Feedback: What did you think of this show?:
Guests: Dr. Jim Logan, Dan Adamo, Dr. John Jurist; Topics: Humans to Mars, exploring vs. pioneering & 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 Dr. Jim Logan, Dr. John Jurist, and Dan Adamo for a 1 hour 45 minute discussion about humans to Mars and a critique of the "NASA's Journey to Marts: Pioneering Next Steps in Space Exploration (Oct. 2015)." Please note that our program completed in one long segment without a break. We started off by asking Dr. Logan to summarize the recent New World Space Conference he attended in Austin, Texas. Jim pointed out that there were lots of young students there and they seemed eager to hear his message and did not consider him a Debbie Downer. Jim is an evidence based guy when it comes to space policy and programs, he is also well grounded in the sciences and engineering so he does not typically hang out in the usual space cadet la la land of make believe. We noted that older, more seasoned space cadets often dismiss those with similar messages based on evidence and fact, but Jim was impressed by the willingness of the younger group to consider evidence and facts. The other guests plus myself had much to say about this particular issue, then we moved on to Dan who wanted to talk about the paper he has uploaded on TSS blog containing his analysis and comments re the NASA Journey to Mars Document. If you have not yet read it, please do so at this time. For Dan and our guests, there were issues about a poorly defined definition for exploration vs. pioneering, confusing the two in the Journey to Mars document, the need for congressional action to change the mandate to pioneering, then asking for the rational for pioneering or Martian settlement. Much was said about there being no business case or rational case at all for humans to be on the surface of Mars. This was an overriding theme for the entire discussion. Our guests kept asking the question, "why are we doing it.? This referred to humans on the surface of Mars for pioneering purposes. Note the definitions Dan used for exploration and pioneering earlier in the show. Note also the differences Dan suggested for exploration. Our guests talked about the challenges that make Martian settlement or pioneering beyond our reach at this time. Dr. Jurist brought up radiation and microgravity issues along with other human factor issues. Dr. Logan supported what John was saying and called for the need to know the gravity prescription. Without knowing it, we cannot possibly be serious about sending humans to mars. Our guests talked about nuclear thermal propulsion and several times they referenced the Aquarius Concept (www.spaceenterpriseinstitute.org/tag/aquarius-concept). Cognitive decline was also discussed as a leading challenge. The matter of the Twin Study on the ISS with astronaut Scott Kelly came up. Jim said a sample size of one does not help as it would only lead to insufficient information. Our guests talked about radiation shielding, its cost, and added mass. Dan mentioned a recent Aviation Week article from a September issues saying that nuclear propulsion may have a timeline for development around 2022-24. John had much to say about this. John also brought up the economy, potential interest rate rises and the impact on space and NASA. Jim said we needed a 10% growth rate for our interplanetary work. We addressed the economic issues for several minutes as it was an important part of our discussion. Later, I mentioned the recent interest I was seeing from Space Show listeners regarding the pioneering of Venus with some sort of settlement in the upper atmosphere. Our guests pointed out the pros and cons for this & we contrasted it with pioneering on the surface of Mars. Joe sent in an email asking for the action plan or steps to be taken to pioneer Mars. Don't miss how our guests responded to Joe's question. This provided the opening for more discussion about cislunar development. Here, our guests had much to say, including rescue opportunities, the lack of a redundant vehicle in contrast to even Apollo 8. Dan talked about this issue in technical terms so don't miss it. Near the end of the program, SLS came up but in the context of problems with it regarding mass, the stages, Orion, abort and rescue, black zones and more. Don't miss what Dan had to say about SLS and technical problems and issues. The issues Dan raised are not the typical issues one hears discussed when talking SLS. Please post your comments on TSS blog. You can reach either of the three guests through me at firstname.lastname@example.org.