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 |
| << < 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 > >> | |
| 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
|
| Add this to another station |
Taylor Dinerman, Tuesday, 6-8-10 (49.65MB; download) -- Guest: Taylor Dinerman. Topics: Falcon 9, commercial space, ISDC, SSP. We welcomed back Taylor Dinerman and learned that he is no longer writing for The Space Review but is now writing for the Hudson Institute New York. You can find his new posts at www.hudsonny.org/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=1&id=138. In our first segment, Mr. Dinerman started out by commending the Falcon 9 for a near flawless launch and Space X. Taylor talked about the U.S. launch development process and the quality of U.S. launchers going back to EELVs. We started talking about policy and a listener asked about the balance between space as a jobs program and a space policy for the good of the nation. Don't miss how Taylor responded to this question. We also talked about the affordability of the Program of Record as compared to the administration program and Taylor was asked how human spaceflight was in our national interest. Don't miss Taylor's response to this question. We continued talking space policy in this segment and asked how the US was viewed by China, Japan, and India. Mr. Dinerman brought up the fact that there were people in congress and government that did want to end human spaceflight and have wanted to do so for years. This discussion then included an assessment of OMB and human spaceflight, then a listener asked what our guest thought of the idea of an international body making decisions for human spaceflight. This was an interesting discussion with Taylor, myself, and the caller agreeing that such an international body would probably not be a good idea. In my comments, I used a NEO as an example and an international body that might make the decision to deflect or take the hit of the NEO. These comments led Taylor to suggest that no matter where a NEO was going to hit on Earth, no US president would allow the hit to happen. In our second segment, Bruce brought up many of the U.S. problems suggesting they would interfere with our space program development. See what you think of Taylor's answer. From here, we went to SSP as Taylor was part of an SSP panel at ISDC and will also have a panel at the coming NewSpace Conference in July. In discussing SSP, we talked about the DOD war avoidance concept, closing the business case, time lines, technology, demos, and much more. Mr. Dinerman updated us on the Indian view of SSP and how NASA, our DOE and most of our government views SSP. In response to some of my questions, Taylor did say investment capital was starting to flow into SSP business projects but that for the moment they were still very private and under the radar. In and our third and final segment, we spent some more time on the SSP subject and when such technology would be ready for prime time. Terrestrial solar and wind were mentioned and we all agreed that these forms of energy were not reliable for base load electricity. Taylor repeated that our Dept. of Energy had a bias for nuclear fusion projects. In the remaining minutes of the program, Rules of the Road and military space came up as Taylor had recently attended a conference on these subjects. There are differing perspectives on these issues among space nations and regions so listen to what our guest had to say about the U.S. position as compared to the position of other space nations. In summarizing the program, Mr. Dinerman said the space debate for the remainder of the year would be very spirited but there was a chance that the forces supporting the POR and those supporting the administration program would self-destruct, thus allowing those that want to destroy human spaceflight to win out. This was a theme our guest repeated at different times during the program. Finally, we talked about space as a policy tool for manipulation and influence. Don't miss these comments. If you have a question or comment for Taylor Dinerman, please email me at drspace@thespaceshow.com and I will forward it to him. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 09 Jun 2010 05:31:39 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Robert Zimmerman,Monday, 6-7-10 (71.75MB; download) -- Guest: Robert Zimmerman. Topics: Falcon 9 successful launch, U.S. Space Policy, Bat fungus and caves. We welcomed back Robert Zimmerman to talk all things space policy. We started our first segment with a discussion on the successful Falcon 9 launch on June 4, 2010. Bob said it was exhilarating to watch and we all had high praise for Space X. Our guest talked at length about the need for the private sector to continue with these successes to lower the cost of space access. Listeners asked our guest to comment on the impact of the successful launch on the administration's space program and Bob said it was probably not that much given the layoffs coming from the cancellation of Constellation as well as shuttle are far more significant and represent a potential disaster. Toward the end of this segment, listener Patrick asked about other space programs with different companies and he was also interested in the impact of the Falcon 9 on the Russians and Chinese . In our second segment, we talked about the side effects of the cancellation of the return to the Moon per the comments made during the Friday European space policy program. Bob said the U.S. has a lousy reputation for cancelling programs and international cooperation. Marshall called in with a question about the Apollo astronauts commenting on the administration's program and wondered how valuable such comments and opinions were. Later in this segment, another listener asked about the ISS and the possible participation in it by South Korea and China. We concluded this segment with a discussion about Orbital Science and its efforts to provide cargo transportation to the ISS. Our third final long segment started with listener Jack asking about ITAR reform. Listener Charles entered into a vigorous debate with Bob regarding the administration's space policy program. This is a must listen to discussion. The debate ended up with an agreement that we are definitely in uncertain times. Other listeners sent in questions wondering what type of compromise between Congress and the administration might unfold and Bob speculated on the potential for compromise and the likelihood for going to continuing resolution. Listener Peter sent in the URL for the earlier mentioned Dr. Harrison article. You can download the article at www.rightsidenews.com/2010060210427/editorial/the-chasm-between-apollo-and-the-gulf.html. Jerry called in to defend the Obama program suggesting it would be a pipe dream to think that shuttle would be extended. Bob debated with Jerry that the administration plan does not reduce overall costs and they talked about the recent GAO report on Constellation. I stepped into this particular discussion by referring to the printing press comments made on an earlier Classroom show by Dr. Hertzfeld and suggested that since the printing press money was in full force anyway, it was a matter of choice as to what it was being used for and could be used for space, the point made by Dr. Hertzfeld. But let me be clear, nobody including Henry recommended or believes that printing press money should be used for anything including space. If you have not done so, you should listen to Lesson 9 on the Classroom from June 1. In the remaining minutes of the show, Bob updated us on the strange bat fungus problem that is spreading. Bob did a good job in explaining the fungus, what it is doing to a specific species of bats and the caves where they live and how the fungus has spread beyond the East Coast. We will continue to follow this strange problem with Bob when he is a guest on the program. If you have questions or comments for Bob Zimmerman, you can find his email address near the bottom of his website, http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3cxxp/zimbib.htm which is zimmerman at asw dot org or you can forward it to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:30:43 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
The Space Show Classroom Lesson 10 Space Policy, Sunday, 6-6-10 (51.45MB; download) -- Guests: Classroom, Dr. Eligar Sadeh, Dr. John Jurist. Topics: Lesson 10 U.S. Space Policy, what it is, how its made. See The Space Show Classroom blog, Lesson 10 Archive Notes for regarding this show. Lesson 10 got underway in the first segment with Dr. Sadeh talking about the nature of political policy, some of the players in formulating space policy, and the priorities for NASA in the context of overall US government policy. As you will hear, space policy is typically a means to another end. Dr. Sadeh provided us with several examples underscoring this perspective. In response to a listener question, Dr. Sadeh identified four space policy segments that overlap in terms of making policy. These segments were civil space, commercial space, military space, and intelligence space. He further defined each group into subsets. For example, civil space would include NASA but also NOAH. Don't miss this set of definitions and explanations as we can use it for most all of our space policy discussions. Toward the end of this segment, we talked about the Falcon 9 launch and its impact on policy and then I asked Eligar if the policy makers were at all concerned about the economics and costs of their policy, for example the cancellation of Ares 1 and the sunk cost of about $9 billion plus another 2+ billion to terminate the program. Dr. Sadeh had some interesting things to say about policy makers and this type of concern and awareness but then our program was abruptly terminated as ATT dropped Dr. Sadeh's iPhone call. After a short break to reconnect with Dr. Sadeh and his ATT iPhone, we continued discussing the economic awareness and concern of policy makers and I mentioned what was said on an earlier show about Europeans making plans for programs around the return to the Moon and then finding that the Moon was no longer on the table as result of the new policy proposals announced by the Obama Administration on Feb. 1. Eligar commented on the wide ranging impact of policy and how often such impact and collateral damage is not well thought out by those making the policy. We inquired about policy as inspiration for education, STEM, careers, etc. None of that is a primary concern of most policy makers. Bruce from Canada called with comments and questions about our extremely partisan system of government and how destructive it was for good policy making. Our panel had much to say about this so don't miss the discussion. This led us to talk about business as usual, vested interests and all three of us, Dr. Jurist, Dr. Sadeh, and I had lots to say in this arena. Dr. Jurist commented on the increasing complexity and fragmentation going on in government and the country, making it even harder to establish quality policy and not just with regards to space. Later in the segment, I asked Eligar who the policy makers were and he named a few but mostly talked about the OSTP, the National Security Council (NSC), and Congress. We talked about the influence of NewSpace and space advocacy on policy and we said it was increasing and used the FAA AST. Toward the end of the program, we talked about Congress going to continuing resolution (CR) for the FY 11 budget and that the system is set up for feedback from the people through Congress and our elected representatives far more so than our communication with OSTP or the NSC. Space as a jobs program for policy makers was addressed as well as human spaceflight issues. Eligar offered an interesting way to view policy for human spaceflight when asked if the Administration plan was truly a possible end to human spaceflight as many suggest. We ended the program talking about National Security Space Strategy and the need for a national space strategy for the country. Post your comments and questions for this program to the Classroom blog, http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com. Prior to closing, Dr. Sadeh talked about his space consulting business, www.astroconultinginternational.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Mon, 07 Jun 2010 15:17:03 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Kai-Uwe Schrogl, Friday, 6-4-10 (43.30MB; download) -- Guest: Dr. Kai-Uwe Schrogl. Topics: European space policy. We welcomed Dr. Kai-Uwe Schrogl, Director of the European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) to the show. Please visit their website for more information at www.espi.or.at. In our first segment, Dr. Schrogl told us what ESPI was and what they do. Note that he stressed they were a think tank, not an academic research center or educational institution. During this discussion, we compared and contrasted many aspects of European space policy with policy here in the States. Our guest also stressed public private partnerships and space cooperation. Later in this segment, I asked the question about the impact of European and Euro economic problems on space spending and planning in Europe. You might be surprised with his response to that question. In the second segment, we talked about a Transatlantic space policy perspective. Here, our guest explained European space policy goals and plans and opportunities. We also inquired about the European general population and its concern for spending on space versus other issues here on the ground. As you will hear, this type of concern and question is diminishing in Europe so you don't want to miss the discussion and explanation. It seems Europeans have far more of a space awareness level than we do here in the United States. Another issue that came up was the focus we in the States have on going to Mars. Dr. Schrogl talked about the importance to Europe of the ISS and even returning to the Moon, not so much Mars. STEM education in Europe came up and we compared that to the U.S. too. Don't miss this analysis! We learned that space tourism was a big and important issue along with space debris management. Dr. Schrogl then told us about the Draft Rules of the Road Code of Conduct paper his organization produced. You can find it at www.espi.or.at/images/stories/dokumente/Perspectives/espi%20perspectives_32.pdf. In our third and final segment, we continued discussing the Code of Conduct and added in the issue of space traffic management. We then switched to ITAR, both its impact in the U.S. and throughout Europe. Dr. Schrogl also explained that there was no European wide ITAR equivalent but that each member state had its own type of ITAR which resulted in some overlapping of important issues. Operationally Responsive Space came up and we learned that there is both a military and a civilian approach to this subject in Europe. If you have a question or comment for our guest, Dr. Kai-Uwe Schrogl, please email him at kai-uwe.schrogl@espi.or.at. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Sat, 05 Jun 2010 17:36:37 UTC
|
| << < 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 > >> | |