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 |
| << < 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 > >> | |
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Paul Mueller, John Culverhouse, Tuesday, 6-29-10 (50.94MB; download) -- Guests: Dr. Paul Mueller, John Culverhouse. Topics: Experimental Sounding Rocket Association (ESRA) 2010 competition, student rocket clubs and launches. We welcomed back Dr. Paul Mueller, Chief Engineer for ESRA to update us on this year's college student competition for ESRA. John Culverhouse of the winning team from Embry Riddle Aeronautical University (E-R) joined us to talk about his team's entry and rocket clubs in general. For more information, please visit the ESRA website at www.soundingrocket.org. In our first segment, Dr. Mueller provided us with a summary of this year's competition which was held June 16-18 at Green River, Utah. Teams had to launch a 10 lb payload to 10,000 feet, recover the payload and the rocket, make a presentation and provide a conference type paper on their rocket project. This year they had four teams with about 50 students in total. As you will hear, two teams made it to an altitude higher than 10,000 feet, one team reached 8,840 feet and the other reached 7,900 feet. A team actually looses points if they go higher than the stated altitude objective due to the FAA waiver that the competition obtained. We also talked about student and college competitions in general, as well as rocket clubs. John Culverhouse described the E-R winning entry and then based on listener questions, we took a look at the team costs for building, developing, and participating in the competition. Toward the end of this segment, Paul talked about the advance division of the contest to launch to 25,000 feet. In the second segment, Paul talked about the workshops that they are developing for the teams in association with Utah State regarding hybrid rocket motor development. Later in the segment, ITAR came up as there might be foreign teams wanting to enter the competition including some from Canada. In the context of ITAR, guidance was discussed with roll control and also pitch and yaw. Listen carefully to what Dr. Mueller had to say about this and what he has to do to comply with ITAR rules. Later in this segment, I asked John about the E-R students and their thoughts on Obama space since they are located in the heart of the Space Coast in Florida. He told us the students were upset that there would be no human spaceflight and in fact have signed a petition about this which they sent to every member of Congress. Listen to what John had to say about the student reaction to the FY 11 space budget and policy proposal. Paul brought up an interesting unintended consequence that as a professor he is aware of in that the transition to commercial and low cost space access may ultimately imply less jobs, not more jobs. A major way of achieving low cost is through using less labor. He said this may ultimately impact those seeking aerospace engineering careers as the number of jobs in the field could be reduced. Listen to the complete discussion on this subject. In our last segment, John talked about the E-R senior project to launch ICARUS 3 to space. He mentioned their need for a launch site and said that when ICARUS 1 was launched out of Wallops, the cost for tracking and related services was about $200,000 for the rocket which went to 37.5 miles in altitude. In the latter part of this segment, Paul summarized this year's event at Green River and then we responded to a listener question about the quality of college faculty advisors for rocket teams. If you have a question for Dr. Paul Mueller, he can be reached at paul.mueller.iii@gmail.com or through the ESRA website. John Culverhouse can be reached at jchouse90@gmail.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 30 Jun 2010 15:41:35 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Dan Rasky and Bruce Thieman, Friday, 6-25-10 (44.44MB; download) -- Guests: Dr. Daniel Rasky and Bruce Thieman. Topics: CRASTE 2010, commercial space perspectives with the Air Force and NASA. We welcomed both our guests to discuss the upcoming CRASTE 2010 conference (www.usasymposium.com/craste/default.htm). Known as the Commercial and Government Responsive Access To Space Technology Exchange, this conference will be at NASA Ames from Oct. 25-28, 2010. As you will hear when listening to this show, both the Air Force and NASA are committed to commercial space development and our guests carefully and fully explained their different approaches. During our first segment, Dr. Rasky explained CRASTE and the focus on using cargo and the various programs over time that have addressed space commercialization and low cost space access. Mr. Thieman provided us with the Air Force and AFRL perspective and history and how the two organizations came together for the CRASTE series of conferences. We talked about reusability, first stages, suborbital and how these technologies play into our future. On the NASA side, we talked about both orbital and suborbital companies, projects, and the COTS program. The two groups realized that commercial markets go hand in foot with lowering the cost of space access. We talked about priorities for both NASA and the Air Force. Each guest listed the priorities from their perspective but the one thing in common for both the AF and NASA was the need to lower the cost of space access. A listener inquired about suborbital and orbital velocities and trajectories for point to point. As we were mostly talking about cargo, suborbital seems to be the focus for distances of 2-3,000 KM. Toward the end of this segment, we found out that part of SSP was a priority, specifically power beaming within space. Our guests said the jury was out on beaming power to Earth as a market. We started the second segment with some registration and citizenship requirements for attending CRASTE 2010. Another listener asked questions about point to point with high value cargo such as organ transplants and wondered if it would be more cost effective to work on making the organs last longer rather than the more costly approach of point to point travel. Don't miss this discussion. At one point, our guests said they were looking for a 2.5X cost reduction using the Falcon 9. Our guests mentioned the NASA CRuSR. Bruce mentioned the term "Turn Time" referring to being able to refurbish or reuse the vehicle in 24-48 hours. In addition, these groups seek airline like operations and want to be 70% operational for all weather. We talked about the SUSTAIN mission and compared human point to point with cargo point to point. We talked about time lines so listen to when we might see these technologies developed. At the end of this segment, our guests were asked a what if question should Ares and Constellation continue as such programs are seemingly at odds with the goals discussed by our guests today. We started the third and final segment for the show with a discussion of workforce and available jobs and the need for STEM workers. We learned that to work for DOD, there is a citizenship/Green Card requirement. Dan then talked about new markets and we focused on space biotech. He had much to say about this emerging commercial space business so don't miss the discussion. Other space programs were mentioned and we learned about competition and who is doing what and that the U.S. could be over taken if we don't continue investing in space. Operationally Responsive Space was part of our discussion, focusing on getting effective use out of small sats as compared to the larger ones. Toward the end of the show, I inquired about the status of the CRuSR program and Bigelow Aerospace. If you have a question or comment for either of our guests or both of them, please send it to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com and I will forward it on your behalf. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Fri, 25 Jun 2010 22:49:16 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Ryan McLinko, Wednesday, 6-23-10 (45.24MB; download) -- Guest: Ryan McLinko. Topic: Space Frontier Foundation's New Space 2010 Conference. Ryan McLinko returned to discuss the upcoming New Space 2010 Conference with us today. The Conference is July 23-25, 2010 at the Domain Hotel in Sunnyvale, California. For more information about New Space 2010, please visit http://newspace2010.spacefrontier.org/index.php. While our program unfolded in the typical three segments, this description will avoid the segment by segment write-up. Ryan started out telling us about the New Space Conference, the general conference information and the them which is "New Space Ready For Takeoff!" Initially, Ryan took us through the agenda and plans for the conference, then we returned and went through each day of the conference, the speakers, and the panels in detail. Each day has a sub theme as you will hear. For example, Friday is about "The Thrill of Victory, the Agony of Defeat: The Business of NewSpace", Saturday is about "Pushing the Limits: Challenges Facing NewSpace Today," and Sunday is about "Beyond the Horizon: The NewSpace and New Worlds of Tomorrow." Ryan then talked about the Gala Event which is set for Saturday evening and will include the awarding of several SFF awards. The conference is single track but there are going to be some breakout sessions. Listeners asked about SFF membership and as you will hear, there is no membership. He also said there was no Early Bird registration fee but if registration is purchased at the door, it will be more costly than online registration. We went through lunches and the speakers and learned that for the SFF Advocates, there will be a special reception Thursday evening, July 22 at the Domain Hotel. As for logistics for the conference, the closest airport is in San Jose but listeners might also consider Oakland's airport (OAK) or San Francisco International (SFO). There is also a ride sharing option at https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AkLS84-tr8HGdGIyckpidFVVRGJ4RXlYY2JsNkE2eHc&hl=en#gid=0. Check it out if you need transportation to and from the airport. If you have questions or comments about the New Space 2010 Conference, please contact Ryan McLinko at ryan.mclinko@spacefrontier.org.
Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 23 Jun 2010 22:46:02 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Sam Dinkin, Tuesday, 6-22-10 (53.95MB; download) -- Guest: Dr. Sam Dinkin. Topics: Private development of space. Dr. Sam Dinkin returned for this nearly two hour Space Show program to discuss his June 21, 2010 The Space Review (TSR) article, "Individuals Pick Up The Space Development Torch (www.thespacereview.com/article/1648/1). In our first segment, Sam put forth his thesis that Space X and the success of the Falcon 9 excited people and that in time many people will be able to afford to have a rocket company. Also that government does not do as good a job as the private companies and he referenced recent launch failures in India, South Korea, and the problems the U. S. is having, probably around Constellation. A listener asked Dr. Dinkin why he classified Space X as private when the bulk of its funding comes from government and its customer is government. Sam also referenced suborbital work and their RFPs though Sam was reminded that suborbital was not orbital. Dr. Dinkin mentioned a possible Space X IPO but listeners suggested the economic timing and the need to more fully validate the success of the company was needed. As we started our second segment of the program, Larry asked Sam if he would have written the Space Review article had the Falcon 9 launch been unsuccessful. Sam said no and that we would still be waiting for Space X or another company to step up and do what he talks about in his article. We talked about the GAP and Sam suggested he would like to see the Russians restart their old space program from the Apollo days about going to the Moon. Don't miss this discussion. In this segment, we talked about space goals as a function of a destination and time line with regards to the administration policy proposal. Sam suggested that space itself was a sufficient destination. Since many of the comments in his TSR article were critical of what Dr. Dinkin had to say, I asked Sam about the criticism and how it impacted him. Again, don't miss what he had to say about this. A listener asked Sam to compare his focus on private space to the focus of Dr. Foust in his TSR article of the same date saying the space development future would likely involve public/private partnerships. Sam had much to say about this which you will want to hear. Another listener asked Sam why he thought the Falcon 9 launch did not close the deal for a definite transition to commercial space. Sam had much to say on this subject but for the most part talked about the need to change the paradigm and that Congress is still stuck with the status quo outlook toward things. Artificial gravity on the ISS came up, our guest mentioned a Japanese centrifuge and the possibility that Bigelow might partner with a launcher to do things along the lines of the discussion on one of his own space stations. Heavy lift was discussed and Sam said he supported the Augustine Commission position. He also said heavy lift was optional and we could use lots of lighter lift and on orbit construction. Mars came up and he was asked to comment on time tables from the one expressed by Dr. Zubrin to the less specific approach in the administration program. He suggested lunar development should be a one way settlement program. In the final segment, Sam was asked about his awarding a suborbital spaceflight to one of the players of the former game Space Shot. Regarding space policy, he was asked for his ideas on a possible policy compromise. ITAR reform came up in the context of expanding business opportunities. There was an elaborate discussion of robotic space versus human spaceflight and I offered comments from several futurists as to how they see AI taking us to space, not humans. We then switched to discussing the US economic deficit and Sam shared his economic thoughts with us on the deficit, interest, inflation, and more. See if you agree. If you have a question or comment for Dr. Sam Dinkin, you can email him at sam@dinkin.com or you can call him at 1-888-4-DINKIN. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 23 Jun 2010 14:16:57 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Fred Slane, Monday, 6-21-10 (46.46MB; download) -- Guest: Fred Slane. Topics: Space standards, disruptive and sustainable space technology. We welcomed Fred Slane to the program to discuss "The Space Innovator's Dilemma: A Space Industry Look at The Innovator's Dilemma." You can find out more by visiting his website, www.spacestandards.org. While this program covered the traditional three time segments, this description will not use the segment approach as discussion was ongoing and did not really lend itself to a breakdown by segment. We began our discussion with Mr. Slane explaining the background of his work, the meaning and application of standards for space development, and innovation based on sustainable as well as disruptive technologies. As you will hear, Mr. Slane's work was based on the book by Clayton Christensen, "The Innovator's Dilemma." We talked about the risk for disruptive and sustainable technologies and attempted to classify NASA so don't miss what Fred had to say about the organization. Fred addressed the growth trend in the international space industry and the same for the U.S. market. He fielded questions about space exploration and suggested what was needed was for a company to "make a buck." Our discussion evolved to the application of space standards in the industry. To be clear, Fred was talking about manufacturing and related standards, standards that could be universal and enabling for space businesses. He was not talking about proprietary information. As a way of illustrating his points, he referenced several space projects and companies so again, this is a discussion you will want to hear. He said that all the stake holders need to have a say in standards development and the application of them. At the end of his paper which he will send you if you request it, we went through some of the businesses listed to see if they were disruptive, sustainable or a combination of both. For example, on orbit propellant depots were sustainable, meaning a likely evolution of space industry development. They were not disruptive. He said his favorite was in the field of reliability so you will want to hear why and what he had to say about this. Toward the end of the program, Mr. Slane talked about the need to be professional, risk protocols and he again stressed the need for standards and their ongoing development. Listeners asked about enforcement of the standards and that proved to be a lively discussion. If you want a copy of his paper or if you have comments or questions for Fred Slane, please email him at freds@spacestandards.org. Please reference The Space Show in your subject line. You may copy me if you like, drspace@thespaceshow.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:59:02 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Joe Vogel, Sunday, 6-20-10 (47.61MB; download) -- Guest: Joe Vogel. Topics: Boeing X-51A Waverider, hypersonics, scramjets. We welcomed the Program Manager for the X-51A Hypersonic Flight Vehicle, Joseph T. Vogel, who is also the Director of Hypersonics in Boeing Phantom Works/Defense Space & Security. In our first segment, we started off with some basic descriptions and definitions for hypersonic vehicles, scramjets, ramjets, along with the mission profile for flight testing X-51A. We discussed the fuels used, the temperatures reached in flight, flight parameters as well as the results of the first flight. In talking about the actual test flight, Mr. Vogel described the flight, the engine burn, and the anomaly they recorded through to the destruction as planned of the vehicle. Our guest received many listener questions asking about things like skip trajectory as well as being able to go to space from the atmosphere and the difference in going from Mach 5 to Mach 26 or 27 should the vehicle go to space. Mr. Vogel also fielded questions about hydrocarbon fuels and the upper limits that could be reached using such fuels, for example Mach 8. In our second segment, we talked about the vehicle and its role for national security, trade-offs with air and Oxygen to get out of the atmosphere and more. Suborbital transportation for Point to Point was discussed. In response to a question about the estimated cost to take the vehicle commercial, Mr. Vogel said it would be many billions. I also asked him about hypersonic work in other countries and he said that as far as he knew, the US was leading the pack in this type of vehicle R&D. Later in this segment, he provided us with some interesting flying times between destinations for both a commercial jet and what a hypersonic would do. He did three comparisons including Los Angeles to New York, Los Angeles to London, and Los Angeles to Australia. Don't miss this comparison discussion. Also in this segment, Joe talked about the materials still needed and said that finally technology is catching up with the concept. A listener asked about the challenges in reverse engineering a project. John in Atlanta brought up the idea to capture air and to liquefy the oxygen out of it in flight to provide oxidizer for the pure rocket driven part of a trip to orbit. This would reduce take of weight and improve total performance. Joe discussed this during the program. We talked about the type of team he had to develop X-51A and then concluded the program with his telling us his experience in talking with kids about how inspired they became by learning about X-51A. You don't want to miss what he said about this project and others contributing to STEM education in this country. If you have a comment or question for Joe Vogel, please send it to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com and I will forward it to him. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Mon, 21 Jun 2010 15:39:12 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Scott "Doc" Horowitz, Friday, 6-18-10 (51.27MB; download) -- Guest: Dr. Scott "Doc" Horowitz. Topics: Ares 1, space policy, SRBs, rocket safety, commercial space, COTS. Dr. Scott "Doc" Horowitz was our guest for this Space Show program to discuss NASA today, the current space policy debate, rocket safety and much more. As the inventor of Ares 1, Doc had much to say about all of these issues. For more information about him, please visit his website at www.docsaerospace.com. In our first segment, Doc started us off by congratulating Space X for a very successful Falcon 9 launch on June 4th. Doc then took us on an historical tour of when he was with NASA regarding the development of the VSE, the Space Act Agreements of 2005 and 2008, and the manner in which both a Republican and Democratic congress responded to and supported space. He talked about human spaceflight funding issues even back then and the role of OMB in the funding process. He talked about the need to be representative of and listening to all the stakeholders, something that does not appear to be the case with the current administration policy proposals. Doc was asked about extending Shuttle, he got lots of questions about Ares 1 and he received a call early in the segment from Dr. Jurist about SRB rocket safety as compared to liquids. This proved to be a thorough discussion of the topic, including why Doc selected SRBs for Ares 1 and what that process and methodology was like. Don't miss this discussion which as you will hear, focused on the need for the human spaceflight system following shuttle to be an order of magnitude safer than Shuttle. This requirement led them to using SRBs. We talked about the Gap and timelines for Ares 1 and Commercial to deliver crew to the ISS. Listen to the comparisons. Doc fielded many questions asking about SRB failure rates and the risks as compared to flying a fighter jet in and out of combat missions. Toward the end of this segment, a listener asked about the testing program for Ares 1 should it survive the policy changes and I added in a question or two about the testing required for both an EELV and the Falcon 9 to fly crew to station. You will hear his rough estimates of how many flights might be required by each of these systems. The Ares 1 X was discussed and I asked Doc about the launch which many consider a bogus or phony launch. Doc explained the 1X test which was part of the needed build up approach to Ares 1 development. Mars was mentioned as a target and goal of our space program. In our second segment, I asked Doc why Ares 1 has been called one of the worst rockets ever by so many people from various parts of the space community. Listen to his reply to this question. He also shared his views with us on the role of government in opening up the space frontier and we discussed the role of government in space development and national defense. A listener followed up on our comments about the space workforce, job layoffs and that was an important discussion as well. Don't miss hearing what both Doc and I had to say about our space workforce. Later, we talked about space policy with and without specific goals, objectives, and timelines. STEM education came up and I again referenced the recent Marzwell program. Doc got several questions about commercial space and he talked about commercial markets, sustainability, and today's reality concerning commercial space. Near the end of this segment, we addressed a recent article by Jim Oberg on possible Soyuz safety issues. Doc said the biggest risk in relying on the Soyuz was that it gives us a single string with no backup for ISS access. If you have a comment or question for Doc Horowitz, you can send it to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com and I will forward it to him. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:12:53 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
OPEN LINES, Tuesday, 6-15-10 (66.37MB; download) -- Guest: Open Lines with Dr. David Livingston Topics: U.S. space policy, aerospace industry job layoffs, commercial launchers, NASA. This was another two hour hard hitting and listener driven hot topic Open Lines discussion focusing on space policy and what is happening in the aerospace industry, especially with NASA layoffs and rockets In the first segment, I opened with discussion points about the possibility of a show about the Peruvian space program, a tongue and cheek idea to do a quarterly infomercial week on The Space Show, and then I read an interesting email from a listener that goes to the heart of civility, negativity, the use of fear to make a point, and related matters by guests on The Space Show and the space community. I'm interested in your feedback on these discussion topics. Our first caller was Mark Bray in Huntsville, a previous Space Show guest. Mark had much to say about the layoffs as he is a contractor and works at Marshall Space Flight Center. Mark told us what was going on with not only the layoffs, but program changes, cuts, and more. Later in the show, Mark continued updating us with chat comments about various rockets an hardware. We talked about morale issues, both with the contractors and those directly employed by NASA. Don't miss this discussion. We also talked about heavy lift, the market for heavy lift, and the engines used for heavy lift. In fact, Mark talked about a compromise program that seemed to make lots of sense in terms of what our FY11 space policy might look like. As we moved to our second segment, Kelly called in and talked about commercial crew, Space X, the business risks for Boeing and Lockheed regarding Orion and more. At this point, the listeners chatting and calling the show pointed out that with Constellation being dead, Orion being dead (you will hear why from the callers on this show) and problems with the various rocket programs, it was said that our civil space program was in far more serious trouble that most of us realize. You will hear my surprise at what was being talked and chatted about by the listeners to this program. As a result of this Open Lines discussion, I'm searching for possible guests to elaborate on the issues that were brought to our attention and the attention of The Space Show audience last night. Assuming I can find the right guest(s) for such a program, I will offer up a Space Show program about NASA shutting down and the crisis facing our aerospace industry. I believe the issues brought to our attention by listeners in this Open Lines program were so startling that they need to be confirmed and an educational informative program needs to be presented on the topic. Lots was said during the program about the letter than Senator Nelson wrote to Senator Barbara Mikulski regarding our space policy and the FY11 NASA Budget.. This letter is at www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=34305. This letter was the basis of much of the discussion in both segments of tonight's program. Listeners seemed to like his comments about starting on a heavy lift vehicle in 2011 and "After retiring the last shuttle, we will soon turn to commercial space companies to deliver astronauts to the ISS. I am proposing that we take a ''walk before you run" approach for the development of commercial crew services." Earlier in the show, listener Terry suggested an informal poll as to the government preventing citizens from going to space. I said the government would not do that short of becoming excessive in regulations. If you want to express your opinion on Terry's poll, send it to me and I'll forward it to him. If you have a comment or question for any of the listeners that called or participated in the show, send it to me and I will forward it to the person of your choice. As always, your comments, feedback, and suggestions are welcome so send them along to drspace@thespaceshow.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:10:29 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Rick Tumlinson, Monday, 6-14-10 (65.05MB; download) -- Guest: Rick Tumlinson. Topics: U.S. Space Policy, Obama space policy, Constellation, NASA, space development. Rick Tumlinson was the guest for this two hour program divided into three segments. However, given that our topic of discussion for almost the entire show was the proposed new direction for NASA and the Administration's space policy, there was no need to break this description into segments. Rick began the discussion with some ground work regarding opening space to the human settlement and the frontier beyond Earth. He provided us with a short history of how we got to where we are today with space policy, going back to the earlier days with NASA and the VSE. Rick then introduced us to President Obama's new plan for space which he said does many good things, including separating out the roles of public and private space. We talked about those unhappy with the new direction, the status quo, and those supporting the new direction. We discussed having time lines and firm plans for destinations as opposed to what the Administration is proposing. Listeners asked him a wide range of questions including why Libertarians who are so very critical of this administration are so willing to accept and believe every word the President says about space. Rick then talked about government programs and what he said were their dismal track records. He cited the Space Shuttle and ISS in driving home his points. Our guest contrasted this with commercial space and the new companies building space infrastructure, rockets, and more. At the mid point of the program, Rick was asked about the article appearing on Space Policy Online (www.spacepolicyonline.com) in which the House Science and Technology Committee sent a letter to NASA demanding new budget numbers saying that the Administration program was no more affordable than the POR pointed out in the Augustine Commission Report. You can read the article at the above website, its titled "Text of Letter to NASA From HS&T Asking For Budget Details by June 16." For those of you interested, you can read the House S&T letter at www.spacepolicyonline.com/pages/images/stories/Gordon_Hall_Giffords_Olson_Letter_re_NASA_Budget_Plan_6-10-10.pdf. As the discussion progressed, we learned who supported private enterprise and who the socialists were/are regarding space development. At one point Rick said that Constellation was a path toward failure and a listener asked him to explain that comment which Rick did. See what you think of the explanation. As we neared the end of the program, Rick mentioned that the Orion Escape Capsule was actually a poison pill. Listen to his comments to know what he meant by his statement. In the last minutes of the program, Rick brought to our attention some of his business ventures and updated us on their development/progress. This included his new Earth Light Institutes, Orbital Outfitters, Space Diver, and his new media company, InSpace Media Productions which is working on a space reality television show. We also talked about the coming New Space Conference near NASA Ames from July 23-25, 2010. You can get more information about the conference at http://spacefrontier.org/events/newspace-conferences/newspace-2010. If you have questions or comments for Rick Tumlinson, please send them to rick@ricktumlinson.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 15 Jun 2010 04:39:08 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Thais Russomano, Sunday, 6-13-10 (44.65MB; download) -- Guest: Dr. Thais Russomano. Topics: Space medicine and life sciences in Brazil, space tourism, space medicine graduate studies. We welcomed for the first time to The Space Show Dr. Thais Russomano, a space life scientist in Brazil. During our first segment, Dr. Russomano told us about her childhood interest in astronomy and space and said she wanted to be an astronaut. Later in the program, she talked about what happened in the astronaut selection process in Brazil as the process favored the military. We also talked about space life science training in Brazil and throughout Central and South America and why the focus is on the United States and the UK. Our guest told us about the Microgravity Research Center at PUCRS university, Porto Alegre, Brazil with its seven research labs which she founded more than a decade ago. You can find out more about this Center at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microgravity_Center. Dr. Russomano talked about parabolic flight experience in Brazil (its not allowed) and the importance of it in life science training. She said its prohibition in Brazil was largely a political issue with cost issues also being a problem. A listener asked about the decision to select astronauts from the Brazilian military so don't miss her detailed response to this question. Bruce from Canada asked about a Rotary Wheel Microgravity Component for the ISS and again we heard about political reasoning why things don't get done or happen. In the second segment, listener Linda asked for a clarification on centrifuge training comments made earlier by our guest regarding suborbital space tourism. This is a most interesting discussion so don't miss it. We also talked about space sickness and unfortunately Thais had no silver bullet to avoid the problem. We talked about head movement and placement and other related issues, all designed to minimize the problem. Also in this segment, we learned about the Earlobe Blood Collector Device which our guest developed and which should fly on the ISS next year. Its flying with the Russians so this too is a story you will want to hear. In the third segment, we talked about microgravity CPR. Dr. Russomano told us about the positioning of the victim and the person doing the CPR and how this has been worked out to work in microgravity. Don't miss it and visualize your legs when you hear her tell us about it. She also mentioned other techniques being tested by NASA and compared the results of her technique with the NASA techniques. Telemedicine was discussed in this segment as were the books our guest has written and is writing, especially her novel which will be out next year, "Betrayal." We asked our guest about breakthroughs in space life science in the coming years and she said we needed to see them in the fields of bone loss, radiation, and psychology. She suggested these disciplines will dominate what we do to be able to colonize or settle in space. If you have a question or comment for our guest, Dr. Thais Russomano, please send it to her at thaisrussomano@hotmail.com. Please visit her website at www.thaisrussomano.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Mon, 14 Jun 2010 03:30:59 UTC
|
| << < 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 > >> | |