and that it would be difficult to establish as customary and it would certainly be an uphill effort.  BJohn and others sent in email comments about this.  As you will hear from BJohn’s emails which I read on air, not every thought positively about Michael’s idea.  Michael also talked about other forms of international agreements being much easier to obtain than treaties.  He also said the property rights policy battles would be fought diplomatically.

In the second segment, we talked about the SpaceX-US Air Force litigation and the AF Motion to Dismiss.  Next, we covered the RD-180 rocket motor issue and Michael noted that a new shipment of RD-180 motors had been received.  He also said there was new information suggesting Russia might want to expand the mission time for the ISS (http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/08/25/russia-agree-iss-extension).  Property rights and moving an asteroid came back as a topic in this segment & Michael again talked about treaties which he said were top down in policy making while transparency, etc. was considered bottom up policy making.  We talked quite a bit about property rights being US one sided and he said that the Asteroid Bill actually enabled those outside the U.S. to put their projects under U.S. law for U.S protection.  We moved on to cubesats and oversight/regulation issues.  Near the end, Michael updated us on the Code of Conduct in which there should be another draft emerging in the near future.  As the program was drawing to a close, I asked Michael for remaining 2014 legal issues that might get a 2014 resolve.  We looked forward to early next year & our guest commented on issues involving Russia, China, and ESA.

Please post your comments on TSS blog above.  You can reach Michael through me or using the email address he gave out on air as the program was ending.

Dr. Rachel Armstrong, Friday, 7-18-14 July 19, 2014

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

Dr. Rachel Armstrong, Friday, 7-18-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2283-BWB-2014-07-18.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. Rachel Armstrong.  Topics:  Living architecture design for interstellar habitable starships.  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 Dr. Rachel Armstrong to the program to discuss the Icarus Interstellar Project Persephone-Living Architectures.  During the first segment of our 1 hour 37 minute discussion, Dr. Armstrong provided us with a bit of her personal history and background leading up to her interest in space and living architectures.  As you will hear, her medical experience and perspectives were critical to her connecting the body in a relationship with technology.  As our guest began introducing us to Project Persephone, Dr. Armstrong talked about the need to move from an industrial type society and economy to an ecological based system which she fully described throughout both segments of our discussion.  She talked about new ways of understanding and working with matter and microbes leading to new world views, new types of structures, and to space habitats that will evolve based on the needs of the crew.  During our discussion, Dr. Armstrong mentioned many of the leaders in applicable and related fields, their projects, and their papers so I suggest you have pen & paper handy to jot them down for your own research benefits.  Dr. Armstrong, in talking about living architectures, made the point many times over that we should start thinking in broader ways about the materials we use.  Don’t miss her explanation & discussion of this & other important concepts.  I also suggest you read “Designing a Sustainable Interstellar Worldship” written by our guest (http://news.discovery.com/space/private-spaceflight/project-persephone-icarus-interstellar-100yss-120920.htm).  We talked about today’s closed and open loop life support systems and how the future will be built upon the shoulders of today’s engineers and designers.  Dr. Armstrong introduced us to non-human matter in this segment, but we continued talking about it in our last segment as well.  Complexity was discussed, then listener Jack asked by email for our guest to describe the future starship with an evolvable environment.

In our second segment, B John asked if we should skip HSF to the Moon and Mars as distractions, instead focusing on habitable orbiting space stations and growing them into world ships. Don’t miss her answer.  Rachel talked at length in both segments about the manifesto and its purpose and place in ecological starship design.  Our guest also pointed out potential conflicts with solar system exploration and the Outer Space Treaty.  Heather asked Rachel if she would produce a reading and reference list given all the citations and references she offered us in our discussion.  While that might be forthcoming, do visit Rachel’s related website, http://www.blackskythinking.org. B John sent in a follow up email asking just how biologically independent humans are from the Earth and its unmanageable ecology.  Don’t miss Rachel’s reply.  Another listener asked about the concepts being discussed today appearing in sci fi literature and film.  Rachel talked some more about sim biosphere which will be a new upcoming project.  As we were ending, starship cities were discussed as was the Philips Microbial Home (www.design.philips.com/about/design/designportfolio/design_futures/microbial_home.page).  Among the many people referenced by our guest was architect Philip Beesley and his work (www.philipbeesleyarchitect.com).

Post your comments/questions on TSS blog above. You can reach Dr. Armstrong through me or her university & Black Sky websites.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 77 other followers