Feedback: What did you think of this show?:
Guest: Dan Adamo. Topics: Mars human spaceflight, robotic exploration, space policy, heavy lift economics, and much more. 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 Dan Adamo to the show for this 2 hour 36 minute comprehensive discussion regarding HSF to Mars, the Second Mars Affordability and Sustainability Workshop report and much more. During the first segment of our program, Dan started out by telling us the process used to engage him reviewing said report and writing his critique of it which is on The Space Show blog (http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com). Topics discussed in this segment included the use of Low Latency Telepresence (LLT) as compared to High Latency Telepresence (HLT), the absence of human factors and aerospace medical personnel in attendance and said issues missing from the workshop report. Dan said the key missing information included radiation as well as microgravity concerns. Dan then questioned the existence of a compelling rational for humans going to Mars. This became a recurring discussion topic throughout today's program. Space settlement came up & so did a possible space race with China. The subject of a rescue mission came up but there was a detailed rescue mission discussion near the end of the program in the second segment. Dan was asked about the minimum crew size to operate an LLT program from Deimos or in orbit around Mars. Several emails were sent in including one by Dr. Jurist addressing high acceleration upon return from Mars. Dan then suggested the stepping stone approach, starting with cis-lunar space. Doug sent in questions about heavy lift versus using already large commercial rockets. Dan and Doug discussed this, then later in the second segment, Doug asked more questions on this topic. For now they talked about going to Deimos with a Falcon Heavy. Dan pointed out the need for many more launches and rendezvous missions as compared to one or two SLS type rocket launch. He questioned if we can't afford SLS launches, how do we afford even more launches and rendezvous missions. Marshal emailed us wanting to know about the possibility of lava tube plans . BJohn asked this guest about a possible Mars cycler & then we moved to the second segment. In the second segment, I asked Dan what he thought the impact on space policy might be vis a vis the workshop being discussed on this program. Don't miss his reply. Doug asked a question inquiring if for the same cost it would take to send humans to either Deimos or to the Martian surface, one could send many high-latency rovers to multiple locations far from each other to give the rovers many chances to discover evidence for life in different types of places? This brought us several exchanges comparing LLT with HLT, heavy lift versus smaller rockets and more. Doug and Dan has several exchanges during this segment, especially when the topic of rescue missions came up. Ted in Boston asked about the rational for going to Mars, referenced the recent program with Dr. Zubrin, and the payoff or benefits for a human Mars mission. Dan had much to say about this so don't miss it. John from Ft. Worth called to say we were not yet technically ready for Mars and we should use the stepping stone method and focus in cis-lunar development and exploration. As an example, Dan & John talked about the need to know the actual gravity RX for humans. Dan said we should have a short arm centrifuge on the ISS helping to figure this out but that there was no policy to do that. We turned to the topic of rescue and I told listeners what I found out about who pays for rescues when I did some quick and dirty research on this a few weeks ago. The issue of rescue and how it might happen on a Mars mission or even in cis-lunar space came up with many listener emails including several by Doug putting forth various rescue scenarios. For the most part, since we have no launch on demand, no rockets, pads or hardware sitting around ready to be used at a moments notice and we have to contend with launch windows, it does not seem feasible that a Mars rescue mission could be implemented, possibly not even a lunar rescue mission. Doug suggested a scenario where multiple ships left for Mars at the same time and then if one got in trouble, the others could rescue the problem ship. Dan talked about the physics and mass of what would be needed to do that. You decide if it might be feasible for such a rescue scenario to be implemented. Let us know your thoughts on the blog. If the rescue party is already on Mars, rescue will be unlikely given the state of the art today. Michael Listner suggested the absence of a realistic rescue plan may hinder the issuing of a launch license. In his closing comments, Dan focused on the workshop critique saying that the sponsors would have been better served if participation had been opened up and had including human factors and aerospace medicine professionals. Please post your comments/questions on TSS blog. You can reach Dan Adamo through me.