Annual Appeal, Nov. 21, 2011

Dear Space Show Listeners:

My best wishes to all of you for a great upcoming Holiday Season and New Years.  The Space Show and I personally wish you a terrific 2012 chocked full of health, happiness, economic prosperity, and a peaceful world.  I, like all of you, hope for a year of  significant and productive space development. The Space Show/OGLF is absolutely 100% committed to that long term outcome.

Permit me to take this opportunity to say thank you to all of you who have so generously supported The Space Show/One Giant Leap Foundation (OGLF) during this year and in past years. The Space Show relies entirely upon your support for its continued operation and programming. And we never ever take fees from guests to be on the program though many guests use The Space Show for the promotion of their fine books and exciting intellectual property.  To continue with free program access, archives, podcasts, webinars, The Classroom series, and programs for the coming year and beyond, along with the opportunity for many of you to continue promoting and discussing your own work, projects, and views, we need to be ever stronger in our financial foundation for 2012 and the future.

This year is quickly coming to a close, and yes, its been a challenge for many of us, including The Space Show. We all know the economic struggles faced by our nation and many of us at the individual level. Yet many of us see viable paths to solutions to our national and international problems running through the broad arena of space development and exploration. So please support The Space Show/OGLF by making a 2011 contribution to help maintain and further develop Space Show and OGLF programming, benefits, outreach, and services.

You can make your donation online using Pay Pal at either www.thespaceshow.com/donate.asp or www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/individuals.htm.  Simply click on the Pay Pal logo.  If you prefer mailing a check, please make the check payable to One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc. and mail it in care of me to P.O. Box 95, Tiburon, CA 94920 USA.  Remember that OGLF is a 501C3 non-profit corporation so you will get a federal tax deduction to the extent allowed by U.S. law.  OGLF is also a California Public Benefit Corporation so if you pay California taxes you can get a California tax deduction as well.  Please check with your tax advisor for the applicability of these potential tax deduction rules to your specific situation.

Your gifts make possible The Space Show programming, the free archives going back to the beginning in 2001, and the upcoming programming for 2012 and the future. It is your generosity that makes it possible to bring to all of you, on a global level, a wide diversity of topics, issue discussions, and guests from around the world.

Thank you for your support. I look forward to sharing the new year with you through The Space Show and the One Giant Leap Foundation, Inc.  Please contact me at drspace@thespaceshow.com if you have any questions.

Best Wishes and Sincerely,

Dr. David Livingston

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1552-BWB-2011-05-03.mp3

Guests:  Classroom:  Dr. David Livingston, Joe Carroll, Dr. John Jurist, Dr. Jim Logan.  Topics:  Manned artificial gravity research station in LEO.  Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show Classroom program/guest(s) on the Space Show Classroom blog, http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show Classroom programming. This two hour plus Classroom program was continuous without a break.  For this program, refer to the Power Point presentation by Joe, “Design Concepts for a Manned Artificial Gravity Research Facility.”  Mr. Carroll took us through this presentation slide by slide, plus he responded to listener and co-host questions throughout the program.  You can find this presentation plus his longer IAC Conference paper on The Space Show Classroom blog under Presentation Materials for our Classroom program for May 3, 2011.  Rather than writing a summary of this program, let me say that Mr. Carroll has given considerable thought to the engineering and human factors/human physiology issues regarding an artificial gravity research station in LEO.  Listener questions addressed technical issues relating to spin, center of mass/gravity, hits by orbital debris items and more.  Throughout this Classroom discussion, Joe took us into the technology, operations, and why’s regarding his artificial gravity research station.  Many issues were discussed including but not limited to Mars & lunar gravity, .06 G, spin rates, the Coriolis effect, the Gemini experiments, a Moon/Mars Dumbbell Concept, Airbeam tunnels, radial structure lengths, and much more.  Toward the end of the program, we discussed the economics, costs, and who might pay for and deploy such a station.  You will hear Joe talk about the present economic, cost, and R&D uncertainties for such a project, but you will also hear him talk about the commercial potentials, who should be given “free” access to the research station and why, the use of it with Space X as well as Bigelow, and why not doing it as a NASA project makes sense though he advocated NASA as a customer.  At the very end, I asked Joe about building some small models to help those of us who are not engineers in understanding and even visualizing his concept.  He liked that idea, talked about larger models of the size of a Boeing 737 cabin (he used this cabin size throughout his discussion and presentation), and possibly locating it at a company such as Space X.  As we concluded our discussion, all of us said that after 50 years of human spaceflight, to not be able to answer any of the questions regarding the issues discussed in this program was criminal. Furthermore, as you will hear Dr. Logan and the others say, you can determine the credibility of a human space program by the speed and determination of the commitment to understanding the necessary gravity needs for people, plants, and animals in space.  If there is no commitment to understanding these issues, the program is more likely a rhetoric only program.  Post your comments & questions on the blog URL above. You can email Joe Carroll at tether@cox.net.  All participants can be emailed through me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.

Artificial Gravity

The Space Show Classroom returns with special guest Joe Carroll discussing the subject of artificial gravity.  Mr. Carroll has provided us with two Power Point Presentations which he will be using during our Classroom discussion.  Both presentations are available below.  Our Classroom discussion with co-hosts Dr. John Jurist and Dr. Jim Logan will be Tuesday, May 3, 2011 from 7-9 PM PDT.

DesignConceptsForAMannedArtificialGravityResearchFacilityForIAC2010Sept14

Artificial Gravity IAC2010 Presentation revised 2011April30

Please hold your comments until this Classroom program is aired, then post questions and comments on the blog post for this Classroom program.

Thank you.

Dr. David Livingston, Host

The Space Show

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1541-BWB-2011-04-05.mp3

Guests:  Classroom:  Dan Adamo, Jon Goff, Dr. John Jurist, Dr. Jim Logan.  Topics:  This Classroom program was an advanced in-space propellant depot discussion. Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show Classroom program/guest(s) on the Space Show Classroom blog, http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show Classroom programming.  We welcomed back our Classroom co-hosts Drs. Logan and Jurist and our two propellant depot experts, Jon Goff and Dan Adamo for a comprehensive graduate school level two hour discussion about propellant depots.  Also note that that as part of our upcoming Space Show webinar series, we did test video streaming during this program but as I said, we did not archive the video stream.  We will let you know when our next video streaming test will take place.  During our first segment, Dr. Logan set the tone with his opening statement when he said that resource pre-emplacement was essential if we were to go beyond LEO with chemical rockets.  Dan said the ISS was already a depot that transferred hypergolic bipropellant fuels.  This opened the door to cryogenic fuel transfer and a comprehensive discussion about boil off and the goal of reaching Zero-Boiloff Cryogenic Storage of the fuels in space.  Much was said about this, the energy needed to separate hydrogen and oxygen and why cryogenic storage was necessary in space.  We discussed some options were a depot to be located on the surface of the Moon but the issue of having sufficient power available for the separation is a significant one.  Launch windows, departure schedules, and depot locations were discussed.  We also talked about the idea of placing the depots in convenient places to attract multiple suppliers though this presents significant challenges with space traffic management problems.  In our second segment we started with a listener question about using NOFBX  and would it significantly help to reduce the complexity of a depot.  Jon Goff responded to this question.  Dr. Jurist brought up the issue of launch schedule reliability were it necessary to have between three to six flights including crew rendezvous happening within a specific time frame.  Both Dan and Jon referenced the Target NEO conference from February 2011, specifically the Chel Stromgren paper, “Getting to the Starting Line -Launch and Assembly Reliability for Deep Space Missions” (www.targetneo.org/Sessions/Session%203/TargetNEO-Session3-Stromgren.pdf).  During this segment, we discussed boil off rates and what this actually means regarding propellant losses and economic hits.  One of the recurring issues during our discussion focused on NASA Technology Readiness Levels (TRL). SpaceX heavy lift was discussed in the context of propellant depots as was heavy lift in general.  Bigelow hotels were also mentioned in the context of depots but there was also a discussion of why it might be too risky to put depots too close to human operated space hardware.  As our discussion was drawing to a close, our guests talked about the road forward. Each of our experts and our co-hosts provided short summary statements and as you will hear, each differed so don’t miss what each said.  We welcome your comments and questions so post them to our Classroom blog for this program.  If you want to email a specific guest, send your note to me and I will forward it to the person of your choice.

1.  Dan Adamo has asked that his document, “Potential Propellant Depot Locations Supporting Beyond-LEO Human Exploration” be made available to Space Show listeners.  This document can be accessed below:

PropDepotChartsFISOr2

2.  Classroom participant Jon Goff has suggested we become familiar with this propellant depot study found on the NASA Watch website:

http://nasawatch.com/archives/2011/03/using-commercia.html

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1498-BWB-2011-01-23.mp3

Guests:  Classroom:  Dr. David Livingston, Dr. John Jurist, Dr. Jim Logan.  Topics:  The Space Show Classroom introduction for 2011.  Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show Classroom program/guest(s) on the Space Show Classroom blog,http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com.  Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show Classroom  programming.  The Space Show Classroom is back and this one hour program was our introduction to the 2011 semester.  Co-hosts Jim and John and I went through our suggested course outline which I will finalize upon my return from Grand Forks and post on the Classroom blog as soon as possible.  While we have a full agenda as you will hear, we are open to and we welcome your course and topic suggestions, as well as suggestions for possible expert guests for the Classroom programs.  Today, listeners asked us some detailed questions about radiation, solar flares, and a few of our suggested discussion topics, but this introductory program was more about letting everyone know that the Classroom has returned and what we will most probably be covering during the year., We also introduced a few new rules for the Classroom.  For example, we will not be using the toll free number for the Classroom this season.  There are a few reasons for this including the need for more phone lines when we do point and counterpoint discussions which we want to do more often.  In addition, we all thought that many of the listener phone calls last year took us off the Classroom main topic.  Remember, the Classroom is different from regular Space Show programs in that we do a two hour simulated graduate school course discussion and we need to stay focused and on topic just as in a real classroom.  The Classroom has its own blog per the URL above.  All Classroom shows are archived on The Space Show website, Gigadial for podcasting, and on the Classroom blog. They are not archived on the regular Space Show blog.  The Classroom blog is moderated and we do not post any comments or material not directly on point with Classroom programs and discussions.  If you want to contact the Classroom co-hosts, all of us have our email addresses listed on the blog.  Mine of course is drspace@thespaceshow.com.  One other Classroom rule we used last year and it seemed to work fine so it will be used this year as well is that all emails and comments about the programs or for the guests directed to me need to be posted on The Classroom Blog so everyone can see them and participate in the discussion.  If you do not post your comment yourself, I will post it on the blog under your name.  For the Classroom, we want to expand our discussions to as many markets and interested people as possible and one of the best ways to do that is to make sure that we have a variety of points of view on the blog along with quality discussions.  Finally, most all Classroom programs will be on a Sunday or Tuesday and just as we did last year, every Classroom program on the schedule, in the newsletters, and on archives will have “Classroom” at the beginning so these programs can be easily identified..  Thank you for participating in the 2011 Space Show Classroom series of programs.

 Thursday, Septembeer 23, 2010

 Archive Notes and Program Information

 The Space Show Classroom Lesson 13 can be downloaded or heard

at:

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1428-BWB-2010-09-23.mp3

Guests:  Classroom featuring Dr. David Livingston, Dr. John Jurist, Dr. Jim Logan and Dan Adamo, Dallas Bienhoff.  Topic:  Orbital Propellant Depot.  Welcome back to this Classroom program focusing on an intense and comprehensive 2 hour 25 minute two segment program.  Please note that as with all Classroom programs, your emails and comments are to be posted on The Classroom Blog at http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com once this program is archived as the Lesson 13 Archived Program. I also want to point out that there were significant telephone line and audio issues on the lines with some of our expert panel members and I apologize in advance for less than perfect audio conditions.  This was a comprehensive and detailed discussion on the pros and cons of orbital propellant depots, the places to put them, economics, launches, constraints, regulations, and much more.  In our opening segment, Dallas started out by talking about the reference study, comments made by Dr. Mike Griffin as the NASA Administrator regarding the value of fuel in a depot to NASA and more.  Dan followed with some of the orbital constraints involved along with operational logistical issues.  At times this was a technical discussion but one that I believe everyone should hear and pay attention to because the discussion with Dallas and Dan along with the co-hosts was at a very high level and all of us learned a lot during this program.  Some of the issues we talked about during this segment included loitering on orbit for perhaps up to a week using the Orion and Altair.  You will hear why this is so and why the system was not capable of landing any where any time.  We talked about LEO depots, concerns and trajectory constraints.  Dan talked about Plain of Regression which is 7 degrees west and what this means for depot placement, Delta V, and ingress egress.  Dallas said that their study only looked at the Moon and never looked at other destinations.  The study he referenced was for back and forth to the Moon using L1.  Other topics addressed launch rates and the number of launches required to put a specific mass on the Moon using the depot as compared to using a heavy lift rocket.  The issue of divorcing a commercially operated depot from existing federal regulations was a hot topic in both segments with Dallas offering one view and Dan looking at the problem from a different perspective given his operational experience, specifically with the Eastern ranges.  The second segment started with our discussing docking with Dan pointing out why docking was risky and problem oriented, and Dallas talking about how we can and will use docking with the depots.  Dallas was also clear that the depot was not a replacement for heavy lift but an enhancement of capability for all launchers, including heavy lift. Later, when our guests were asked for their ideal programs, were we to be starting out with a fresh slate, no legacy anything, one would designs systems for specific environments and as Dallas said, you might not need heavy lift but that is not the world we live in today.  Launch and propellant economics and the business case for a depot came up during this segment.  Our co-hosts had many questions, we talked about cryogenic fuel boilff, power to the depot, and lots more issues.  Dallas outlined how its thought that the boiloff can be used to station keep the depot.  Other topics that were addressed were civil space traffic control, collision avoidance, Bigelow Aerospace as a customer, developing markets and customers, and the size needed for a heavy lift rocket.  Numerous other topics and issues were discussed by our experts and co-hosts during this program.  Remember to post your comments and questions on the blog. Please do not send tem to me but if you do, I will post them on the blog under your name.

Propellant Depot Discussion

Please note that the copyright for each .pdf document posted here belongs to the author.  To use or reference  this material, you must obtain permission from either Dallas Bienhoff or Dan Adamo. Thank you for respecting this copyright requirement.

1.  DRAv5.0commentaryR2   This .pdf document is by Dan Adamo and titled Comments on Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0.

2. CircEPOdepartR0  This .pdf document is by Dan Adamo and titled Interplanetary  Departure From Circular Earth Parking Orbits (EPQs).

3.  100527_Cislunar_ISDC10_R2_NoVideo  This .pdf document is by Dallas Bienhoff and titled Propellant Depots and a Reusable Cislunar Transportation Architecture.

4.  070526_NSS_ISDC_Depot_Insfrastructure_Bienhoff  This .pdf document is by Dallas Bienhoff and titled A Propellant Depot System Concept for Outgoing Exploration.

5.  090414_Depot_for_Constellation_Update_Bienhoff  This .pdf document is by Dallas Bienhoff and titled LEO Propellant Depot: A Viable Opportunity?

6.  070720_Beyond_COTS_Panel_R1_Bienhoff  This .pdf document is by Dallas Bienhoff and titled LEO Propellant Depot:  A Future Opportunity?

Sunday, July 18, 2010

 Archive Notes and Program Information

 The Space Show Classroom Lesson 12 can be downloaded or heard

at:

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1394-BWB-2010-07-18.mp3

Guests: Classroom featuring Dr. Livingston, Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist.  Topics:  This is a summary and critique of The Space Show Classroom Series for this year.  This program will also be archived on The Space Show Classroom Blog, http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com.  Please post your feedback, comments, and questions to the blog, do not send the to the three co-hosts.  Anything we receive will be uploaded to the blog.  We started this summary program with the three co-hosts critiquing the Classroom program.  Dr. Jurist provided was first, followed by Dr. Logan, and then mine which turned into a minor rant.  All of us agreed that the Classroom series was a mixed bag and we graded it and ourselves accordingly.  We thought we missed our target audience, & our feedback so far was insufficient and disappointing given the effort put into the programming.  I also described the rating system which I have mentioned on other shows re archives on Live365.com and noted that exceptional shows got horrible ratings, mentioning again that for the most part, the more fantasy driven a guest or program is, the higher the rating. We spent a considerable time talking about this aspect of the Classroom and our frustration.  We stressed over and over again the need for feedback on the Classroom series, honest feedback, including feedback on the blog, especially if we are to consider another semester of the Classroom in January.  Our co-hosts talked about how ideological we have become as a nation and how little thinking we now do and that critical thinking is not taught to students.  Later in this segment, I asked both co-hosts what their favorite Classroom programs were and the rocket equation and flight dynamics programs were pointed out, mostly because those programs provided the root foundation for most of the others operating and visiting in space is based on those two components.  For most of this session, we talked about some of the shortfalls we saw with the Classroom series and we integrated that into our culture and educational system because the problems that we detected by doing the Classroom were not just limited to space.  Heavy lift was discussed as part of this critique and in talking about the rocket equation, Dr. Logan brought up Initial Mass in Low Earth Orbit (IMLEO) as an illustration point.  We then talked about Congress and the difference between tactical decision making and enabling the strategic.  Life sciences were then discussed and our co-hosts talked about why so many want to dismiss the findings of life scientists because they are seen as obstacles. Even engineers do this.  We had several callers during this segment talking about a specific question, not so much the Classroom summary.  As we started the second segment of this two hour program, all of us again stressed the need for useful feedback, a thumbs up or down on the Classroom programming.  Jim talked about a possible point counter-point format for a future program and I asked about the likelihood of improving our ability to reach the target audience by doing the Classroom with video and webcams.  Gravity became a topic in this segment with questions about going to an asteroid.  We also talked about the ISS and the application of life sciences.  As we concluded our program, Drs. Logan and Jurist said they wanted to know how listeners were impacted by the Classroom.  For example, did anyone change their mind about an issue or subject based on a Classroom program.  We concluded our summary program by reminding people about the written paper opportunity (contact me for details) and that if we are to continue the Classroom series in a following semester, we need meaningful feedback, plus or negative, and information from you that can help us do a better job. Also, what topics would you like covered should we resume the Classroom next semester.  Please post all your comments, questions, etc. on the Classroom blog.

 Sunday, July 11, 2010

 Archive Notes and Program Information

 The Space Show Classroom Lesson 11 can be downloaded or heard

at:

http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1389-BWB-2010-07-11.mp3

Guests:  Classroom featuring Brian Weeden, Dr. Livingston, Dr. John Jurist.  Topic:  Space Sustainability:  Environmental and Crowding Issues Across All Orbital Domains.  Lesson 11 for The Space Show Classroom focused on Space Sustainability issues with guest instructor Brian Weeden of the Secure World Foundation.  Brian’s paper on this subject is on the Classroom Blog under Lesson 11 Presentation Materials and at www.secureworldfoundation.org/images/SWF_Space%20Sustainability%20Booklet.pdf.  We started our first of two segments with a definition of space sustainability and where we as space-fairing nations were in terms of a pending disaster because of orbital debris pollution.  We talked about human spaceflight and issues surrounding it.  From our human spaceflight discussion, we evolved to satellites of all types and scientific payloads.  One of the questions and comments brought up by Dr. Jurist was the difference between natural debris and man made debris.  Brian also took us through Conjunction Assessment and we discussed it in terms of the US and the Russians who are the only ones that can do it at this time.  A listener brought up issues about potential SSP systems.  As you will hear, there is not much debris in the orbits that would be used for an SSP system.  Listen carefully to what Brian said about this.  We talked about GPS and its importance and how evolved economies would be adversely impacted without access to space resources.  As we drew to a close in the first segment, Brian talked about the size of objects and said being hit by anything 7CM and larger would be catastrophic.  From 1-6CM serious damage would be sustained.  As we started the second segment, we summarized and addressed a few additional questions on orbital debris and GPS, including a discussion on the vulnerability of GPS to a hostile attack.  We then focused our attention on Space Situational Awareness (SSA)which implies one knows what is going on in space all the time.  So far, the US and the Russians are the strongest nations applying SSA but more and more countries are starting to use it.  SSA also implies the use of Space Traffic Management.  Some of the questions Brian brought to our attention included who pays for these services and who makes important decisions.  He said the UN Treaties were OK but were based on the framework of the Cold War.  What is happening now is more in line with voluntary agreements.  Brian also said there was no legal definition for space debris so legally there no way to discriminate between valuable space hardware and useless space debris.  We talked about which countries are getting more and more involved in these discussions and as it turns out, most do, even those nations considered rogue.  Toward the end of the program, a question came in about the use of a nuclear bomb to deflect or destroy an incoming NEO.  Brian said it was not allowed by current treaties but that the problem would not be solved until a real incident was upon us and a nuclear nation had to make such a decision.  We talked about the role of the UN COPUOS, the UN Action Team 14 and the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC).  For your questions and comments, please post them on The Space Show Classroom Blog under this post at http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com.  All questions sent to me will be posted on the blog.