Neil deGrasse Tyson Talks About NASA, Innovation & the Economy
A Conversation with Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson at the 28th National Space Symposium, SpaceRef
“SpaceRef had the opportunity to sit down with Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson at the 28th National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs. The conversation centered around his idea of doubling NASA’s budget as it would spur innovation and fuel the economy. We also discussed his latest book, Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier.”
Marc’s note: Tyson gave memorable speech on Tuesday. It was similar to some of what he said to Congress last month. Our conversation touches on all of the highlights from his speech. It’s 20 minutes worth watching.
Could not agree more.Dr.Degresse Tsyon has the right stuff.
If the Administration, Congress, and the people could grasp and act on 10% of the concepts and fundamentals Tyson conveyed in this impromptu interview, there would be hope for the future of this Nation.
Folks:
I like Neil’s ideas on space system design, diversity.
I tackled the problem of interplanetary travel at the system level many years ago. Like deGrasse Tyson, I ignored the conundrum of architecture completely. We need a system that is both flexible and standardized at the same time. Flexible enough because every interplanetary voyage will be different in duration, thrust (delta-v) and cargo. Standardized so that each flight can be assembled efficiently.
What I came up with was two standardized modules that would be the foundation of this system:
– The Backbone Module. This would be a cylinder that would connect end to end with other backbone modules, habitation modules and propulsion modules. Each backbone module can pass power, data, fuel, liquids and gasses required by the architecture to other modules. Each backbone module will have a number of radial ports (also determined by architecture) that will connect with the other standardized module in this system.
– The Logistics/Cargo Module. These modules would be standardized to mate with the ports on the backbone module, but there the similarity would end. They could carry fuel or any other gasses and liquids, pressurized and unpressurized cargo, be configured as lifeboats or landing craft or whatever you need. Use your imagination. Once plugged in, each module would suck power, pass data and send fuel to where it’s needed on the ship
Using this kind of system would allow each flight to be tailored to time, cargo and delta-v. Habitation and propulsion modules would be attached to the appropriate number of backbone modules. Logistics/Cargo modules would then be attached, more fuel modules for a faster trip, less fuel and no habitation module for economic cargo-only flight which can take longer.
We’ve been assembling trains on a mission by mission basis for a century and a half for goodness sake. It’s a good model. “If it ain’t broke…”
Have I thought about actual architecture? You bet! I just don’t want to spoil your brain-boil as you come up with your own ideas. One aspect appeals to me though. Not only do you pressurize the backbone modules (which gives you access to pressurized cargo, lifeboats and landers), pressurize the propulsion modul too so that you can do repairs, overhauls and even complete engine replacements in a shirt sleeve environment. With that, all the important hardware on the ship could be accessible for inspection, maintenance and repair from the inside!
There you have it. Now all we gotta do is come up with standards that everyone can agree to. Ouch!
Any comments?
tinker
P.S. Hey, Neil, am I barking up the right tree here?
Tinker,
This will make DTARS very happy. He and I discussed something similar a while back, and he really likes the railway idea (me too).
The challenge will be in the details, as you’ve inferred. One place where I keep getting stuck is on the backup systems. Your primary fuel, data, etc., feed-through lines are presumably exterior on each module, for safety and grounded access. But, where do you put the back up and crossfeed lines that doesn’t create a safety hazard? Putting them exterior as well leaves them open to geting killed by many of the same events that could take out the primaries.
Steve
Steve:
From an architectural point of view, I would put the fuel lines inside the modules. Double or even triple the system if you want and separate the lines as far apart as you can. Precedence can be found in the main electrical buses under the Shuttles payload bay and the Russian fuel transfer system used on Progress and it ISS (Some of which is internal). Don’t worry about fuel spillage where airtight hatches and the cold vacuum of space can confine and purge any messes. Details, details. Just say that everything goes inside the modules and design using that criteria. If you end up with exceptions, like using liquid oxygen or liquid hydrogen, so be it.
tinker
Tyson is the Great Communicator of the Space Sciences. He is an honest cheerleader that actually knows what he’s talking about. We desperately need more like him.
Dr. Tyson is the best, more articulate, and most enthusiastic advocate for NASA there is. I wish the Agency could do as well!