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 |
Dr. George Robinson, Monday, 2-22-10 (61.47MB; download) -- Guest: Dr. George Robinson. Topics: the Biology of Space Law and commercial space management. Dr. George Robinson was our guest for this two hour program centered around his paper, "Quantum Physics and the Biology of Space Law: The Interstitial Glue of Global Support for Space Migration and a Proposed Commercial Management Infrastructure." If after hearing this program you would like a copy of this paper, please email your request to me. In our first segment, Dr. Robinson talks about some of the critical pressure and stress points we are facing in the world today and how these issues fit into space law and why we go to space. As you will hear, our focus is on species survival and that is the ultimate reason for going to space. Space law facilitates making this happen and helps to set the stage for creative thinking, the development of new alliances, and ultimately the needed new type of private commercial consortium to take us all to space. In segment two, Dr. Robinson explained more about the survival issues and said that there were only two possibilities for humans, either the ocean floors or off planet. Don't miss what he says about each option. Lewis and Clark type of exploration came up as well as fun and pleasure seeking reasons for going to space such as space tourism. Dr. Robinson addressed both of these as subsets of species survival. William in Hawaii asked about laws like shipping with flags of convenience, property rights and the right to private ownership, and here the issues of "for the benefit of mankind" came up and entered the discussion. You will certainly want to hear what our guest had to say about these matters. In our third segment, we talked about a reality check with the way things are today as compared to the needed evolution to get to where Dr. Robinson sees us going and reaching our future potential. We talked about the anthropic principle and stressed that the desired outcome was for the private sector, not the public sector though there should be government R&D but at some point it has to get out of the way. Later in this segment, listener Dave Huntsman called the show and took issue with Dr. Robinson for his not supporting the Administration's space policy program. This call produced a very spirited discussion with Dave and George with George being very clear on why he does not see the administration program satisfactorily and in fact later in this conversation, I jumped in with my passionate rant on our economic problems and growing deficits. Dave said he would respond to my question about deficits from an economic perspective but that did not really happen. George used this discussion as an example of why we have to transcend the national and what he calls "stove pipe" perspectives. Don't miss this high energy exchange among the three of us. Later in this same segment, Charles from Mojave called in to advocate his cry for bypassing NASA and going small with Microlaunchers. As this program drew to its conclusion, Dr. Robinson again said we needed to get out of nationalism and move beyond that. I urge you to request his paper by sending me an email and reading what Dr. Robinson proposes. His concluding comments were that we needed to work together to find a unique way to garner all the resources and energy of all of the nations to participate in this during the worst of economic times. If you have a question or comment for Dr. George Robinson, please send it to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:23:20 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Matthew Allner, Sunday, 2-21-10 (58.55MB; download) -- Guest: Matthew Allner. Topics: space education, STEM, astronaut selection process. Matt Allner returned for this program to talk about space education and his teaching experiences, the NASA Explorer School program, how to become a NASA astronaut, and related items. This two hour program was in two segments. In our first segment, Matt got right into teaching issues including "teaching to the test." He got several questions wanting him to tell us all what is wrong with our educational system today, especially with science, fact, STEM, and space. Matt was asked to compare and contrast the three states he has taught in, California, Iowa, and Colorado. This is a very interesting comparison, make sure you hear it. Matt had much to say about tests in general and said too much emphasis is placed on them. For STEM education, he said NASA inspires students to pursue STEM courses but its hard work and hard to do. Listen to how he teaches STEM classes to his students. You also want to pay close attention to what he had to say about school boards and administrations and how they see and evaluate the NASA programs. As he said on air, its not fast food! We talked about iPhone and iPod apps for Mars and other STEM subjects and how to use these devices to interest and hold the kids with the subject. But as listeners said along with Matt, if one does not know the underlying rule or premise, being dependent on the electronic device is not a good thing. Matt had much to say about this using his search and rescue experience as a model. In our second segment, Matt told us about his astronaut application process and his interviews in 2008. Don't miss the story he tells about the NASA call coming in during the middle of his 8th grade class and how he incorporated his class into that call. Matt discussed Houston, the training program, and we talked about what might happen with the astronauts if the US does not do human spaceflight missions for many years given possible space policy changes. A listener asked about long term space travel issues and space detachment from Earth. Matt again used his search and rescue diving experiences as the model and the use of communications. Another listener asked if these human efforts might someday be replaced by a computerized HAL from 2001 but Matt made it clear he was far more comfortable with humans on the com than computer. I asked him about our economy and how he saw the impact on space policy with our increasing deficits, interest on the deficits, and our economic situation, both domestic and globally. He said we needed to make sure that we let Congress know just how important space is and this must be a constant reminder. We also talked about space travel and Matt separated a tourist from someone who might make a long duration or settlement type of spaceflight. See if you agree with him. If you have a question or comment for Matthew Allner, you can email him at mjallner@msn.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:19:09 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Jim Vedda, Friday,2-19-10 (59.73MB; download) -- Guest: Dr. Jim Vedda. Topics: U.S. space policy, capabilities driven rather than destination driven, "Choice, Not Fate." Dr. Jim Vedda returned to the program to discuss his new book, "Choice, Not Fate: Shaping a Sustainable Future in the Space Age." The book is available through the One Giant Leap Foundation (OGLF) Amazon partners program and if purchased through OGLF, Amazon contributes to OGLF/The Space Show. You can order this book using this specific URL: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1450013473?tag=onegialeafou-20. In our first segment, we talked about the timing of his new book and the Feb. 1 announcement of the Administration's proposed 2011 space budget and policy. Jim extended the discussion saying that his book looks at what is best for the nation, not what is best for any particular interest holder. He also talked about Apollo and said that the Apollo programs and era were not golden. Don't miss this discussion. He then went on to say that he makes the point very strongly in opposing a destination driven space policy rather than a capabilities driven policy. He also said we need to be thinking planning at least out to mid-century, maybe even longer. He talked about the need to develop important skills, to fully use the ISS, and the need to size hardware such as Orion for specific missions and projects. As we started our second segment, we talked about the need for a cultural shift in our space program and planning, and that it must come from the top down in the Administration but that it was not there. He was asked about sunk costs on Constellation, don't miss his response to this important question. Dr. Vedda again repeated the need to match our rockets and hardware to the project, develop what we need to accomplish the goals, but we do not do that. Our discussion evolved into one focusing on the need for long term planning. We discussed this in the context of American businesses not doing much long term planning for business and fiduciary reasons, and that this was not unique to the space industry. Dr. Vedda said the annual budget process and cycle needed revisions and were part of the problem. In our third segment, we continued the discussion about the need for long term planning and that the space community was too insular. In this segment, he discussed Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs in the context of space policy, and also talked about the potential for SSP. He described the long term planning process for SSP going backwards from mid-century deployment of SSP to what would be needed starting now to make it happen on that time line. Later in this segment economics were discussed and Dr. Vedda pointed out how they can change over time. We also got into a discussion about vision versus fantasy. I asked him how one could tell them apart and he listed several test criteria. Pay attention to what he said, his rules are excellent. We also talked about suborbital tourism and would it prove to be a path to orbital tourism and spaceflight. In segment four, Dr. Vedda addressed four primary goals with his book, including the focus on long term planning, exploration and development, capabilities not destinations, and global solutions to bring in the most talented and best people to the space and related industries. We talked about lunar programs of other national space agencies, and the U.S. economy. Here he said that our space program needed diversity and multiple interest holders to enable it have the most value to the most members of society so that even in touch times space is seen as economically valuable. If you have questions or comments for Dr. Jim Vedda, please address them to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com and I will forward them to him. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:56:04 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Angie Bukley, Thursday, 2-18-10 (30.37MB; download) -- Guest: Dr. Angie Bukley. Topics: Space and its various meanings, importance, and development. Dr. Angie Bukley returned for this special one hour program to discuss her latest book co-edited with Dr. Joe Pelton and published by Apogee, "The Farthest Shore: A 21st Century Guide to Space." This book is available through the One Giant Leap Foundation (OGLF) Amazon Partners website at www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/books. If you buy the book through OGLF, Amazon makes an important contribution to OGLF/The Space Show. The direct OGLF URL is www.amazon.com/dp/1926592077?tag=onegialeafou-20. We started our discussion by asking Dr. Bukley about the concluding chapter first, Chapter 12: The Meaning of It All because this chapter sums up the many reasons why we value space, its development, and why we want to go to space. Its one of the best responses to these questions which are always asked both within the space community as well as in the general population. Dr. Bukley suggested that an overriding theme from this last chapter was the need for people to explore . There were questions about ISU students, the attitude about space tourism both within the student body and the French population in general. Another question asked Dr. Bukley was what her book would like on these subjects in ten years. Here, we learned that the goal is to make this into an online book and have it constantly updated to reflect changing times and changes within the industry. She made the point that it was not static. Listener Terry called in from Dallas, won the book given away by Apogee, and asked Dr. Bukley what she would like to do in space. This produced a most interesting discussion, don't miss it. We talked about space walks, weightlessness, and Angie used the terms the microgravity dance and choreography for such a dance. Angie suggested that she would like to just spend time looking out the windows but listen to her full comments in response to this question. What would you like to do when you go to space? Other listener questions addressed space markets and business, the subject of Chapter 11 of the book. Don't miss this discussion either. Space policy, space law and the regulatory environment came up and we also talked about the Next Generation Suborbital Research Conference underway in Boulder, CO that Angie was attending. In our commercial discussion, asteroid mining was brought up and Angie mentioned the ISU student publications and how to find them on the ISU website. Several people asked questions about attending ISU and the language of record which is English. Dr. Bukley outlined the application and admission standards, along with additional information about ISU so if you are interested in the program, listen carefully. Before the program concluded, I asked Dr. Bukley about Chapter 3: Space Stories. Here, we talked about the need for space stories from those that have been to space or work closely in the industry and how the stories help make the bond with us all about space. Dr. Angie Bukley can be contacted through the ISU website, www.isunet.edu. Her direct email for comments and questions is Bukley@isu.isunet.edu. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:28:10 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Classrom Lesson 3 Orbital Dynamics, Tuesday, 2-16-10 (61.78MB; download) -- Guests: CLASROOM: Dan Adamo and co-hosts: Topics: Lesson 3: Orbital/Flight Dynamics. Lesson 3 discussed the basics of orbital and flight dynamics over a two hour plus period. As with all Classroom programs, the goal was to ground listeners on the facts of space flight. In our initial segment, Dan provided us with a basic understanding of both orbital and flight dynamics and what a Flight Dynamics Officer (FDO pronounced as Fido) actually does. We talked about the training required, the supervision, internships, computers used and the various positions available including working the console. Dan also explained the difference in doing an LEO mission versus a longer mission to the Moon, a NEO, or Mars. He also described the differences in working a human spaceflight mission versus a science or robotic mission. I asked Dan to extrapolate to the needs of orbital space tourism or an orbital destination to a Bigelow space station. We described and explained transfer orbits using the Moon as an example. This is a very important factual discussion including rendezvous, the concept of antipode, and launch windows. Here, our panelists explained that we launch eastward but to go to ISS at 51.6 North, we have to go to the NE. The penalty for doing this was clearly and technically explained. This discussion brought up staging and the tyranny of the rocket equation. Pay attention to the required maneuvering to get to station, why it starts almost immediately after leaving the pad, and the penalty paid by Europeans and even the Russians to get to this orbit. As you will hear, once at the ISS, its easy to go to the Moon and other places, but getting to ISS does involve a costly launch penalty. I asked about polar orbits to the Moon and our panel members explained the facts of this type of orbital action in detail. The timing and windows on the polar orbit are far more severe than equatorial or an ISS launch. In our second segment, our guests said that the reason orbital dynamics was so hard was because of the tyranny of the rocket equation. Dan then talked about Adamo's Rules for the Road for Gravitational Harmony. These rules are on the blog as part of the Lesson 3 presentation materials. A propellant depot discussion followed. This is an essential and must hear part of this Classroom program as we talked about orbital dynamics issues, propellant depot orbits and locations including at the destination, cryogenic transfer, location near the ISS and much more. Plausible and not so plausible propellant depot missions were described. We suggested that those proposing propellant depots need to undertake a Conceptual Mission Design and run the numbers. Orbital and flight dynamics need to be part of the analysis, not just the engineering issues. We then talked about the presentation material submitted by Dr. Jurist and partial orbits, launch east instead of west and Jim brought up the concept of minimum energy used by the clipper ships as an analogy to why launching east is more effective than Point to Point going west. Our panel members said the purpose of the Classroom was to offer grounding on the issues controlling spaceflight. Jim suggested that the future is not unfolding as any of us thought it would be and this presents us with disconnects from facts and reality. Dr. Logan suggested four areas that we must all be grounded in: 1) the rocket equation; 2) flight dynamic; 3) bio-medical and human factors realities for space travel; 4) propulsion. He said to solve these much needed problems, grounding is essential. All of us agreed. If you have comments or questions, please post them on The Space Show Classroom blog at http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com under the Lesson 3 Archive section. All co-host email addresses are on the blog and Dan Adamo said he could be reached at adamod@earthlink.net. All notes and comments sent to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com will be posted on the blog.
Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:23:20 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Dr. Richard Greenberg, Monday, 2-15-10 (33.65MB; download) --
Guest: Dr. Richard Greenberg. Topics: Europa, the moon of Jupiter, the potential for life on Europa. Dr. Richard Greenberg was our guest to discuss his book, "Unmasking Europa: The Search For Life On Jupiter's Ocean Moon." This book is available on the One Giant Leap Foundation Amazon partners book page, www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/books. You can order the book using this URL, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0387479368?tag=onegialeafou-20. Remember, if you buy the book through the OGLF Amazon partners page, Amazon makes a contribution to OGLF/The Space Show. In our first segment, Dr. Greenberg talked about the water on Europa, the oceans, possible sea life due to the oxygen that interacts from the surface down. He talked about the ice and the estimated O2 path which might set up the mechanisms for complex life as there is plenty of O2 available for complex life. We talked about the next flagship Europa mission which is to take place in approximately twenty years. Dr. Greenberg stressed throughout the show the need for this mission to have a Europa lander. At one point during this segment, I asked about the approximate cost of a Europa mission and if scientists would be willing or able to buy the research results in a commercial contract. While he estimated the cost at about $3 billion, you will want to hear what he had to say about buying commercial research. Also in this segment, we talked about Europa being heated by tidal friction and the differences with Europa from the other moons of Jupiter. In our second segment, we got a call from listener Rick who asked about the spider complex at the Manannan crater. We spoke about radiation and the need to harden electronic equipment going to Europa. We also talked about the nature of science in that the missions to Europa are so far apart that new teams of scientists step in to conclude the experiment. We talked about this being the nature of science even if frustrating. As an example, he said that he started work on the Galileo Mission in late 1977 and the mission ended in 2003! The tidal issue was also discussed in this segment as was the orbit of Europa. Here we talked about orbital resonance and the ratios with Io, Europa, and Ganymede. In our third and final segment which was shortened, we talked about the color photographs in his book. He said they were artificial colors because the camera on board the Galileo spacecraft only had first generation CCD black and white cameras and did not contain all the filters necessary for rendering real color. He suggested that if we looked at Europa from the window of a spacecraft, we would probably see a smooth white surface object. This is a fascinating discussion about color photographs so don't miss it. He also said he used the black and white photos for his research, not the enhanced color photographs. Toward the end of this segment, Lake Vostok came up as a study model for Europa regarding the contamination issues. If you have a comment or question for Dr. Richard Greenberg, you can email him at greenberg@lpl.arizona.edu.
Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:02:10 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Brent Sherwood, Sunday, 2-14-10 (53.85MB; download) -- Guest: Brent Sherwood. Topics: NASA Flexible Path based on the Augustine Commission Report. Brent Sherwood returned for this Space Show program to present a detailed discussion the potential NASA Flexible Path for our coming civil space policy. In our first segment, Mr. Sherwood explained the basis of the Short Study conducted by various NASA centers and participants during the Fall 2009. Brent was the Study Coordinator. This is an important discussion as Brent outlines the purpose of the study, who participated, why, and much more. As he said, the main issue involved how to define the ultimate space policy goal and separate the goal from a destination goal. Later he said there was a focus on three missions including the assembly of very large telescopes, going to a NEO, and visiting Phobos, the largest of the Martian moons. There are also three nasaspaceflight.com articles you should read on these issues as they leaked information from the study project.
1. Mars and Phobos: www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/01/taking-aim-phobos-nasa-flexible-path-precursor-mars/; (2) Very large telescope construction in space www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/01/manned-mission-to-construct-huge-geo-and-deep-space-telescopes-proposed; (3) Visiting NEOs www.nasaspaceflight.com/2010/01/nasas-flexible-path-2025-human-mission-visit-asteroid. Brent outlined the characteristics of the flexible path so you definitely want to pay close attention to what he described. This is a very interesting, comprehensive, and important discussion. In Segment Two, our last and longest segment, we talked about why a visit to Phobos was easier and less costly than a trip to Mars. Brent also described why going to Phobos was more interesting that the smaller Martian moon, Deimos. Phobos is probably a captured asteroid and has many interesting qualities to it. Again, a very interesting discussion. During this segment, Bob Werb called in and asked if the flexible path was really different. This led to a lengthy discussion about the flexible path, how we did things in the past with Apollo and ISS, game changing technologies, and more. Bob asked if this was really a plan to return NASA to the "glory" days of NACA. Don't miss what Brent had to say about this. Brent fielded many additional listener questions about a NASA flexible path, mission costs, and NASA budgets. He talked about what makes a mission interesting and valuable. Toward the end of the program, Brent discussed the very large telescope idea in some detail, including placement at the various Le Grange points between the Earth and the Moon and Sun. He explained what such huge telescopes could accomplish and even "see." If you have a question or comment for Bent Sherwood, please send it to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com and I will forward it to him.
Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:42:11 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Kris Kimel, Friday, 2-12-10 (60.24MB; download) -- Guest: Kris Kimel. Topics: Kentucky Space innovative space programs. Kris Kimel returned to update Space Show listeners on new Kentucky Space programs and projects. For more information, visit www.kentuckyspace.com. In our first segment, Mr. Kimel told us about the Kentucky Space cubesat program with Professor Bob Twiggs. We also learned about the approaching suborbital launch on Feb. 24 and the upcoming Glory Mission with a Kentucky Space satellite launch to orbit out of Vandenberg later this year. Kris also discussed all of the 2010 launch plans for Kentucky Space. We talked about Professor Twiggs, the possibility of working with Interorbital Systems (www.interorbital.com), and much more. The Kentucky Space NanoRack project came up and Kris had much to say about this project throughout our two hour program. This is a fascinating commercial project which we have discussed before with Jeff Manber. As we started our second segment, we continued the NanoRack discussion and inquired about ITAR issues if launched on a foreign rocket and if placed on the Russian module of the ISS. Kris then physically described a NanoRack container. We talked about the opportunity being available to any individual or company as long as they meet the materials and safety requirements established for its presence on the ISS. There is no approval of the experiment. Kris said that the experiments will be astronaut tended and that NanoRack payloads give way to NASA priorities for the ISS. Later in this segment we talked about student opportunities and learned that Kentucky Space student opportunities start in high school and go on to graduate school. In our third segment, we discussed suborbital launches and sounding rocket launches at White Sands and near Mojave with Garvey Space. Balloon launch was discussed as was the possibility of doing projects with JP Aerospace. Kris also talked about the possibility of using the upcoming suborbital space tourism flights for both suborbital and orbital cubesat launches. Throughout the program, we addressed the shortage of academic launch possibilities, what this means for the academic community and the nation as a whole , plus students. Later in this segment, I asked Kris for a preview of the Kentucky Space five year plan. We talked a lot about their commercial and entrepreneurial space focus and the need to have value added payloads. This is an important discussion you will not want to miss. Toward the end of this segment, we started discussing the Kentucky Space plan to pursue an Exo-space medicine disease mitigation and health enhancement program in microgravity. This sounds like a fascinating and potentially very important program. As we started the fourth and final segment, we continued on with the medical discussion and access to Kentucky Space programs for non-residents of Kentucky. Toward the end of the segment, we talked about innovation and creativity and the role of serendipity in coming up with progress. Don't miss this fascinating discussion. As we concluded our discussion, Kris talked about the need to pursue persistence and passion. If you have a question or comment for Kris Kimel, please email him at kkimel@kstc.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:38:30 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
The Space Show Classroom Lesson 2 Rocket Equation, Tuesday, 2-9-10 (54.38MB; download) -- Guests: Classroom guest panelist Paul Breed with co-hosts Dr. Livingston, Dr. John Jurist, Dr. Jim Logan. Topics: The Rocket Equation and why it matters. Welcome to Lesson 2 The Rocket Equation in our Space Show Classroom series. This nearly two hour program focused on The Rocket Equation, how to understand it, use it, and why we build and launch rockets the way we do. In the first of two segments, Paul Breed began our discussion using his presentation materials posted on The Space Show Classroom blog, http://spaceshowclassroom.wordpress.com. This is a very comprehensive discussion and explanation of the rocket equation and the physics and engineering governing the launching of chemical rockets. Paul and our co-hosts talked at length about the difference between suborbital and orbital, the amount of energetic differences in the two and why going to orbit is 25 times harder than suborbital flight. We talked about fuel, mass rations for the rocket full of fuel and payload as well as the rocket's dry weight mass ratios. We talked about the need to accelerate to a minimum of 17,000 mph and the 1,000 mph boost the rocket gets from launching west to east at the equator which diminishes to only about a 300 mph if you launch from a polar site. The penalty for launching east to west was described and Israel was the example. Comparisons were made to the Saturn V rocket and jets. We talked about why a big rocket has less of a launch penalty than a small rocket, the SSTO was examined so that all of us would understand why it is so difficult and illusive to build. We talked about why wings, landing gear and reusable robustness work against the orbital vehicle but are better for the suborbital vehicles. Air-breathing rocket engines were discussed along with jet engines, and toward the end of this segment, we got into the rocket' equation significance for costs. In our second segment, Paul took us through the rocket characteristics, mass, and costs for the typical Lunar Lander Challenger rocket. Paul said such a vehicle would have a gross takeoff mass of 3,000,000 pounds! Air drag was discussed in both segments of the show but again applied to small rockets in this segment, thus within certain limits, an air launch of a smaller rocket is useful. Paul explained why in his opinion the ramjets, scramjets, and hypersonics don't make sense other than for the military or only for upper atmospheric operation because at best they can only produce about 16% of the needed energy for orbit. During this segment, we explained rocket staging. As you will hear, each stage is planned and designed using the rocket equation but builds upon the performance of the preceding stage. Later in this segment, Dr. Logan used the Space Shuttle and the SMEs as an example of mass ratios for payload. This example dramatically describes what Paul, John, and Jim talked about during this rocket equation program. Near the end of Lesson 2, we discussed possible propulsion and space access from other means that would allow significantly better performance given the rocket equation constraints or even not be subject to the rocket equation including nuclear, the space elevator, fusion, and non-chemical rockets. We also talked about the difference in fantasy and reality and all our participants said that the fantasy while important, does not work for space exploration. Space exploration requires reality and reality is not interchangeable with fantasy. The issue of changing orbits came up, carrying more fuel on an emergency Space Shuttle flight, and why its not practical or doable and even insignificant given the ratios for the shuttle. If you have a comment or question for any of the participants on this Classroom program, please post it on the blog. E-mail addresses for the three co-hosts are listed on the blog. For Paul Breed please use paul@rasdoc.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:02:01 UTC
|
| Add this to another station |
Robert Zimmerman, 2-8-10 (57.78MB; download) -- Guest: Robert (Bob) Zimmerman. Topics: Proposed U.S. Space Policy. Robert (Bob) Zimmerman was our guest for this three segment two hour show devoted almost exclusively to discussing the new proposed space policy as put forth by the Obama Administration on Feb. 1, 2010. While this program was in three full segments, to summarize it by segment would be too limiting. Bob discussed the proposed space policy throughout the show. Listeners called and sent in questions and I promise all the listeners that there is something in this discussion that will anger you, please you, possibly even make you giggle or laugh. That is there is something in what Bob said about the policy and the Obama Administration that will resonate with everyone regardless of their liking or disliking the new proposed policy. It seems the shift to commercial launchers is desirable but when and how remain the question. The impact of the policy on human spaceflight was discussed at length. I did one of my usual rants on the economic problems facing the country and the space program. We discussed what it likely means for space when all there is happens to be fiat money. I'm quite sure many will disagree with what I had to say and with what Bob also said, but without some economic stability entering the picture, it won't just be space programs facing hardship in the out years. Bob talked about the commercial launchers, the need to have competition, the lack of strategy from the top down in the Executive Branch, and he openly guessed at a possible budget outcome at the end of this year. We both talked about the idea of a shuttle extension but recognized such an idea was DOA. Bob commented that the proposed policy does not really mandate or set a plan or goal for flights, it only just talks about such activities as if they are possible. As you will hear, it’s a comprehensive discussion of what is known about the policy plan so far and to many, its controversial and Bob's comments will also be considered controversial. 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 or you can forward it to me at drspace@thespaceshow.com. Selected by: David Livingston [ stations ], Tue, 09 Feb 2010 03:50:30 UTC
|
| << < 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 > >> | |