jump to navigation

The John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars, Wednesday, 7-2-14 July 3, 2014

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

The John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars, Wednesday, 7-2-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2273-BWB-2014-07-02.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, Dr. Frank Martin, Dr. David Livingston.  Topics:  The NRC study “Pathways to Exploration: Rationales and Approaches for a U.S. Program of Human Space Exploration.” 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.

We welcomed to Hotel Mars Dr. Frank Martin who was part of the study team for the National Research Council’s “Pathways to Exploration: Rationales and Approaches for a U.S. Program of Human Space Exploration” study.  You can download a free copy of the 280 page report as a pdf document at www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18801.  Dr. Martin introduced us to the report which focused on the goal of human spaceflight to Mars.  During our Hotel Mars summary of the report and related issues, we discussed the problems with constrained budgets, the risks it poses for our human spaceflight program, and the leadership vacuum it creates in the U.S.  human spaceflight program.  John asked Dr. Martin about radiation, the use of the ISS, using the Moon to facilitate Mars, and the incremental approach to going to Mars.  At the end of the 11.5 minute segment, Dr. Martin was asked about the private sector doing the Mars human spaceflight mission, particularly SpaceX.

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

John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars with Marcia Smith, Wednesday, 4-9-14 April 10, 2014

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

John Batchelor Show Hotel Mars with Marcia Smith, Wednesday, 4-9-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2225-BWB-2014-04-09.mp3

Your Amazon Purchases Can Help Support The Space Show/OGLF (www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

If you are listening to archives & rating programs on live365.com, email me the reasons for your rating to help improve the show.

Guests: John Batchelor, Marcia Smith Dr. David Livingston. Topics: NASA implementing sanctions against Roscosmos, the Russian Federal Space Agency. 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.

We welcomed Marcia Smith of www.spacepolicyonline.com to the segment to discuss the National Research Council’s sanctions against Russia for their behavior in the Crimea/Ukraine region. We talked about the sanctions applicable to NASA, Roscosmos, exemptions from the sanctions of which there are several, the ISS, NASAs budget, the U.S. Congress and the continued funding, and a priority for SLS-Orion. We talked about Susan Eisenhower, a long time NASA advisor, siding with Senator Bill Nelson in thinking the sanctions may backfire on NASA & the U.S. because of the lack of scientific exchanges. Much more on this topic was discussed in this 11.5 minute segment.

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

Dr. Albert Carnesale, Monday, 1-28-13 January 28, 2013

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

Dr. Albert Carnesale, Monday, 1-28-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1938-BWB-2013-01-28.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Albert Carnesale.  Topics:  The NRC study, “NASA’s Strategic Direction And The Need For A National Consensus.”  Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.  We welcomed Dr. Albert Carnesale, Chair of the Committee on NASA’s Strategic Direction to discuss the National Research Council Report, their analysis of NASA, their findings, and their recommendations.  You can download the pdf form of the study report at www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18248.  We started our 1 hour 34 minute discussion with Dr. Carnesale introducing us to the National Academies and the NRC, then this specific study.  We talked about its origins, its source of funding, its methodology, objectivity, and how it addresses issues within NASA, Congress, and the Executive Branch of the government.  Dr. Carnesale talked about the study Statement of Task.  We learned that it was equally important as to what they were to do as to what they were not to do. For example, the were not tasked to opine on what NASA should be, rather they looked at NASA’s current status and evaluated and reported on what they found.  Also, the study was a fast track study completed over seven months.  This is in contrast to an NRC-NASA Human Spaceflight Study spanning two years.  You can get information on the HSF study at http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DEPS/ASEB/DEPS_069080.  Dr. Carnesale went over their findings and you will hear constant references back to the NASA 2011 Strategic Plan.  There were three main findings including the vision statement for the 2011 NASA Strategic Plan did not articulate “a national vision that is unique to the nation’s space and aeronautics agency,” that the mission statement in the 2011 Strategic Plan does not “articulate a mission unique to the nation’s space and aeronautics agency” and finally, that both the NASA vision and mission statements are so plain vanilla that they could apply to almost any part of the government.  These findings can be found on page 31 of the study.  Dr. Carnesale then discussed some of the specific findings and recommendations for the NASA program areas including human spaceflight, robotics, science missions, and technology.  NASA funding was discussed along with Congressional control and the congressional role in making space policy.  Our guest received questions about the value of space advocacy, its place in the study, and public feedback/commentary. One of the points made by our guest was that overall, most people they talked with seemed to think the ultimate HSF goal was Mars and that the Moon would be of value as a stepping stone in going to Mars.  However, there was no strategy for this, nor was there a strategy or policy or even funding for an asteroid visit or program.  We also discussed the gap which exists between the public’s liking the space program and the level of interest in congressional funding for NASA and its programs.  Listeners asked about pork spending projects and related inefficient characteristics of the congressional & NASA administrative practices.
In our second segment, the subject of sequestration came up and our guest said most thought it would impact NASA on the margins.  Dr. Carnesale got a question about getting NASA to focus on RLVs but something that specific was outside the scope of their study parameters.  Lots of comparisons were made with the Defense Department in terms of efficiency changes, including applying DOD like BRAC reductions to helping make the NASA centers more efficient, perhaps even to consolidate them.  Another listener wanted to know about the study suggesting NASA take on more frontline research such as in the earlier NACA.  Here, our guest talked about JPL which has a somewhat different structure than other NASA centers & suggested it was one of the management and organizational models that could be considered in streamlining NASA for the future.  Later in the segment, I asked what the methodology was for implementing the study findings.  He talked about the need for strategy, goals, and objectives with consensus in NASA.  Support and direction from both the Administration and Congress was essential.  Don’t miss his outline for implementation of the study findings and conclusions.  Throughout our discussion, we talked about the leadership role of NASA and the value of the contributions NASA has made to the nation and the world, looking forward to how best to see NASA continue in this light.  We also talked about partnerships with other government agencies, the private sector, and international players, especially for something as expensive as a Mars mission.  Toward the end of our discussion, Dr. Carnesale took a listener question about the need for better NASA communication to take the space story to the public.  He said the weakness was not in the communications, the weakness was in the lack of the NASA vision.  He cited outstanding communication from JPL and NASA regarding MSL and Curiosity.  Our last caller was from Dave Huntsman, a 38 year NASA veteran.  Dave raised some excellent points regarding what NASA could do on its own without Congress and the Administration.  He talked about programs put in place since the Challenger accident, all with mixed results.  The three of us took time to acknowledge remembering the Challenger accident on this day in history, January 28, 1986.

      Please post your comments/questions about this program and the NRC Study on The Space Show blog URL above.

Don Kessler, Dr. Darren McKnight, Tuesday, 2-7-12 February 8, 2012

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

Don Kessler, Dr. Darren McKnight, Tuesday, 2-7-12

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1707-BWB-2012-02-07.mp3

Guests:  Donald J. Kessler, Dr. Darren McKnight.  Topics:  The National Research Council  report: Limiting Future Collision Risk to Spacecraft: An Assessment of NASA’s Meteoroid and Orbital Debris Programs (http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13244). You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Transcripts of Space Show programs are not permitted without prior written consent from The Space Show (even if for personal use) & are a violation of the Space Show copyright.  We welcomed Donald (Don) Kessler and Dr. Darren McKnight to the program to discuss the above mentioned NRC orbital debris report.  Mr. Kessler started us out with the background and reasons for the current NRC study.  He directed us to the list of goals on P. 3 of the report, a list that we talked about during the entire program.  In this introductory discussion, he talked about space policy and the need to clean the space environment, saying mitigation was insufficient on its own.  In talking about the structure, organization and work of the committee doing the study, our guests provided us with a comprehensive description of the space debris problem, the types of technologies being considered for use in addressing the problem, and time lines for LEO, MEO, & GEO intervention.  Listeners asked about behavior in response to comments made by our guests for rules of the road and we took a hard look at intentional acts as compared to behavior out of ignorance or not understanding the problem.  Insurance rates and our decades long history of space activity was made part of the analysis  Some debris technologies and counter measures were talked about such as tethers, satellite drag devices, radar and its issues, and more. I asked both our guests if we were at a point where commercial/entrepreneurial businesses could take hold regarding debris cleanups.  As you will hear, we are getting close but not quite there yet.  Our guests gave us many examples to illustrate the points they were making in this discussion.  As related to the comments on behavior, caller Jon brought up Game Theory along with the Tragedy of the Commons.  One of the main points made throughout the program was that there were lots of variables and uncertainties in how best to deal with debris issues.  The uncertainties make it far more difficult for companies to take action and for policy to be made.  This is a discussion you do not want to miss.  Later, Alistair called in with concern for MEO debris and collisions.  One of his questions concerned potential damage to SSP materials from debris impact.  Our guests had much to say about this issue which might just be an SSP show stopper!  Throughout the first segment, we talked about the need for a NASA & other agency budget increase for cleaning up the space environment, space cleanup expenses, who might pay for them and also the Kessler Syndrome and that even if there were no new launches, the debris issue would continue escalating. 

In our second segment, John called in wondering if down the road using RLVs would help the problem given there would be less space junk hardware left in obit.  As you will hear, it helps but it is not a solution to the debris problem.  During this shorter segment, other ideas were mentioned in the context of their applicability to LEO or another location.  Near the end of the program, Darren said it comes down to paying now or paying much more later. 

Please post your comments/questions for our guests on The Space Show blog.

Dr. Dwayne Day, Wednesday, 11-23-11 November 23, 2011

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

Dr. Dwayne Day, Wednesday, 11-23-11

HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

 http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1659-BWB-2011-11-23.mp3

Guest:  Dr. Dwayne Day.  Topics:  The future of the U.S. astronaut corps & the Chinese space program & intentions.  You are invited to comment, ask questions, & discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments, questions, & any discussion must be relevant & applicable to Space Show programming. Transcripts of Space Show programs are not permitted without prior written consent from The Space Show (even if for personal use) & are a violation of the Space Show copyright.  The Space Show/OGLF is now engaged in its annual fundraising drive. Please see & act upon our appeal at https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/space-show-2011-fundraising-campaign. We welcomed Dr. Day back to the show to discuss the NRC/National Academies report he directed, “Preparing for the High Frontier: The Role & Training of NASA Astronauts in the Post-Space Shuttle Era.”  You can download this report in .pdf format for free: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13227.  Later in the program, Dr. Day talked about the Chinese space program based on his Space Review article from Nov. 14, 2011, “Staring into the eyes of the Dragon ( www.thespacereview.com/article/1970/1)”.  We started our discussion talking about the astronaut corps of the future.  Dr. Day told us about the study panel members,  their methodology, their visit to JSC in Houston to see the training facilities, & their discussions with many of the commercial companies working on CCDEV. Their initial assumptions that were proven wrong were that NASA had too many astronauts & the use of the T-38 were not that vital to the program. They discovered that the astronaut corps had already been downsized. Dwayne provided us with a chart which is on the blog for this program showing the astronaut corps population going back to 1959 projected to 2016.  The panel looked at three issues at the start of their task: The future role of the corps & its size; Training facilities & needs post shuttle; Training aircraft such as the T-38 for spaceflight readiness issues.  During this segment, Dr. Day discussed their work & conclusions in detail.  Several questions were about comparing the U.S. astronaut program with the Russians & the training involved with astronauts from other countries.  Many listeners wanted to know about the role of commercial launch providers & even if there might be a private astronaut corps.  One of the things Dr. Day said was that two commercial astronaut models were being examined by NASA, the rental car model & the “we are in charge” model.  He also talked about the impact on the program, planning, & development of uncertainty.  As for the T-38s, the conclusion was that they were needed for real time space situational awareness training & decision making. In our second segment, Dwayne took a few New Space focused questions.  He mentioned talking to Space X & other companies plus what his panel heard as to their suggestions for the astronaut corps.  Later, we talked about NRC reports in general, avoiding conflict of interest, & taxpayer value. A listener from Canada asked about the possibility of a private astronaut corp returning to the Moon before government astronauts. This led to a discussion about space enthusiasts & reality checks.  For the balance, we talked about the Chinese program.  Here, Dr. Day broke it down between human spaceflight & their defense, science & image satellite programs. He also talked about Chinese intentions.  I urge you to read his excellent Space Review article referenced above.  For 2012, I will do my best to offer Space Show listeners programming on the Chinese program, including webinar panel discussions, as it is important for us to understand as much as possible about the Chinese program.  Post comments & questions on the blog URL above.  You can email Dr. Day at zirconici1@cox.net.  If you do email him, please copy me so I can learn from the exchange.

 

Astronaut Corps Population