jump to navigation

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.

Dr. Mark Shelhamer, Tuesday, 7-22-14 July 23, 2014

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

Dr. Mark Shelhamer, Tuesday, 7-22-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2286-BWB-2014-07-22.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

Guest:  Dr. Mark Shelhamer.  Topics:  A look at the risks associated with long duration 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 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. Mark Shelhamer, Chief Scientist of the NASA Human Research Program to the show to discuss the critical risks associated with BLEO long duration HSP. You can hear his FISO talk on this topic from April 2, 2014 at http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Shelhamer_4-2-14/Shelhamer.mp3.  His associated Power Point can be downloaded at http://spirit.as.utexas.edu/~fiso/telecon/Shelhamer_4-2-14/Shelhamer_4-2-14.ppt.  During the first segment of our 95 minute discussion, Dr. Shelhamer started off saying  we would be talking about beyond low earth orbit only and that many of the risks are unknown since we have very little experience with BLEO.  Much of what we do know is extrapolated from our current knowledge base plus our Apollo experience.  Next, our guest defined three major areas/issues.  First he listed medical issues which he later described as onsite medical treatments for various complications, illnesses, surgical needs and such.  He classified physical deconditioning issues such as muscle and bone loss issues, cardio vascular issues in a different category.  The second group he identified had to do with radiation, and the third group included psychological-social issues.  I asked about Microgravity not being in the top three and he said because those issues are likely a constant for both LEO and BLEO missions.  He then talked at length about the challenges needing countermeasures/mitigation.  He did not say these were showstopper challenges but they do require effective countermeasures.  For example, he said humans could probably survive a trip to Mars today providing the hardware & life support was up to the job but their goal is to get the crew there in good condition, to be able to do effective work, and to return safely.  He did not think those goals could be obtained today.  I asked if money was a primary issue and it was not though he said more money is always helpful. He talked about the time needed for some human studies, team studies, and research, sometimes extending even longer than a year.  He then took us through the three categories to tell us what NASA was doing & how it was doing in that research area. You might be surprised by what you hear.  I certainly was.  Later, we talked about ocular/vision issues which are now getting front page attention.  He explained the latest theory causing the problem as possible fluid shifts.  Listen to this discussion.  Note that once we start with BLEO HSF, we may find other problems that do not now show up now.  Also, we may develop a countermeasure for one problem but that opens the door to lots of other problems currently unknown.  One tool he talked about that was being tested on the ISS Russian sector was lower body negative pressure.  Artificial gravity was a big part of our discussion.  While everyone is enthusiastic about it, he made the point of saying we don’t know the needed spin rate nor do we know what level of gravity is needed for humans or for how long. Just spinning a spacecraft without knowing this information is unlikely to be successful let alone cost effective or economic. He also pointed out that artificial gravity is costly, requires lots of energy, a huge spacecraft which means lots of mass to orbit, & to do it, it needs to be done in a way that maximizes the benefits for the crew.  Without knowing the precise spin rate and gravity needs for humans plus how long the crew needs to be in artificial gravity, it is likely it won’t be done just for cost and economic reasons alone.  Charles emailed in about bed rest analog studies.  Joe sent in a question about lower back pain & spine issues.  As the segment ended, I asked him if humans were lousy candidates for BLEO spaceflight.  Don’t miss his answer.

In the second segment, we took a call from Dave about nuclear submarines as an analog for HSF studies.  Our next topic was space radiation which our guest discussed in detail.  I then took two email questions from B John in Sweden.  He asked about the benefits of microgravity for disabled folks, then I read a longer email from him suggesting solutions for the microgravity, psychology, and radiation issues already existed and why was NASA not proposing and developing “these simple non-medical solutions to the problems you describe.”  Dr. Shelhamer responded to his email item by item. For the most part, he agreed with what B John was saying except that his information and perspective were limited and missing key components of the scenarios he was talking about.  Mark explained why our listener’s comments were way too simple and cited some scenarios to illustrate this.  It was a fascinating reply to what many of us believe are already effective countermeasures.  Unfortunately, while what many of us suggest is correct, what we suggest does not go far enough and does not contain the specifics and details of what is actually required to make a specific countermeasure work.  Otherwise, the countermeasures are far more complex than what B John asked about in his email which you will hear me read on the program.  I asked Mark about genetic modification and that took us to the subject of personalized countermeasures.  We talked about pioneering/space settlement, childbirth & children in the space environment, even gender differences for BELO HSF.  I asked about the differences from his perspective of doing HSF to the Moon, an asteroid, Mars, or Deimos.  There are differences, don’t miss his response.  As the program was ending, I asked if a commercial company without gov. funding could decide to do a BLEO mission without all the costs and safety concerns of NASA.  Mark said it might be possible though the costs of the missions and the technology needed would make it very hard for a commercial company to carry out.  He said a short cut bare bones mission might be achieved by a commercial company but the risks for the crew would be extreme.  If you were running a commercial company and funding such a mission, would you accept these risks, plus the risk the crew might not be able to do much or be effective once they got to their destination? As the commercial company CEO, would that be a good use of company money or would you dismiss what people like our guest today have to say about these issues.  Let me know your thoughts by posting them on the blog.

Please post comments/questions on TSS blog above. Mark can be reached through me or through his PPT presentation address.

Drs. Jim Logan and John Jurist, Sunday, 7-13-14 July 14, 2014

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

Drs. Jim Logan and John Jurist, Sunday, 7-13-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2278-BWB-2014-07-13.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

Guests:  Dr. John Jurist, Dr. Jim Logan.  Topics:  EVAs, spacesuits, Moon, Mars, radiation, Aquarius HSF launch vehicle Space Enterprise Institute.  Please direct all comments & questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com.  Comments & 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 &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 both Dr. John Jurist and Dr. Jim Logan back to the show to discuss spacewalks (EVAs), spacesuits, human missions to the Moon and Mars, to the Martian Moon Deimos, the newly created Space Enterprise Institute, & the new Aquarius Reusable Human Spaceflight water based launch vehicle.  During the first segment of our 2 hour 5 minute program, our guests started talking about EVAs.  Early in the discussion, Dr. Logan provided us with important & interesting statistics regarding EVAs, then we discussed the challenges with them and spacesuits.  We talked at length about the difference in EVAs and spacesuits for the Moon, LEO, asteroids, & Mars.  We also talked economics for spacesuits given the need for a specific spacesuit depending on the destination/mission.  We talked about new designs for one size fits all & for mitigating dust problems.  Jim talked about the medical complications regarding both lunar and Martian dust.  Our guests then suggested that EVAs will likely be phased out for robotic missions.  Doug asked several questions about this via email.  Also, Jim suggested that EVAs will evolve to the concept of Forward Deployed Humans in the Loop for Telerobotic Operations.  This concept was discussed several times throughout our program.

In our second segment, Jim started with an announcement about the Space Enterprise Institute (SEI).  When it goes live in the next week or so, I will announce it on the show so you can follow it  He explained SEI, its purpose & goals.  He then talked about the concept that both Jim and Dan Adamo have developed over the past few years, Aquarius which is a reusable water-based interplanetary HSF transport.  As soon as the SEI website is online, listeners will be able to download their peer reviewed paper for free.  During this segment, Jim talked about Aquarius, John added in some details, we talked about the need for nuclear electric propulsion and why, plus the role of water with this launcher.  Both our guests explained the advantages of Deimos for the early missions, plus the return shielding and reusability as the return goes to a lunar orbit using existing water.  Radiation shielding was talked about, including the needed water and needed Radiation Protection (RP) levels.  John pointed out one advantage of Aquarius was the use of an open loop life support system.  John in Ft. Worth called about the temperatures that Jim said were needed.  Jim explained the need for 3,000 degrees C.  Both guests offered closing comments about EVAs & the direction we might be heading toward the forward deployed humans concept.  Both guests said the telerobotic concepts discussed would reduce risks, timelines, & overall mission costs.

Post your comments/questions on TSS blog.  You can reach our two guests through me.

Dr. John Jurist, Friday, 5-9-14 May 10, 2014

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

Dr. John Jurist, Friday, 5-9-14

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2241-BWB-2014-05-09.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

Guest:  Dr. John Jurist.  Topics: Space program related medical & biotechnical advances, spinoffs, 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 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 Dr. John Jurist to discuss some space program related medical and biotechnical advancements to illustrate some of the benefits and importance of human spaceflight.  Listeners also asked him about radiation and one listener in particular answered my question as to why so many space advocates & enthusiasts dismiss the human factors when planning their versions of a humans to the Moon or Mars mission.  During the first segment of our 90 minute discussion, Dr. Jurist talked about the former astronaut Deke Slayton’s experience with NASA and spaceflight during NASA’s early days when it was discovered that Deke had atrial fibrillation (afib) regarding his heart rate.  Given that I’ve made it public that afib was the reason for my medical leave of absence plus I talked on air about my cardiac ablation procedure at UCSF Medical Center, it seemed appropriate for Dr. Jurist to open with that topic.  Dr. Jurist showed how Deke’s afib experience was in many ways, with NASA research, the root of biotechnology and patient monitoring, wireless monitoring, and even the early days of afib research.  He talked about early space and aviation companies making the monitoring devices for the patient & medical public though this is hardly ever mentioned when talking about NASA spinoffs.  Listeners and I asked lots of questions about these advancements coming from sources other than NASA had NASA not been around.  Would we have had them anyway and around the same time?  Don’t miss what Dr. Jurist had to say in response to this line of questioning.  Dr. Jurist also spoke about bone density issues and osteoporosis analysis and mitigation devices and drugs, many of which have been tested and used in space.  Also, aerospace companies made the initial hardware used for bone density analysis.  Other human factors issues came up and were discussed including vision problems such as a higher incidence of cataracts for astronauts, plus issues probably resulting from fluid shifts in the eye due to microgravity.  John talked about the use of ablation procedures throughout the medical profession and Holter Monitoring for cardiac issues.  He also noted that early bone monitoring was developed by lunar related companies.  Our guest was asked just how important the medical advancements are to HSF and he said very important but they have been undersold to policy makers and the public.  They are also complicated to explain and understand.  Radiation was discussed and turned out to be a significant part of the discussion in Part 2 of our program.  Toward the end of the segment, I asked why so many space enthusiasts seem to dismiss the human factors.  Fortunately, B.John in Sweden provided what I think was an excellent answer to the question which we took it up in the second segment.  However, his note said the following:  “About 500 humans have been to space. No increase of radiation related health effects have been observed. No one have died in space, only during starting and landing. And that’s because of technical malfunctions with catastrophic explosions. That’s why most listeners think that Dr. Jurist grotesquely over estimate the imagined hazards of space flight. There exists no data at all to support his pessimistic claims.”  While I disagree with his analysis and conclusions, I do think his reasoning is held by many and it does go a long way to explain why so often the human factors issues are dismissed by some in the greater advocacy community.  Before the segment ended, I asked John to talk about the April 4, 2014 presentation at Rocky Mtn College by Walt Cunningham. The video of Walt’s talk is on our Space Show Vimeo channel and the audio is now archived on our website and blog.

In the second segment, Dave Ketchledge called to speak to the radiation issue as Dave was part of the nuclear Navy and worked in the nuclear power plan industry for years.  He had much to say about the radiation risks that debunked B.John’s comments.  Both he and Dr. Jurist spoke to beta and alpha particles, some shielding material ideas, & changes in the radiation standards used by NASA.  Later, Dr. Jurist responded to a question about space being engineering driven with the medical issues not always receiving the top priority in architecture development and mission design. B.John sent us additional emails regarding radiation, supporting art. gravity, and suggesting why NASA does not want to do HSF.  Don’t miss our responses to B.John’s emails though I said again I thought his explanation to my initial question was on the mark.  In his summary, Dr. Jurist suggested the bio medical field received important benefits from our early and ongoing space program.  He also said going to Mars, the Moon, or an asteroid would most likely produce huge benefits and medical advancements, and that should be reason enough to have a robust human spaceflight program.

Please post comments/questions on The Space Show blog above.  You can reach Dr. Jurist through me.

Open Lines and 2014 Predictions, Sunday, 12-22-13 December 23, 2013

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

Open Lines and 2014 Predictions, Sunday, 12-22-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2148-BWB-2013-12-22.mp3

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

Guest: Open Lines with Dr. David Livingston.  Topics:  Space predictions for 2014, SLS, Mars One, Inspiration Mars, radiation, policy, 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.

Welcome to our final Open Lines program for 2013.  This two hour 1 minute discussion also included space industry predictions for 2014 per our callers.  Note that the first segment was long, 90 minutes, followed by a shorter second segment.  In the first segment, I suggested seeing the NASA Earthrise 45 anniversary recreation of the Apollo 8 Earthrise photo that was released by NASA Goddard.  Andy Chaikin helped create it and does the narration.  It shows where the astronauts were coming around the Moon on Apollo 8 and how they managed to see Earthrise and get the famous picture.  You can hear the astronauts talk about it as they scramble to take the photo.  See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE-vOscpiNc.  Mike Listener was our first caller about Mars One and his being doubtful the program will ever get off the ground. Besides believing they will have sticker shock from the pending Lockheed Martin study, he doubted their capability as do I and others that called into the show.  He deferred predicting re the Code of Conduct until 2015.  SLS John from Ft. Worth called in and said congress would avoid confrontation so he predicted SLS and Orion would continue for 2014.  He also said Mars One would not happen.  We talked about radiation and the recent Classroom program addressing the subject, the Chinese lunar mission getting attention, and then he said we need a competitor to shake us up (China?).  He also was not optimist on Inspiration Mars.  Falcon Heavy Doug called in to discuss the Falcon Heavy 2014 flight which was on the SpaceX manifest.  He predicted three things for 2014:  Virgin flight, SpaceX getting close to hover technology over the ocean with about 8 flights for 2014 with good recovery progress being made, and #3, the launch of Falcon Heavy.  He thought 2015 might prove more interesting.  He repeated the Mars One comments and then he mentioned that our recent radiation Classroom show should have focused more on solutions. He gave an example using a lunar settlement scenario.  He also discounted the need to have a hab on the Moon equal the same radiation protection as provided by Earth’s atmosphere, instead suggesting 80% of that protection level would suffice for a three year lunar mission.

In the second segment, Dr. Charles Lurio called on a bad cell phone connection.  He concurred about the Virgin flight with Branson aboard, but also pitched XCOR, having much to say about their progress.  He also talked about the ISS and its growing list of commercial opportunities. When asked about Google Lunar XPrize, he said he was pessimistic. Listen to his comment for the details.  Regarding HSF, it needs to get cheaper and we need a commercial space transportation system.  He also talked about SLS and recent proposals to make the project cancel proof.

Post your comments/questions on TSS blog above.  All callers can be reached through me if you want to email them.

Classroom with Drs. John Jurist & Jim Logan, Tuesday, 12-17-13 December 16, 2013

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

Classroom with Drs. John Jurist & Jim Logan, Tuesday, 12-17-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2145-BWB-2013-12-17.mp3

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

Guests:  Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics: This was a Classroom show on radiation issues for deep space travel, Mars and Moon settlements.  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.

We welcomed Dr. Jim Logan and Dr. John Jurist to this special 2.5 hour Space Show classroom in-depth discussion on space radiation. We focused our discussion on deep space, Mars, the Moon and BLEO missions. Note that on both The Space Show blog (see above) and The Space Show Classroom blog (http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com),  Dr. Jurist has a Power Point presentation on radiation.  During the program, our guests referred to specific slides that you will want to check out.  In our first segment, Dr. Logan started out by telling us about his interest in the subject, why he has been writing a paper on the subject for publication, and how this Classroom show came about.  He cited our short duration spaceflight experience, the Apollo missions, Space Shuttle flights, and then how things started to change when we had six month ISS visits.  Dr. Logan also made it clear that space was not a benign emptiness type of environment.  He said the reality was that interplanetary space was a sea of disruptive ionizing radiation wrecking havoc on biologic systems.  We moved forward in our discussion from that point.  We talked about the findings of the MSL RAD instrument regarding radiation on the way to Mars and on the surface of Mars.  Both John and Jim spent some time putting the RAD numbers through analysis to let us know what this means for human missions to Mars.  We talked shielding, possible materials, passive and active.  We talked extensively about water and the use of hydrogen as well for shielding.  Our guests addressed the two types of radiation, the GCR (galactic cosmic rays) and the CME/solar flare.  Here, John suggested listeners look at his slide 13 as we talked about protons and neutrons.  Jim said there was no magic bullet and talked about shielding effects of Earth’s atmosphere.  Pay attention here as Jim introduced us to the  RP scale.  For being on the surface, he said nothing less than RP100 would suffice.  For the vehicle, an RP5 was required.  John introduced us to career limits for radiation for men and women astronauts of different age but the career limits are for LEO and not BLEO.  BLEO limits are expected to be more restrictive when made public in April 2014.  Earth Mars transit times were discussed, especially in the context of Brian’s email that suggested a 180 day transit time.  Both our guests said that was unlikely with chemical propulsion and all of us again stressed the need for nuclear thermal propulsion.  Microgravity was talked about, especially in the context of side effects due to the radiation environment.  Jim then brought up the EVA subject and spacesuits.  Briefly, Jim said that quite possibly the ISS construction represented the zenith of EVAs which may become a thing of the past.  Don’t miss why he said this plus his description of serious spacesuit limitations.  We talked about life support to Mars and here Jim suggested we should use Open Loop! Again, listen to the rational behind this recommendation.  Don’t miss what our guests said about theories & movies making it sound easy to go to Mars and that the radiation would be nothing more than just a few more cigarette packs a year.  Our last topic addressed informed consent issues.

In the second segment, I asked our guests for a readiness timetable were there sufficient funding and technology advancements.  I also inquired if Russia, China, and others assessed the radiation risks in a similar way to the U.S.  We then talked about radiation and space pregnancy, fetus development, birth, and informed consent for the fetus, a baby, and a child under 18.  Ethical issues regarding child birth and space pregnancy were talked about as well.  Curt had sent in email questions which our guests answered, especially about drinking irradiated water and microgravity DNA damage & what this may mean for radiation effects.  Next, I asked Jim and John to tell us their 2-5 steps for the start of designing a Mars human mission.  Jim went first and listed Day 1 and Day 2 activities, John listed his top three priorities which were different than those suggested by Jim.  Don’t miss this discussion as its very instructive as to how to do or at least start mission planning for a human mission BLEO.  Roger sent in a question asking if the crew should be senior citizens since they have more resistance to radiation.  Don’t miss what our guests said about this idea.  It may surprise you.  Our next topic was would going to Deimos be easier.  Yes, it would but it would be a very different kind of human  mission.  Jim had some great comments about Mars gravity.  Briefly, he said it was the “best.” Later, when asked to compare the Moon and Mars, our guests said lunar radiation was worse than Mars.  Also, the Mars atmosphere does provide limited shielding while there is no such thing on the Moon.  Jim had earlier talked about a sphere being the perfect shape for an interplanetary spaceship.  Shelia emailed in wanting to know if heavy lift made a difference and if the sphere was so good, why were capsules being used? Don’t miss the response.  We then talked about the complexities of rendezvous and docking, especially in the context of fewer launches (heavy lift) as compared to many more launches (smaller rockets).  Near the end, I asked our guests if either thought our nation, the public, NASA, our leaders and politicians were sufficiently motivated to do a human Mars mission.  Jim did not think so and had much more to say in reply to this question.  John was more pessimistic.  Both thought it was more likely that the private sector would mount a human Mars mission rather than our seeing a government mission, but raising the needed capital might turn out to be a show stopper.  The three of us then talked about what it was like growing up in the 40’s, 50’s, and 60’s as compared to today.  John and I (John is a bit more than 2 years older than me) were probably more harsh than Jim in our assessment of today, but we all realize that the younger generations will be taking us to space, building the next smartphone and more. I talked about my visits to Google, Apple, SpaceX, etc. and the excitement in the air in belonging in their work forces which does not seem to exist with NASA. This opened the door for Jim to put it on the line about his NASA experiences and the potential opportunities providing NASA can somehow reorganize.  He did not think the type of reorganization he was talking about would happen.  Both our guests left us with excellent takeaway points and concluding pearls of wisdom.

Please post your comments/questions on the blogs. You can reach either of our guests through me.

                                                  Radiation Biophysics and Human Spaceflight

Dan Adamo, Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist, Tuesday, 11-19-13 November 19, 2013

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

THE SPACE SHOW CLASSROOM

Dan Adamo, Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist, Tuesday, 11-19-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2125-BWB-2013-11-19.mp3

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

Guests:  Dan Adamo, Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics:  “Trajectory Challenges Faced By Orbiting Infrastructure Supporting Multiple Earth Departures For 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.

Welcome to this special Space Show Classroom program with Dan Adamo, Dr. Logan, Dr. Jurist, and myself.  There was no break during this 2 hour 21 minute discussion which at times was very technical.  For those of you interested in missions to Mars, orbiting space infrastructure including depots, Earth & LEO departure points, mission and launch trades, payload issues and trades, radiation concerns, and more, you will find this discussion to be extremely informative and educational.  Guest Dan Adamo took us through the charts and graphs which you can access on either The Space Show Blog or The Space Show Classroom blog ((see https://thespaceshow.wordpress.com and http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com).  Access the document ReuseForMars to follow the MP3 audio transcript. The other document on the blogs is a longer white paper version of the .pdf we used for last night’s discussion.  Dan introduced the topic to us, talked about his tangential work in this area at JSC last summer and the space community interest in orbiting infrastructure, especially fuel depots.  Dan then took us through the .pdf document discussing and explaining each chart and graph.  Rather than report on his page by page discussion, note that Jim, John, and I asked lots of questions per each chart and graph as did listeners by email and later in the discussion by phone.  Some of the main points and take aways from this discussion focused on inclination, launch location, penalties and advantages relating to orbiting infrastructure reuse for Earth departures to interplanetary destinations. For example, Russian launch sites are far to the north and will not be as efficient for Mars launches as sites to the south.  But as Doug discovered when he asked about equatorial launches, they benefit from a boost due to the inertial rotation of the Earth for higher initial launch speed, but otherwise there is no real benefit from the equatorial launch because minimum Earth orbit inclination is imposed by interplanetary geometry.  Another important point had to do with the reuse of orbital infrastructure.  As you will hear, it’s virtually worthless to reuse infrastructure in low Earth orbit to support Mars mission departure, including a depot, unless it can be repurposed for something else other than a Mars mission.  Don’t miss Dan’s explanation of this.  While we talked about Earth departure windows for Mars at two year intervals, we learned that not all these windows are equal.  Here, using the tables in Dan’s document, we were able to see just how unequal the Earth departure windows can be.  We talked a lot about Elliptical Earth Parking Orbit (EEPO) and the relationships with apogee and perigee for our payload departures for Mars.  Later, Dan outlined how we can “store” the cryo in the upperstage of our rocket as kinetic energy in the EEPO shortly after launch, a way to store the cryo energy without having to mitigate boiloff or transfer it between spacecraft.  Much was said about radiation and when you go through the trajectories and see them plotted as Dan has done, we learned that not all trajectories are equal as to radiation exposure.  Other important elements of our discussion that we focused on included the trans-Mars Injection (TMI) and asymptotic Earth departure velocity (v_infinity).  Listener Jimmy emailed us about another paper by a Goddard team that Dan was familiar with and he used some of their data and research.  Access their poster at www.lpi.usra.edu/sbag/science/NHATS_Accessible_NEAs_Summary.png (note you may need to cut & paste the URL in your browser).  As Dan & our Classroom panel went through charts, graphs, & tables, we applied the information to launches Earth departures in 2020 and 2022.  It was valuable to see how the constraints change, not always for the better either.  Note that we started with a 400 KM orbit but later dropped it to about 340 km above earth.  I suspect you will find the changing constraints and parameters to be more than interesting.  Near the end, Doug called in to ask about the reuse of the repurposing orbital infrastructure, including depots, as possible infrastructure for the Moon or a cislunar project.  Not only is this a possibility, we learned that something like the orbits that would be involved in doing this were used for the recent NASA GRAIL Mission.  During our discussion throughout the program, we talked about the two Mars missions now en route to Mars, Maven and the Indian mission Mangalyaan.  Note what was said about Mangalyaan and how it is making use of the type of information we discussed in this program to do a lower energy mission to Mars.  In fact, one of the hot topics of our discussion was the comparison between long-way trajectories and short-way trajectories to Mars, what each means for arrival at Mars, capture by Mars, and the return to Earth and capture by Earth.  The reentry speed coming back to Earth is crucial as these speeds can be extremely fast with lots of heat to dissipate.  Keeping speeds below 12k/s for a human Mars mission is vital.

Please post your comments/questions on our blogs and we will do our best to respond to you.  If you want to reach any of our guests, do so through me using drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Dan’s charts and graphs are here:  MultipleMarsDeparturesR1

To best follow tonight’s discussion, refer to;  ReuseForMars

Robert Walker, Friday, 10-4-13 October 4, 2013

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

Robert Walker, Friday, 10-4-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2099-BWB-2013-10-04.mp3

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

Guest:  Robert Walker.  Topics:  Humans to Mars and other destinations in the solar system.  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.

We welcomed Robert Walker to the program for a 1 hour 28 minute discussion about his analysis, conclusions, and thoughts regarding humans putting colonies on Mars and elsewhere in the solar system.  You can read his articles at www.science20.com/robertinventor.  Robert has a YouTube channel at www.youtube/marsandspace.  I urge listeners to read his articles as they are thought provoking.  Though you might not agree with his conclusions, keep an open mind, his articles are very informative and what he has to say should be part of our human spaceflight to Mars discussion.  In other words, don’t dismiss or blow off what Robert and others are saying about the issues he brought to our attention today.  We started the discussion with his August 14th op-ed, “Ten Reasons Not To Live On Mars – Great Place to Explore.”  Rather than going through each of the ten items, for purposes of this summary and our discussion, we will talk about planetary protection and making sure humans do not contaminate any part of Mars for scientific exploration.  Robert referenced the UN as well as NASA and other nation’s Planetary Protection Policy against human contamination on Mars and the provisions in the Outer Space Treaty that impose this obligation on all signing countries.  Planetary Protection has been discussed before on several Space Show programs but Robert talked about it in the context of why humans to Mars missions will not be allowed and should not be undertaken.  He is much more supportive of orbiting missions such as Inspiration Mars or even going to Phobos and Deimos.  Most of our first segment is about this subject.  We also talked about sample return missions using the ISS or the Moon, exoplanets, lunar settlement, asteroid resources, and space exploration in general.

In the second segment, I opened asking him about his short article on the true color of a specifically discovered exoplanet which was cobalt blue as a result of a continuous rain of liquid glass.  Robert got several listener emails about planetary protection, Elon Musk and his plans to settle Mars, ways to avoid contamination, and more.  He even got a question or two asking why in the literature ETs that have come to other in the stories (maybe), etc. don’t seem to have a regard for avoiding contaminating Earth.  This was a fun discussion. Another listener asked him a question about his musical and math background and using music to communicate with ET in sci fi movies, wondering if there was any science in fact to the idea of musical communication.  Another fun discussion.  Jody asked about going to a dry part of Mars with humans to avoid contamination.  Don’t miss Robert’s reply to this scenario.  Robert also spoke about teleportation, saying it was key to space exploration.

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog.  You can email Robert Walker at support@robertinventor.com.  His website is www.robertinventor.com.

Dr. Pascal Lee, Tuesday, 9-24-13 September 25, 2013

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

Dr. Pascal Lee, Tuesday, 9-24-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2092-BWB-2013-09-24.mp3

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

Guest:  Dr. Pascal Lee.  Topics:  Dr. Lee discussed HSF for Mars, pending Mars mission, Mars science, Earth analogs & his new book, “Mission 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.

We welcomed Dr. Pascal Lee back to the program to discuss HSF to Mars, pending Mars programs, his new children’s book, “Mission Mars” (www.scholastic.com/missionmars).  During the first segment of this 1 hour 58 minute program, Dr. Lee talked about our operating Mars rovers, Opportunity and Curiosity.  He talked about Curiosity looking for organics and the confusion over not finding methane.  I then asked our guest about the two potential HSF missions to Mars, Mars One and Inspiration Mars.  As you will hear, Dr. Lee was highly skeptical regarding Mars One and suggested it might not be good for the “cause.”  He was supportive of Inspiration Mars and had much to say about that mission and the likelihood of survival for the astronaut couple on board.  I asked him what he thought the impact on HSF and especially humans to Mars mission would be if the Inspiration Mars crew died.  He offered an interesting perspective on this depending where along the mission the crew died.  We also talked about possible NASA involvement in Inspiration Mars plus the challenges in the reentry given the capsule’s high speed coming back from Mars and entering our atmosphere.  I also asked if Inspiration Mars put a damper on many of the Phobos-Deimos mission plans.  Pascal was asked about the Mars One business plan modeled on the Olympics and virtual reality TV shows.  Pascal was not optimistic that such a plan could drive a Mars mission but did think there might be a place in a human Mars mission for a TV show.  Pascal then described the hostility of the Mars environment for human life. This is an interesting factual analysis of what the Martian environment is like & what it would mean for human survival.  Near the end of the first segment, we talked about Pascal’s first book, “Mission Mars” which is aimed for the 9-12 year old market.  Make sure you visit the book’s interactive website, www.scholastic.com/missionmars.  The book is officially released in November but teachers & others can order it now from the Scholastic site.  I also asked how he explained the potential for alien and microbial life to young kids, along with the risks to humans going to Mars.

In our second segment, we started off discussing the Drake Equation. Dr. Lee explained in detail why he believes that N in the equation is a very small number.  In summary, even if there are other intelligent worlds out there, they may be so few in number and so far away that for all practical purposes we are alone in the universe so we better be good stewards of what we have with Earth.  Pascal mentioned the dinosaurs in terms of the evolution of life on Earth and he noted how long it took for something like modern day humans to evolve (around 4.5 billion years).  Some listeners asked him if we were not so different from the dinosaurs given the violence and killing humans do to one another.  Next, we talked about the Humvee expedition as a Mars analog across the North West passage.  Known as the Northwest Passage Drive Expedition, this was an amazing trip.  A documentary was made and will be available next year. I will let listeners know when it is available.  From fuel to cold to polar bears to almost losing the Humvee by falling through the sea-ice, this was quite the expedition over a three year period.  Note what Dr. Lee said about the expedition challenges in comparison to what it would be like to living on Mars.  Briefly, as hard and challenging as the North West Passage Expedition was, it would be nothing compared to living on Mars!

Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show Blog per the above URL.  You can email Dr. Pascal Lee at pascal.lee@marsinstitute.net.

Open Lines, Sunday, 8-25-13 August 26, 2013

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

Open Lines, Sunday, 8-25-13

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2075-BWB-2013-08-25.mp3

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

Guest:  Open Lines with Dr. David Livingston.  Topics:  Mars missions, space advocacy, SLS & NASA lunar missions.  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.

Today’s Open Line show was in two segments over 2 hours and 23 minutes.  During the first segment, I put forth a few topics for discussion, including the NASA plan for returning to the Moon with two SLS launches over a year with the lander in orbit for about six months waiting for the second SLS flight.  This topic seemed to be the prevailing topic for the entire show covering both segments as listeners wanted to talk about SLS, Falcon Heavy, heavy lift and depots in general, and the announced NASA plan.  We also talked about the NASA asteroid missions as several listeners wanted to comment that they were less than enthusiastic about these missions.  Of course the majority of the listeners were critical of SLS and the return to the Moon mission.  Many wondered why such architecture, why so many years to build out the full heavy lift SLS, especially when looking back to what was accomplished with Apollo over half the time.

In the second segment, Tim called in to talk about Mars One and SLS.  Then Dr. Jurist called in questioning the SLS lunar mission, Congress, NASA, and the asteroid missions.  John had to much to say on these topics so don’t miss all of his comments.  We also talked about Mars One and pregnancy/child birth in space, on Mars, on the mission, and the moral and ethical issues surrounding  this issue.  Before John got off the line, he wanted to know why so many space advocates dismissed hard science in their chosen space plans and projects.  I attempted an answer but not sure it does justice to what I believe is a complex question with lots of subjectivity surrounding it.  See what you think and post your comments on our blog.  Near the end, Patrick called back about the space advocacy topic and talked about advocacy in an echo chamber but also what visionaries accomplish.  This was also an interesting discussion. We ended talking about successful, forward thinking, crowd funding space missions today and we had much to say in support of the entrepreneurs behind these projects.

Please post your comments and questions on The Space Show blog.  You can contact any of the callers by email through me.