Tags: cryogenic propellant transfer, Falcon Heavy, GEO, Hu Davis, ISS, KIBO Japanese ISS Module, LEO, NASA, nuclear propulsion, orbital refueling, public opinion, Return to the Moon, reusable launch vehicles, SLS, space education, space infrastructure, space policy, space policy advisors, Space Shuttle, space solar power, SRBs, SSP economics, SSP engineering, U.S. congress, U.S. space leadership, William (Bill) Ketchum
1 comment so far
Hu Davis and William (Bill) Ketchum, Sunday, 5-5-13
Guests: Hu Davis & William (Bill) Ketchum. Topics: Space infrastructure, SSP, SLS, Falcon Heavy, reusability, space policy and U.S. space leadership. 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 Hu Davis and Bill Ketchum to the program to discuss the need for space infrastructure development, SSP, and a space leadership policy by the United States. In the first segment of our 91 minute program, we talked about the need for space infrastructure development, reusable rockets, and space solar power. Our guest Hu Davis has a Power Point presentation on SSP that will be uploaded to The Space Show blog summary so don’t forget to check it out on the blog. I will also upload to the blog Bill Ketchum’s pdf paper, “What Will America Do In Space Now?” We discussed the history of various space infrastructure studies and efforts and the same for SSP studies, pointing out how new technologies, engineering methodologies, and sophisticated manufacturing have made many projects cost effective today when that was not the case years ago. Our guests fielded several questions from listeners about the SSP business case, reusability and the SLS compared to the Falcon Heavy. Doug asked about the use of in space resources & our guests suggested that for SSP for example, using in space resources could account for 90% SSP components. Questions were asked about the land cost and the use of rectennas.
In our second segment, we talked about nuclear propulsion and tax/economic subsidies to our current terrestrial energy industry which make it harder to develop SSP. We talked about the problem and the lack of viability for SLS. Questions came in regarding on orbit propellant transfer and cryogenic transfer development. As our program was ending, our guests talked about space education outreach, persuading congressional leaders and the public to support space infrastructure development, SSP , and more.
Please post your comments/questions for our guests on The Space Show blog and I will make sure they know about them. You can email either of our guests through me at Drspace@thespaceshow.com.
Alan Steinberg, Friday, 2-1-13 February 2, 2013Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: "Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding, "Weapons in Space: The Need to Protect Space Assets, ABM, Alan Steinberg, ASAT, ASTROPOLITICS, beamed energy, cyber warfare, Dept. of Defense space, enforcement., international space law, NASA, PPWT, public opinion, self-defense, space advocacy, space debris, space weapons, U.N. Charter, U.N. treaties
Alan Steinberg, Friday, 2-1-13
Guest: Alan Steinberg. Topics; Protecting our space assets, weapons in space, space policy and public opinion. 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 Alan Steinberg to the program to discuss both is latest Astropolitics article, “Weapons in Space: The Need to Protect Space Assets,” and his 2011 Space Policy article, , “Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding.” Both of these articles are available for purchase by using Google the full title of the article. During the first half of the program, we focused on Alan’s Astropolitics article. As you will hear, the issue of protecting our space assets is not an easy one to address or solve. Furthermore, as Alan and listeners suggested, the response the U.S. might make to an attack on space assets is unclear, especially if the attacking party or nation had an excuse, said it was an accident, or denied intentionally doing the deed. Alan and listener Michael defined the term space weapon and Michael provided us with the PPWT proposed treaty language defining space weapons. Alan had much to say about protecting space assets and weapons in space in the context of the U.N. treaties. We talked about U.S. as well as international enforcement here and in other countries. Space debris was discussed, especially in light of the difficulty in diplomatic action leading to tangible action against a debris causing country or party. Also discussed was government being responsible for commercial space assets under its flag.
In the second segment, we mostly talked about Alan’s 2011 Space Policy article, “Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding,” although many listeners via email and the phone kept returning to the space weapons topic. Alan took lots of questions about the role and impact on policy of space advocacy and as you will hear, its not easy or clear to pin down. Alan had much to say on how best to influence members of congress but was clear in pointing out that space advocacy does not have the numbers of the larger and more powerful lobbying groups that are far more effective in influencing policy than is the space community. Another of his points focused in on the significant influence of the aerospace industry as compared to space advocates and enthusiasts. We also learned from his concluding paragraph that when researching this issue, “research on what influences space policy attitudes and even space policy public opinion is in short supply.” In addition, we learned that while Americans like our space program and NASA, they don’t have a good understanding of it, the actual amount of funding NASA gets in relationship to the budget, and that their liking of the space program simply does not translate to more funding and more programs.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. If you want to contact Alan Steinberg, you can do so through email@example.com.
Robert (Bob) Lancaster, Sunday, 12-4-11 December 5, 2011Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.
Tags: Artemis Society, Bob Lancaster, charismatic space leadership, civil space program, Coast Guard, commercial space, communications, Congress, cultural changes for space policy, human spaceflight, international cooperation in space, leadership, Mars, media and space policy., military police, NASA, public opinion, SLS, space advocacy, space and pop culture, space celebrities, Space Command, space conferences, space consultants, Space Guard, space priorities
add a comment
Robert (Bob) Lancaster, Sunday, 12-4-11
Guest: Bob Lancaster. Topics: Suggestions on space policy leadership and space advocacy leadership. 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. 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 Bob Lancaster to the program to discuss space advocacy and policy leadership ideas. Mr. Lancaster started our discussion with an explanation and short backgrounder of his interest in space and its connection to his profession in military police and security work. Based on his interests and background, along with the leadership and management training he has had in the Air Force, Mr. Lancaster sees ways that such leadership and management training could benefit the space cause and especially the advocacy community. Bob then talked about the need for strategic planning and excellent communications. With regard to communications, he made a point about making sure people outside the “choir” were being reached and included in the discussion. The tendency within the space community with our blogs, conferences, etc. is to talk too much to each other and not enough with the people outside our community. Preaching to the choir is not helpful. Bob said that understanding the need to communicate outside our group is fundamental to exercising better leadership and management within the space advocacy community. As the first segment ended, Bob said there were three main reasons for human spaceflight and exploration: 1) To become a multi-planet species were anything to happen to the home planet; 2) Our space efforts enhance our communities here; 3) Planetary protection/self-protection regarding NEOs. As we started our second segment, we followed up on Bob’s earlier suggestion of using a consulting or outside strategic planning group to assist in the leadership changes being talked about. He said it was important for this planning company to be independent of the space community. Don’t miss his discussion on this important point. Another listener asked about the need for charismatic leadership and Bob said being able to communicate and move the population was important. Others asked him about the Space Guard idea and he said that at some point something like the Coast Guard in space would be needed. Another listener asked about our differences over issues such as SLS. Bob talked about finding common ground to speak with a more united voice to the public. In our final segment, John asked Bob what he thought the ideal space policy might be given the country being bankrupt or at least on the verge of it. Bob’s reply was very good as he talked about making the case for growing the economy through space rather than fighting over how to divide up a shrinking pie or tax more to fund different parts of the stagnant pie. Listen to what he said and tell us on the blog what you think. We then talked about space being the leader or one of the few leaders in the country/economy that can take us into a growth future. At the end of the program, we explored Bob’s thoughts regarding forming a separate military service out of Space Command which is currently part of the Air Force. We also talked about national security space and Bob suggested that our civil space program was very much a part of our national security. At the end, we talked about space as a priority within the budget given areas likely to be cut in pending budget cuts. Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog URL above.