The Space Show
The Space Show
The Space Show focuses on timely and important issues influencing the development of outer-space commerce, space tourism,space exploration and space development. The Space Show is committed to facilitating our becoming a space-faring nation and society with a growing and self-sustaining space-faring economy. The Space Show also focuses on other related subjects of interest to us all.
Station feed:  Created by: David Livingston |
Created on: 12 May 2005 Language: English |
| << < 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 > >> | |
| Add this to another station |
Futron 2010 Space Competitive Index, Monday, 10-4-10 (47.34MB; download) -- Guests: Peggy Slye, Jay Gullish. Topics: Futron's 2010 Space Competitive Index: A Comparative Analysis of How Countries Invest In and Benefit from Space Industry. We welcomed back Jay Gullish and for the first time, Peggy Slye, the COO and Director of the Space & Telecommunications Division at Futron. Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. In the first segment of this two segment program, Jay provided us with an introduction to the Futron Corporation and its space analysis work including the Space Competitive Index. Jay then provided us with a quick overview of the status of the space industry as measured over the past five years, proving to everyone that the space industry does incur global economic growth and that it is a wealth creating industry. During this introduction, he broke this analysis down into industry segments and U.S. national agencies. A big part of this analysis was the growth in the commercial side of the space industry. Additional topics included the aerospace workforce and how technology has changed the industry by reducing the need for some jobs but increasing the need for skilled jobs in related areas. Our guests talked about military services, distance learning, and telemedicine as examples. This is an important discussion you do not want to miss. This discussion brought us to the educational problems in the U.S., specifically with regards to STEM. This discussion was also very important and certainly shed light on some major challenges we in the U.S. are facing and will be facing for years to come. In returning to the Space Competitive Index, Jay said that they used 50-60 indicators for the report and they now have three years of trends in the space industry which enables better analysis. He then talked about the report's focus on the major nations, breaking them into three tiers. One of the important trends discussed was the loss by the U.S. of relative space competitiveness over the years to other nations. We talked about this in detail and I asked about the impact on policy decisions influence this declining trend. Our guests had much to say about this, including the lead we have in military space, the impact of ITAR, and then the issue of policy and leadership. This is a must listen to segment so no matter what, do not miss it. Later in this segment, listeners asked about obtaining reliable data for their report and how such data was obtained, especially from several of the countries included in the report. In our final segment, our guests were asked about space as a wealth creation investment and if that was a fact, why government policy does not invest what it takes to produce more wealth by increasing the value of our space industry. This is another discussion you do not want to miss. Here we talked about the opportunity cost for investing in space over other government activities. We then talked about space in China, Japan, Israel, and India. Our guests told us the full report was available for purchase from www.futron.com for $199.00. The Executive Summary is on their website and is a free download. Later in the final segment, a listener asked about detecting upticks in the Russian military space budget. Near the end of the program, our guests outlined four key trends for our attention. If you have questions or comments, please post them on the blog URL above and you can send them to our guests at jgullish@futron.com and pslye@futron.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 05 Oct 2010 16:17:36 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Pat Duggins, Sunday, 10-3-10 (105.20MB; download) -- Guest: Pat Duggins. Topics: Mars, "Trailblazing Mars," space policy. We welcomed Pat Duggins, the news director for Alabama Public Radio to the show to discuss his new book, "Trailblazing Mars: NASA's Next Giant Leap." Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. His book is available at the One Giant Leap Foundation website and if you order it from OGLF, Amazon will make a contribution to The Space Show. Please use this UR:: www.amazon.com/dp/081303518X?tag=onegialeafou-20. We began our first segment by talking about the retirement of the shuttle per the FY11 budget, the addition of a third shuttle flight referred to as a suicide flight, heavy lift, and space policy. Pat also spoke about the challenges in carrying out a humans to Mars mission, not just from the human factors and engineering perspectives, but with the will of the American people given the costs and risks involved in such a mission. In response to listener questions, our guest talked about covering more than 100 shuttle missions and many of the spin-offs from NASA programs that are now commercially successful products. I asked about nuclear propulsion for going to Mars and our guest had much to say about the probability of this. Commercial space came up as he talked about his talks and associations with MSFC. Other topics discussed during this segment included Space X, possible contamination of Mars from Earth, EELVs as commercial launchers, Constellation, and the GAP causing us to rely on Russian rockets. A listener asked about the layoffs taking place at KSC, MSFC, and other NASA centers. Pat had much to say about this, especially for Florida. John in Atlanta called in to talk about space shuttle LEO access and missions based on Pat's comments about shuttle missions. We started our second segment by asking Pat about the need to return to the Moon. We then talked about the Viking experiments and new information that may end up validating the work by Dr. Gil Levin. Pat was asked to compare robotic Martian missions to boots on the ground for Martian science. Our guest had much to say about this so don't miss this discussion. Later in the segment, we talked about other national space programs going to the Moon and Pat mentioned the problem of being able to collect Apollo lunar artifacts, returning them to their own country. Bigelow Aerospace and private astronauts were discussed in the context of the NASA oversight discussion that was an overriding theme of this show, especially with NASA oversight on human rating commercial launchers. All of these topics and more are included in Pat's book which is an excellent read for valuable space history plus a look at what may be our space future. You can reach Pat Duggins through www.apr.org, his Facebook page, or through drspace@thespaceshow.com. Post show comments and questions at the blog URL above. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Sun, 03 Oct 2010 22:56:41 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Shawna Pandya, Friday, 10-1-10 (42.44MB; download) -- Guest: Shawna Pandya. Topics: CiviGuard and smartphone applications, the space connection. We welcomed Shawna Pandya to the program. Note that there was a telephone line problem responsible for less than clear audio noise which you will hear, especially during the first segment of the program. We do apologize for this. In addition, please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. In our first segment, Ms. Pandya provided us with her background that enabled her to leverage technology and help create the concept of CiviGuard. Her attendance at the Singularity University was instrumental in shaping her thoughts in this direction as they were challenged to develop ideas and technologies that would be important to one billion people in a ten year period of time. CiviGuard is a direct outgrowth of that challenge. As she explained it, its now in one city in Manor, Texas but will soon be rolled out elsewhere. As you will hear, CiviGuard is a new way to get disaster information to people using smartphones with far more detail and relevant info than other means now in existence. In our second segment, Shawna connected using space to CiviGuard through Earth Imaging. She explained how they are doing it, the push technology being used, and more. Since we were talking about NASA and space spin-offs, a question was asked why the spin-off argument does not do that well in selling space to the larger public. We also talked about differences in Canada as compared to the US, especially Silicon Valley. I believe you will find this discussion most interesting. In our third segment, Shawna pointed us to the two key websites, www.civiguard.com and also www.civiguard.me. The latter site allows one to sign up for information even if their cell phone, smartphone or other communication device is not yet supported by Shawna's company. In this segment, I asked Shawna about human factors and the life sciences for long duration spaceflight and going to Mars. In addition, we talked about Canadian and Europeans playing larger roles with European citizens in achieving portable medical data, including telemedicine and teleradiology using space resources. Shawna had much to say on these subjects so don't miss her comments. A listener asked Shawna if she actually had classes at the Singularity University with Dr. Ray Kurzweil and what the students had to say about his known attitudes on space travel, humans, and robotics. This was a fascinating discussion you will want to hear. Toward the end of the program, I asked Shawna for her take aways from her education and work. She talked about empowerment and passion. If you have comments or questions for Shawna Pandya, post them on the above blog URL and you can email her at shawna@civiguard.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Sat, 02 Oct 2010 16:06:37 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Robert Zimmerman, Thursday, 9-30-10 (56.74MB; download) -- Guest: Robert Zimmerman. Topics: U.S. Space policy, heavy lift, commercial space. We welcomed Bob Zimmerman back to The Space Show to discuss the passage by the House of Representatives of S.3729 known as the NASA Authorization Bill. Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. As we started our first segment and throughout this two segment two hour show, Bob expanded on his thesis that the Authorization bill was nothing but pork, that NASA would likely screw up most parts of it including heavy lift, that because of our economy, we cannot afford heavy lift at this time and should not be doing it, and that the best hope for U.S. human spaceflight lies within the private sector for developing and expanding a successful commercial space industry without oversight from NASA where NASA simply buys the ride from different commercial vendors. Bob takes us through his analysis and how he has reached these conclusions so you can see if you agree with him or not. We talked about the coming Lame Duck Congress, how the elections will tell us much because if the nation's deficit turns out to be the focus of the election and the new congress, he expects NASA to be included in budget cuts. We talked about FY 11 and subsequent years and Bob clarified what would likely happen for FY11 as compared to future years or the out years. He did say that aware of space was in his opinion, at an all time high and the public was interested in space but as others have said, it has to start being relevant to the people. We talked about Constellation, the details in S.3729 and order NASA to be only marginally different than Constellation and more. In the second segment, Bob continued these themes but we also talked about the Russian space program and some about China as Bob was asked if other national space agencies could fill the void he sees coming because of what is going on with NASA and our economy. I asked Bob for an assessment of the science and astronomy side of NASA and he said those budgets were flat. Later in this segment, we turned our attention to the discovery of the most Earthlike planet yet found, Gliese 581d which orbits its red dwarf star is 66.8 days, is about 20 light-years from Earth, and is in the constellation Libra. In the second segment, Bob broke the space policy discussion down into three groups and he talked about commercial space including the large aerospace firms such as Boeing and Lockheed, not just the NewSpace companies. If you have questions or comments for Bob, please post them to the Space Show blog URL above and you can send them to Bob zimmerman at asw dot org. Visit and post at Bob's blog as well, http://behindtheblack.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Fri, 01 Oct 2010 14:52:16 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
John Garvey, Tuesday, 9-28-10 (51.28MB; download) -- Guest: John Garvey. Topics: Garvey Spacecraft Co. updates, students, nanosats, cubesats, building & launching rockets. We welcomed John Garvey, CEO of Garvey Spacecraft Corporation back to the program. Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. In our first segment, John reviewed the activities of Garvey Spacecraft since his last visit with us in 20007. The company is now focusing on a nanosat capability. John described their goal in detail and explained the evolution of the company and his activities toward this new goal. We talked about the NASA FASTSAT program which John said needed to be supported as it represents an important path to the future. A listener asked him what type of launch costs he was focusing on and John talked about the difference between a launch price and the launch costs. We talked about costing a project out using students as a major source of labor. John had much to say about this so don't miss this discussion. Even in a student program, students do not always carry out all the labor and functions required to build and operate the rocket. Next, we focused on the use of federal ranges. As most of the Garvey Spacecraft customers are government and DOD, the use of a federal range is specified. He said it is a big mountain to climb to be able to use one but that its just part of doing business to go through all paperwork, regulatory and related requirements. I asked him about using commercial launch facilities such as Spaceport America and he said he mostly is launching orbital so that leaves out inland spaceports. Also, were he to be doing suborbital, he said it would likely be as a test for an eventual orbital mission so he would want to start the regulatory requirement process for that orbital launch early on so using the federal range from the outset makes sense to him. He had many interesting observations and facts to share with us on this issue so don't miss this segment. As we began our second segment, we talked about commercial versus government. John said he does not see a commercial market at this time given the government is the primary or only customer. We spent a good portion of this segment discussing the issue of potential commercial markets and again, this is a discussion you will want to hear as he shares with us his experience on the ELV team and the fact that ELVs were largely sold as a commercial program which never materialized. We concluded this segment by examining the market potential for nansoats and cubesats. In our third and final segment, I asked John what he would do differently going forward from what he has done in the past. This led us to a discussion of doing things incrementally and slow as compared to one big aggressive shot at the end result. We talked about this in terms of investors and due diligence. John said it may depend on what the goal is, raising money for example may define the program as a success. I suggested success was implementing the program and seeing it become a revenue producer. Again, a reason for would be investors to exercise extreme due diligence with space related investment opportunities. Another listener asked him to identify the problems and challenges that he dealt with in his aerospike engine. This then led us to a discussion of various rocket fuels and his ease in using and transporting them. Toward the end of the program, I asked John about cost accounting and the DCAA requirements. John shocked us by saying he now spends 80-90% of his time on accounting and DCAA issues. I asked him to elaborate on this and boy did he ever give us a glimpse of this cumbersome and burdensome process! Do not miss this discussion. If you have a question or comment for John Garvey, you can post it on the blog URL above. John can be reached by email at jmgarvey@garvspace.com. His website is www.garvspace.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:08:56 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
NASA FASTSAT, NanoSail-D, Monday, 9-27-10 (45.78MB; download) -- Guests: Joseph Casas, Dean Alhorn, Mark Boudreaux. Topics: NASA FASTSAT, NanoSail-D Programs. We welcomed our three guests from NASA Marshall Space Flight Center to discuss the Fast, Affordable, Science and Technology Satellite (FASTSAT) and the NanoSail-D program, but we also talked about many other subjects. Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. These three websites will be useful in furthering your interest in these programs. (1) www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/pdf/480065main_FASTSAT_Facts_Final.pdf; (2) www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/smallsats/fastsat; (3) www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/smallsats/nanosaild.html. During our first segment, each of our guests provided a short opening statement about their participation in these programs and a description of the overall FASTSAT and NanoSail-D missions. We talked about the upcoming Nov. 19 launch on a Minotaur IV rocket from the federal Kodiak, Alaska launch complex. Our guests described the secondary payloads consisting of a 400 lb. satellite, the use of the ESPA ring and the capability to do secondary payloads across a wide array of multiple launch platforms. Regarding the NanoSail-D satellite, we discussed debris mitigation through the use of the solar sail which will add to drag at its orbital altitude and slow it down. During this segment, we discussed many other characteristics of the mission and the hardware. Later in the segment, we addressed the issue of the value proposition for fast tracking the project, including a risk vs. reward analysis to see if a mission could be created and actually flown while a student was still in school. You do not want to miss this value proposition discussion. One of the listeners asked about relationships between working on human spaceflight and the type of work and projects being discussed on today's program. Each of our guests responded to this question which took us into a broader discussion of education, skill sets, NASA interns, and student opportunities to learn and work on NASA projects. This is a must listen to discussion. Our guests listed several NASA programs and websites that focus on students. As a result of this discussion, The Space Show will work to produce a special program in support of NASA educational and intern programs. Our lead item in the second segment was about observing opportunities from the ground with NanoSail-D. Initially, its 650 km orbit will be too high but as the orbit decays and it gets lower, there will be armature astronomer viewing opportunities. To support this, a website has been established for posting pictures. Please visit www.nanosail.org as the site is already up and running. We then spent some time talking about the collaborative effort with Ames, Goddard, the Air Force, the Von Braun Center, and private companies such as Dynetics. A listener asked our guests for their take aways , both positive and negative, and lessons learned for fast tracking a project. This was yet another superb discussion which focused on the problems of controlling mission creep. All of our guests talked about the need to control mission creep and some of the rules and parameters they worked with to avoid the problem. Our mission creep discussion points can be extrapolated to other space projects so I urge everyone to be extra attentive as we learn that resistance is not futile with regards to mission creep. As we ended our program, each of our guests left us with excellent closing statements. I would like to offer a special thank you to Kimberly Newton, NASA Public Affairs, Marshall Space Flight Center who worked very hard to arrange this program with me and to bring these three guests to The Space Show audience. If you have questions or comments about this program, FASTSAT, NanoSail-D, or for any of our guests, email Kimberly at kimberly.d.newton@nasa.gov. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:13:42 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Jim Munch, Sunday, 9-26-10 (64.49MB; download) -- Guest: Jim Muncy. Topics: U. S. space policy. Jim Muncy returned to The Space Show for space policy updates, policy related information, and how to make space relevant for the American people and Congress. Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. As we started the first of two segment for this two hour program, I suggested to Jim after reading his bio on air that things in the space policy and accomplishment arena had not advanced that much referring back to the issues Jim worked when he was on the staff of the House Science Committee's Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee a decade ago. Jim said that things had actually devolved from that older period. He then talked about space being about jobs and that what was missing was the connection to space, the relevance of it to the rest of us and certainly to members of Congress. This discussion took us through most of the first segment and its an important discussion. We also talked about the two compromise bills, the Senate and House versions, and Jim explained them to us, as well as why the Administration program was the right program and still is the right program. Jim brought up heavy lift and had much to say about this topic including that we really cannot afford it at this time. We talked space infrastructure, partnering with DOD and the commercial companies, and working to break the paradigm of fixed infrastructure which is very costly. We took several listener questions and a call by Charles in Mojave . Toward the end of this segment, we talked about the private companies taking federal money and the risk in their doing so. Jim had much to say on this issue so do not miss this important discussion. At the end of the first segment, we were talking depots, Jim referenced the HEFT report and the NASA plan to do a sort of inline shuttle derived heavy lift as opposed to the depot model. In segment two, a listener brought up the recent Thalia program and her comments on the frontier analogy. Jim then explained what was meant by the term frontier in space. Another listener asked about international partners for space development. This led to another important and substantive discussion with our guest. Later in this segment, we focused in on the NASA Authorization and the NASA Appropriation requirements by Congress. Jim explained that the authorization is not essential and we talked about why the House should accept the Senate version and vote on it this week. During the balance of the program, Jim talked about policy strategy, the need to develop the commercial segment and the fact that space must become relevant to both Congress and the people if we are to have a space program, especially in the context of future budget requirements for NASA. I believe this to be an important discussion and urge you to listen to it and tell others about it. Even if you disagree with Jim Muncy, the issues he is talking about strike at the core of our space policy debate. If you have a comment or question for Mr. Muncy, you can email him at james.muncy@polispace.com.
Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:43:58 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Open Lines, Friday, 9-24-10 (46.96MB; download) -- Guest: Open Lines with Dr. David Livingston. Topics: Space policy, congress, FY 11 NASA budget. This program was an unplanned Open Lines program due to the last minute rescheduling of the planned program. Please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. I read a policy update statement from our friend Henry Vanderbilt of Space Access Society, pertaining to the differences in the House and Senate compromise bills being discussed, and the timing for a House vote on their bill. We also talked about an Orlando Sentinel article indicating that the House and Senate versions were now very close to one another. Our first caller was Bob Zimmerman who talked about the differences between the House and Senate versions of the compromise NASA plan to the plan proposed by President Obama on Feb. 1 of this year. Bob did not think the differences were all that much, that there was a real risk for budget cuts, including cuts of the NASA budget for FY 11 and that the FY-11 proposals represented "pork." He supported many of the provisions that President Obama put forth but they did not translate over to Congress. Bob is the Space Show guest on this subject and more on Thursday, Sept. 29 at 9:30 AM PDT. Following Bob, Amnon called to tell us that Astronauts4Hire has its first customer, an Australian beer company that will do zero-g experiments. You can learn more about this project from the press release his organization put out, www.astronauts4hire.org/2010/09/press-release-astronauts4hire-selected.html. Amnon also created a short survey for space enthusiasts and their friends and families to assess their knowledge about space and issues pertaining to space. He is interested in finding out if we in the space industry are doing a good job of getting the space word out about space. If you want to see and use his survey, you can find it on Amnon's Spacepirations blog at www.spacepirations.com/2010/09/next-space-shuttle-launch-informal-poll.html. Briefly, he is asking us to ask our family, coworkers and friends which Space Shuttle is getting ready for launch, when is the next launch, how many Space Shuttle launches remain after this one and what mission number is it going to be? If you have thoughts or suggestions about his survey, you can post them on his blog. I'm not so sure how many of us space cadets could answer these questions nor am I convinced that this is the priority info that we should have rolling off the tip of our tongues. Let Amnon know your thoughts and results should you use the survey. Our friend Charles called in from Mohave as he has not yet crossed the state line to Nevada on a permanent basis. He commented on the Space Access Society update and kept saying that it was like flogging a dead horse and then repeated his usual comments about policy, how to start off correctly in space development and the Microlauncher concept. He also provided a short personal history of how he landed in Mojave in the first place. During the balance of Open Lines, we continued to talk space policy, the likelihood of the NASA budget being cut depending on the outcome of the November 2nd elections, comments made by Dennis Wingo on his recent Space Show program about the dangers and risks of space companies taking federal money and more. In support of what Dennis said several weeks ago, I again referenced one of the panel discussions from the recent NewSpace conference and earlier comments on the subject by our friend Tom Olson. If you have questions or comments for any of the callers or those asking questions, its best to post them on the Out of the Box blog URL above. You can also email me at drspace@thespaceshow.com.
Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Sat, 25 Sep 2010 17:04:35 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Classroom Lesson 13 Propellant Depots, Thursday, 9-23-10 (74.96MB; download) -- 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. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:30:48 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Don Nelson, Monday, 9-20-10 (51.46MB; download) -- Guest: Don Nelson. Topics: NASA management problems and resolutions. We welcomes Don Nelson of Nelson Aerospace Consulting to the program. You can learn more about what Don Nelson spoke about on this show by visiting his website, www.nasaproblems.com. In addition, please note that you are invited to comment, ask questions, and rate this program on the new Space Show blog, http://thespaceshowoutsidethebox.blogspot.com. In our first segment, Mr. Nelson introduced us to NASA management problems, their origins, and provided us with many examples of what he was talking about. One of the recurring themes throughout today's program focused on the need for accountability and oversight. He shared with us his experience with his shuttle work where his signoff signature needed to be reviewed by 22 oversight individuals who just rubber stamped his signature. He talked about growing the shuttle program to 24,000 people and why the larger number created more problems. This led us to a discussion about our national aerospace workforce and he said that the workforce was regarded as a national treasure. He defined that in a way that may surprise many of you so listen to what he said. During this segment, Don had much to say about Ares 1, Constellation, and Orion. He challenged the safety, especially with Orion, and said that to meet the changing flight characteristics of Ares 1 to solve those problem, NASA took out safety features in Orion to lighten the mass. He then talked about the static margin for Orion. About midway through this discussion, I asked Don to define static margin which refers to center of gravity. He said the static margin was very sensitive and every time a change came in, the static margin had to be redesigned. Don talked about the idea that NASA centers were not so team oriented and often individually focused for the center only, not for NASA as a whole. He said this was part of the management set of issues. In the second segment, he again stressed accountability and oversight. One of the listener questions dealt with the younger engineers and employees at NASA having a say in things and Don suggested no, they typically go along and don't rock the boat. In returning to the oversight issue, he said it needed to be independent with clout. I suggested this was needed across the board with government today and that pointing only to NASA was unrealistic since NASA is reflecting problems throughout government and today's society and culture. Jim in Alabama sent in a note asking why he was targeting Marshall in his comments. Don replied that he was not targeting Marshall but did say Marshall and JSC are the biggest contributors to the problems he was talking about, followed by KSC. Don was asked if he had any conflict of interest or financial interest in any outcome for NASA or any of its centers. Don said no to both. Don is supportive of keeping shuttle flying but as an unmanned robotic vehicle to hold the costs down. He said shuttle already has that capability. It would reduce about 2,000 lbs of mass in the front end, freeing that up for payload and adding crew escape to shuttle. Don then said we would be unable to solve the launch cost problem using expendable rockets. When asked about transitioning to commercial rockets, he said as long as they were expendable, the launch costs would remain very high. Near the end of the program, we talked about media reporting and suggested that the general interest news media would need to report a story such as NASA management issues. Listen to hear why. Our guest made it clear he was not NASA bashing, but was in fact a strong supporter of NASA, but one who wants to get it on track in solving the problems he highlights. He says he talks to top NASA people all the time and frequently goes to Congress with his message. If you have questions or comments for Don Nelson, you can email him through his website or by using nasaproblems@yahoo.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 21 Sep 2010 16:14:41 UTC
|
| << < 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 > >> | |