Broadcast 2576

02 Nov 2015 Joe Carroll
Your Amazon Purchases Helps Support TSS/OGLF (see www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm)

Feedback: What did you think of this show?: 

Guest: Joe Carroll. Topics: Artificial gravity, what's next for human spaceflight? Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. In addition, please remember that your Amazon purchases can help support The Space Show/OGLF. See www.onegiantleapfoundation.org/amazon.htm. For those listening to archives using live365.com and rating the programs, please email me as to why you assign a specific rating to the show. This will help me bring better programming to the audience. We welcomed back to the program Joe Carroll to update us on his work with artificial and partial gravity, plus his thoughtful considerations for what comes next for human spaceflight. I have uploaded three papers of Joe to The Space Show blog for today's program. He does refer to these papers and presentations during the show so be sure to follow along by viewing them on the blog. During the first segment of our 1 hour 41 minute program, Joe said he preferred using the term partial gravity to artificial gravity. He talked 1 g issues, tests that can be done on the ground and the need to learn about gravity limitations for humans through ISS research. Centrifuge spin rates were a significant discussion topic in this segment. Here, he referred us to Appendix A page 8 for a two page discussion on early research on this subject. See his paper titled "Partial Gravity Biology Research Paper for Space 2015 Final" on TSS blog. Joe referred several times to the Twins & one year cosmonaut/astronaut study underway on the ISS, plus the Gemini 7 mission which answered several important microgravity questions. Later, Joe suggested we look at the chart on the third slide of his Power Point where he showed the gravity factor of major bodies in our solar system. This is an interesting discussion, don't miss it. It also pointed to the importance of knowing the gravity prescription for Moon-Mars as it covers most of the solar system gravity ranges. Doug sent in an email about spin rates as high as 24 rpm. Don't miss how Joe responded to Doug who then sent in a clarification email about upright exercise in a short-arm centrifuge. Again, don't miss Joe's reply. At this point, Joe started raising questions about why Mars, asking what were the economic reasons. He referenced our National Space Policy from 2010. Joe suggested the direction of the manned program was confusing at best. He talked about the remaining residual from the Apollo momentum and the Outer Space Treaty impact on future human spaceflight. BJohn emailed in about artificial gravity experiments with cubesats. In the second segment, Tim asked several questions including one about using weighted clothing to offset microgravity. The subject of radiation exposure came up and here, Joe talked about the side effects of "fixes" which may cause even more problems than just the original problem being mitigated. He again referenced the Twin and cosmonaut/astronaut studies on the ISS now underway. Doug called regarding my earlier comments where I reference a past show in which many listeners did not think we needed to know the gravity prescription. Doug corrected what I said about his position but Joe thought there were solid advantages to know the gravity RX and to do so in LEO. You will find this discussion to be very interesting. In the latter part of this segment, we talked about being serious about humans going BLEO if we are not serious about finding out the gravity RX for humans. Safety came up and here Joe had much to say about the approaches regarding Orion and Dragon. Jack emailed in about our lack of seriousness on HSF BELO since we are not trying to learn the human gravity RX for long duration spaceflight or settlement. Joe went so far as to suggest convening a panel discussion to open up the discussion channels on what should be next for HSF. He listed potential participants but also invited listeners to send in to me or post on the blog their suggestions for participants. He said this was the perfect time for such a discussion as we entered the last year of the current administration. Doug sent in the final email saying that the challenge was more about how we go about deciding who's vision gets the funding, suggesting this challenge took precedent over figuring out the next vision for HSF. Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog above. You can reach Joe through me.

Tags: 

Guest: 

WARNING: Using Disqus Comments on the Space Show:

To ensure your comments do NOT get caught in the Disqus automatic spam filter systemplease login to your Disqus account or create a verified/approved Disqus account.

Posting multiple URL links WILL TRIGGER the Disqus automatic spam filter system.