Skip to main content

tv   Discussion on Legacy of Apollo Missions  CSPAN  October 15, 2019 6:05pm-8:04pm EDT

6:05 pm
safe, secure, private data, but we also want safe and secure communities. we can have both. i really do believe that. i hope you have a great conference. i look forward to hearing ideas that come out of today's discussions. thanks. (applause)
6:06 pm
(applause) >> welcome to the engineer forum i am apollo 15. joined on stage today by six incredible individuals and each of whom have shaped the history and the future of human spaceflight. i will give a little introduction but as he said my name is lianne much like panelists today, i have never been to space which gives you an idea of the impressiveness next to me, but i did grow up in
6:07 pm
florida and watched many of you wants to space. it is one reason i chose to pursue engineering. i have gone on to have an atypical career and also a founder and ceo of future engineers and we have current challenge with nasa where students can meet the next mars rover. right now, we have i encourage them to go online and submit their name. speaking of space history, i will tell you about our panelists and i will let you
6:08 pm
know that their placement on stage is not a coincidence. right here, we have general tom stafford, so that is a famous after not with an apollo program. we have dr. sandy magnus who spent four months on the international space station. also, chris ferguson, now a boeing commercial astronaut. he joined spacex in 2002 and we share the title of never having been to space.
6:09 pm
with all the work going on the commercial side, maybe all of us will have the opportunity to go to space one day and in the end, we have major general charlie bolden. he is a former nasa administrator during the obama adminitration and really oversaw the transition from the space shuttle program to a new era of space exploration where it is now being turned over to commercial entities and looking forward to new technologies going forward. the way the panel works is we separated into three different segments. we will give speakers time to share about themselves and then we will have a 30 minute q&a and then transition to the
6:10 pm
audience questions so start thinking what you want to ask our panelists. we are going to start over to my left. general thomas stafford received his degree from the u.s. naval academy and graduated first in his class in 1959. he then went on to become an american legend. in 1965, he piloted gemini six the first rendezvous in space and in 1966 a rendezvous in the lunar mission. he had software development for project apollo. as commander in 1969, he flew the first rendezvous around the moon. he also commanded a meeting in space between u.s.
6:11 pm
astronauts and soviet costs among cosmonauts. dental stafford has flown four types of race craft and more than 100 types of aircraft. he presided over the development of multiple aircraft and conceived of and started the roadmap for the f-22 raptor. at this point, i think you understand what it is my honor and pleasure to introduce thomas stafford. >> thank you. it is a real pleasure to talk yesterday. other factors, to me is the face invasion and what the soviets do. it was a real
6:12 pm
dynamic time and i used the qualities i gained to talk about it. really enjoy the history. it was a lot of fun. as i looked at apollo, we set the tools and we did not know. later, on the first spacewalk, nearly got killed. from that,
6:13 pm
you train underwater where before you go on a spacewalk. now, they have virtual reality so you can just do goggles. also, we had our engine shutdown. we learned you have to have a mix of a system, not a complete automatic, but with a manual override. you will also learned lessons like apollo 13 and that is a lesson you learned back in high school chemistry. you always pour acid into water, you do not pour water into acid. we learned
6:14 pm
from apollo 13, you do not mix oxygen with compound that have carbon. we had about five and a half pounds of carbon. you have probably seen pictures. that was a series of things. then, i was involved in the columbia accident. there is a whole series of things. he could have used the word challenger,
6:15 pm
anywhere they had the word coumbia. so there is a lot of rules that you do not violate and they are all there. the main thing is don't screw up. it was a great time to be there and started with all these stealth programs from the airforce. later, i was commanding general and whatever never started the b-2 bomber roadmap there's a whole series of things, a great time to be there. they're all tools out there and you do not violate
6:16 pm
them. >> our next panelists, we have a captain. he was the pilot of the very first space shuttle flight back in 1981. he had three other space missions during his 30 years in the u.s. navy, he served as a test pilot. in 1969, he was selected as a nasa astronaut and on the apollo test project. he became director of the space shuttle program at nasa headquarters and the director of kennedy space in her. he entered the private sector at lockheed martin and served as president of a propulsion company. he earned his bachelors from the
6:17 pm
university of texas austin and elected to the national academy of engineering in 2012. (applause) >> thank you and good morning. i'm really pleased to get this panel open with friends of mine. especially with tom stafford. they took us over to russia and the soviet union. even out to their launch site which i think we were the first to visit and i had the pleasure of tucking
6:18 pm
the rest of his crew in the so we go back a long way, but it is also a pleasure to be up here with the last shuttle flight, one of my fondest memories. john young and my commander had a photo op because we represented the space shuttle program. i joined nasa right after apollo 11 50 years ago. there was a highly classified program and it was finally declassified. we took
6:19 pm
photographs of the soviet union. when the program was canceled, they took crew members offset and we did not do any training or grandmother a process. we just walked through the door and they put us to work. my first assignment was to go to make sure the crew interfaces were acceptable and i worked throughout the program and its fights which started off kind of dramatic, but ended up a great program. the development of the space shuttle had just been
6:20 pm
announced. people think the job is mostly training, but most of my career was spent in doing engineering and following the development of the spacecraft. i would imagine that the current astronaut office is doing the same thing with the vehicles being developed today by boeing and spacex. there's a lot of engineering work that the astronauts are assigned to do. i was surprised and honored when john young, our experienced astronaut at that time selected me to be his crewmate. flying that mission,
6:21 pm
it is one of the highlights of my life. we are engineering test flights to make sure the space shuttle would do what we decided to do. looking back, i am very proud of the space shuttle program. yes, we had two terrible accident and i lost some very close friends but when you look at some of the 30 years it was flying, early on in the program, we did some important department of defense missions that i think contributed significantly to us winning the cold war. the shuttle made it possible, it looks like the hubble space telescope. this revolutionized our knowledge of the universe.
6:22 pm
it also made possible the building of the international space system station. that is an engineering marvel that is still up there doing its job. in summary, the space shuttle program is something we will look back on fondly. it will be a long time before we see a vehicle that is anywhere near capable of that. i was sorely disappointed in 2011 when the program was terminated. i was primarily disappointed because we did not have the capability to put our crews in space. we would be dependent on russia to do that. we have been for the past eight years. i am anxious to hear how the star liner and dragon capsules are going to correct the problem very soon. thank you. (applause) >> for our next speaker we have dr. sandy
6:23 pm
magnus. dr. sandy has flown on four shuttle missions. she flew to the international space station in november of 2008. she spent 4.5 months aboard the iss. she served at nasa headquarters and as the deputy chief of the astronaut office. dr. magnus worked extensively with the international community, including europe, japan, brazil and russia. she is now the deputy director for engineering. prior to working at nasa, she masters has a masters in electrical engineering and physics. she has a phd from georgia tech. help me in welcoming dr. sandy magnus. (applause) >> i want to take a moment to talk about this space
6:24 pm
station.i want to start of by saying, there is a big difference between intellectual knowledge and experimental knows, learning and going into a lab and touching something. that is when you really understand, when you have the experience with the knowledge. we need to experience that environment and experience the planet a different way. when you fly on a space station, it is really interesting. you adapt into the environment at a completely different level than when you are just up there as a tourist for 10, 11 or 12 day flight. the crew came to pick me up in march. they floated across and looked so awkward
6:25 pm
and so unsure up there. motions and just very gingerly moving their bodies as they moved through the spacecraft try not to touch things. i said let me take you back. let me take you back to the service module to use the treadmill. i was going to bounce off that handrail, that handrail and straight to the pa. i knew how it was going to translate through. they caught up with me and said you move really fast. i did not realize it. that is when i knew i adapted to a whole new level. it is interesting because when you experience that, you realize it was normal for me to get up every morning and float through my day and talk to people around the world in different countries about all of the amazing science and things we were doing. it was normal to have the earth out
6:26 pm
the window to the extent that after maybe a month or so, i almost took it for granted. i took for granted looking out the window. there was an earth cloning by below me and the beauty of it and how amazing that really was. we have this ability to adapt. i think it is really important. when you're up there and you are experiencing it, it changes your perspective. let me share one of the greatest perspective changes that i had. that was the perspective about gravity. to have that ship, everyone in this room understands gravity intellectually because we are all scientists and engineers.
6:27 pm
you know the equations and we can describe it and quantify it. that is not the same thing as understanding it instinctively and internally. the fact that when you hold your arm out like this, think of all of the little diagrams you've done in physics. there is a vector acting on your arm that you are using the energy of your muscles to do. it is weird to experience that. it makes you look at the world in a whole different way. this is the power of sending humans into space. we start thinking about questions we should be asking that we don't think about asking because we take for granted the environment they are already living in. it opens up our minds to new ways of looking at the universe. it makes us think just a little
6:28 pm
bit differently, it is just that little shift in perspective. that is what is so powerful about sending people to space. that is what is so powerful lot having people in space for a long time. and also during the experiments that we do up there. maybe not all of those are cutting edge but i guarantee, as we continue to put people up there with different skill sets, as we continue with different kinds of experiments up there, we will learn more from the questions that we learn to ask then the answer is that we are getting from those experiments. we are just at the beginning of wandering out of the norms we have established here on the planet. to open our minds to new ways of thinking and new questions to ask. that is what the power is of sending people out in the space program. i am really excited about where we are now. we are at the point where we can get more people into space to have these perception shifts based on their experience base. i will stop there and i look forward
6:29 pm
to your questions. (applause) >> on to our next speaker. we have chris ferguson. captain chris ferguson is the first commercial test pilot astronaut. he will be among the first to go to space. he has met the developed of the spacecraft mission system and crew interfaces, working hand-in-hand with nasa. he was also a leader in the development of the testing. he is a retired u.s. navy captain. he has piloted space shuttle atlantis, commanded space shuttle endeavor and commended the final desk commanded the final shuttle mission. he is a spacecraft communicator for many space shuttle missions. he has a masters in aeronautical engineering from the naval postgraduate school. it is my
6:30 pm
honor to introduce captain ferguson. (applause) >> i always listed love listening to sandy magnus's stories. she always makes sound so compelling. maybe i would like to talk a little bit about the future. it was mentioned that the shuttle program ended in 2011 without an immediate replacement to get us back into the lower orbit. we have been working diligently over the course of the last eight years, 2014 specifically was when the big contract was led to return americans to lower orbit. it warrants a little bit of an explanation about what is a commercial spacecraft. what is happening here is nasa will begin purchasing services. they will begin purchasing services to take astronauts from the
6:31 pm
service of the earth up to the international space station and return them safely after six months. the benefit of this is it allows nasa to focus on space missions beyond lower orbit. it comes at a great value to the tax taxpayer. we are on the cusp of returning americans to space. this came out in the news late this year, early next year after an absence of about eight years. i'm very excited to show you this. this next chart will look a little bit like the nfl's red zone if you are familiar with it but it was my way of avoiding the two-term limit. this one first, just appropriate description of what our vehicle looks like. you can see the spacecraft. that is the vehicle that will take astronauts up-and-down. it has a very apollo like appearance. it'll carry up to five astronauts up to the station. it will stay there for six months and return safely and
6:32 pm
remain on board as a lifeboat if we ever need it. the service model will be jettisoned and the crew module will be recovered at one of our five west coast landing sites. it will be a land landing. we are going to lunch on an atlas five rocket. it is a very proven technology. about 80 flights to their credit. we are looking forward to all of the modifications of all them, they were made out to launch complex 41. that was previously in an uncrewed launch facility. and the two vehicles, what we call ofd and cft wants vehicles are sitting there and waiting for them to show up. that will happen very shortly. i mentioned the nfl sunday ticket. if you have the red zone, you have an opportunity left and right, top to bottom, we are in the process of training the very first crew. i will witness it. we will get
6:33 pm
all of our flight support from a mission operation from a team in houston comprised of a lot of the mission controllers that actually service to the very tail end of the space shuttle program. we will leverage a lot of the capability that nasa had the safely operating the space shuttle for 30 years. we will launch aboard an atlas five rocket. we will land at one of our five west coast landing spots. the object is to adopt the space station in 24 hours. we can complete all of our test objectives. we will remain there for up to six months. once we get a go that the lending facility is cleared, we will undock and in a short
6:34 pm
period of time short timeframe, we will land in the western united states. we will recover. ideally our landing area will be white sands test facility. we have another in a town called will cox, arizona. that is not too far from the mixing board of. the proving ground up in utah and then the edwards air force base in california. next up is a big moment for us. it is what we call a paddleboard test. this will be conducted at the white sands test facility. this vehicle will rollout their in the very near future. you will see the preparations that we will have in november. to us, that is a
6:35 pm
very big steppingstone leading up to our test flight. we will fly in unscrewed orbital test like that will adopt the international space station prior to putting it crew on board in the near future. again, that is just a little summary. i look forward to your questions but this is what the future of spaceflight holds. thank you. (applause) >> now for our next speaker. this is the vice president of the build and play lighting at spacex where he leads the companies polity and engine or process development team, he oversees the launch readiness process during the launch and assesses launch risks. he developed spacex is much ready space x's was ready preparedness. he was the launch engineer for the last three
6:36 pm
falcon nine missions. he has a phd in aerospace engineering from the university of berlin. we are honored to introduce hans. (applause) >> thank you. it is an honor to be on this panel. i realize my flight time was less than your space-time. i have to work against that with more slides. i will show you a quick video
6:37 pm
of the dragon spacecraft mission. it was completely autonomous. it was for preparation for the man flight later this year. i will stop here. this is lt 39. this is where all of the shuttles and apollo launches from. this is two different rooms. mission control and hawthorne. inside of crew dragon, you see little earth and ripley. that is the view from the spacecraft. there is the second stage. the first stage returns and lands there. they're getting closer to the space station. little earth is
6:38 pm
a gravity center for us. this is the actual thing. this is one of my favorite phases. little earth stayed up there. the nose will close for
6:39 pm
re-entry. tara deploys. there, it deploys. this is the recovery boat. there are two of those. after yesterday, nasa and spacex got an emmy for a webcast for this launch. it became pretty popular. it is exciting. the whole thing is
6:40 pm
very popular. you can see on the top there, it is amazing. these are dragon capsules and different stages. down here, this is the final integration down there. there is lots of cabling going to other places. on this side, you see a bit more propulsion. these devices over here are the thrusters that basically move the space craft away in case of problems. that is one of the things that is different between dragon and any other spacecraft. the integrated system allows you to use those perpellants. if you don't use them for escape, you can use them for maneuvering and orbit. it extends your range on the spacecraft dramatically. we are also heavy
6:41 pm
into training. i think this is a fire drill down there. here's a picture that reminds you of other things we do, we have 76 launches. space x started business in 2002. we did this relatively quickly. the majority has happened in the last four years. it is pretty amazing how fast we ramped up and how many launches we do currently. this is a landing of two pieces boosters in parallel landing. you have to do this over and over again if you want
6:42 pm
to do this quickly. we are extending our views ability. it allows you to gain so much experience in a much shorter time. this improves your spacecraft based on what you get back and what you see. we will perform the mission as soon as possible. we are coming to the cape pretty soon. that is what i have. (applause) >> amazing. we have our next
6:43 pm
speaker. he oversaw the transition from the space shuttle system to a new era of exploration. he is the president and ceo for the bolton group. he worked in nasa's about office. he piloted the space shuttle columbia and discovery. he commanded the mission that deployed the hubble space telescope. general bolden created the space technology mission directorate. his tenure at nasa has seen the landing of the mars curiosity rover. and an increase of earth observation satellites. he earned his bachelors of science from the u.s. naval academy and his masters in system management from the university of southern california. join me in welcoming charlie bolden.
6:44 pm
(applause) >> just as i did yesterday, i want to call out a couple of people who really played a critical role in my development but also in the time i spend as the nasa administrator. there is a guy in the room who has helped everything we have done in human spaceflight in the last 20 years. i don't know whether bill is still here. did he leave? ok? one of the things i learned a long time ago when i can to the naval academy and again when i came became a marine, they said listen to the gunny. or listen to the chief. that means you have very smart people who happen to not be
6:45 pm
officers. if you listen to them, they will not steer you wrong. i'm not trying to say that bill was a chief but that was my gunny and my chief. i thank you for everything you did. really quickly, i have had an opportunity to work with everyone on the stage at one time or another. this was one of the satellites that worked here. it was one of the final experiments we had on the space shuttle mission in 1994. we almost did not get the launch. it turned out absolutely incredible. he reminded me of hamilton, the broadway show. how many of you have seen hamilton? you should see it. it is awesome. there is this
6:46 pm
musical reprise where everybody talks about what impact hamilton had on them or they had on hamilton. you get to ehrenberg and he says i am the fool that shot him. aaron burr says i am the fool that shot him. i was at the cape when chris and his crew landed. i was in tears. i spent my entire nasa career that spans the 30 years of shuttle. it was really time to make a transition. i agree, the crime of it was that we did not have the replacement immediately available. hopefully we will not make that mistake as we transition to lunar orbit and then onto mars. another thing that was mentioned, what the shuttle brought us, i will continue to emphasize this. i think shuttle
6:47 pm
will go down in history. the ability of people to fly who could not fly before, that will be the legacy of shuttle. things to look for that are happening now with these two guys, with spacex and boeing, we never tested the escape system on the launchpad at kennedy until we had the accident. we should have done that. they have now done that. you have people who work on the pad every single day. they depend on a way to get off. these are the workers, not the astronauts. we had an opportunity to use it once and we did not. we did not have confidence in the escape system. these guys already took care of getting rid of that. selection and training of
6:48 pm
astronauts. as sandy said, the big thing about where we are today is we will allow people, some of you sitting in this room, you may not think so but you may have an opportunity to go to space for 20 minutes. that will change your perspective on this planet. if you get an opportunity, find a rich friend and get them to for the bill for you but you need to do that. the last thing i will say, get your students to understand they don't have to be astronauts or scientists. they have to be people who think about food and drugs and medication. there is no supply ship coming every 30 days or every three weeks. we will have stuff that will sustain for years at a time. i look forward to taking your questions and helping you understand how you helped kids get interested in
6:49 pm
taking apart inthis thing. no matter what they do. (applause) >> now is when it gets fun. we are going to do some q&a. i want to start our discussion today by celebrating history. we are talking apollo 50 years on. at it's time, it was on the cutting edge. a human perspective, it really taught us how the humans have the capacity to explore and pioneer. i would love for each of you to share just to share one aspect of apollo. whether it is a person or a moment that inspired you about your work in space. why don't we start here? bob, i think you have countless inspirations to share.
6:50 pm
>> well i was inspired, actually the original mercury seven people were part of my inspiration. and tom here. as i said, i joined the program while apollo was in progress. but it was the people that inspired me to try to emulate them. >> how about you? >> i was five when the apollo 11 landed on the moon, i don't remember much of it. sorry. but i will say what is really inspiring about the apollo program is again you go back to perception shifts. now all of a sudden we put people on the moon and it really inspired the whole world about, hey, if we can do that, maybe there was something i can do in space, too. so for those of you who live in the d.c. area, on
6:51 pm
october 21, here in d.c. at the convention center, the international astronomical congress, which brings together the whole global space community. what we are celebrating at the congress is the impact of apollo and 50 years on to see what happened in the space industry in the last 50 years. it is going to be an incredible display of not only what the united states has accomplished in continuing to aim for but with the rest of the world has engaged in, too. the theme of the conference's power of the past, promise of the future. the pivotal moment when men stepped on the moon really inspired the whole planet to where we are today and the trajectory of where we are going tomorrow so it continues to have an impact. i think that will be true for the next 50 years as well. for those of you in d.c. i invite you to come to the congress and see what is going on globally in space. it is impressive.. >> i was eight. i do remember watching it on a black-and-white television in
6:52 pm
my parents's basement. it obviously stuck with me. i went on. my mother saved these little sketches i would make of the lunar module. i was a pretty creative eight-year-old. but fast-forward, i read a book called "digital apollo." i don't know if anybody read that. it was a story about how we did it on a technical level. how did we get to the moon? we invented guidance that did not exist or systems that no one would new would work. how did we do this? how did people position themselves to land on the moon? it was amazing about, how does an astronaut stand? what does he look at? what does he want to see? when does he turn from going backwards to forwards? there are amazing discussions in there about how we really did it. that actually serves as a bit of a motivational force for how we design our new motivational
6:53 pm
spacecraft new space our new spacecraft. what does the docking system need to do? it helped us a little bit. we played on a lot of the apollo legacy just in designing our capsule in space. >> yes, i was six. i was between the two of you. i was nearsighted and in the wrong country. i'm incredibly thankful for having a chance actual to work actually to work on the next generation. apollo is an incredible inspiration for everyone working at spacex. but part of what we do is also to re-create that, the boldness of building a device and filling it up with dangerous propellants and going to the moon. that is an incredible thought that is really hard to explain to people that are not
6:54 pm
engineers, not scientists, and have not seen that. to me, that was one of the key drivers and that i want to do that, too. you know, very thankful to elon musk to have an opportunity to actually do that. hopeful that we will see the moon and mars in the next decade basically again and have a chance to stay longer and stay maybe permanently. that would be great. >> i'm not going to say i was five or six because i wasn't. i was in my last trows of my last few months as a student naval aviator. i was in meridian, mississippi, going through flight training, in the t2 getting ready to go back to pensacola to go aboard the boat. i had no interest in space whatsoever. i admired the original seven. we were sitting
6:55 pm
watching neil armstrong and buzz aldrin descend to the surface of the moon. i was mesmerized by that, but still no interest whatsoever. it took a person to really get me interested in the space program, and that was the late and great dr. ron mcnair, who personally inspired me and embarrassed me into submitting my application for the astronaut program because he reminded me of something my mom and dad told me all the time growing up in south carolina, that you can do anything you want to do if you are willing to work and put your mind to it. i had forgotten that. ron asked me if i was going to apply for the program, and i told him, not on your life. he looked at me strange and said, why not? i said, they would never pick me. he said, that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard. how do you know if you don't ask? so i was challenged and i was
6:56 pm
inspired by apollo becoming part of the program, and i was most inspired in my almost eight years as a nasa administrator when i learned that people who have no clue of rocket ships and sometimes don't know which end is up play and importantly critical role in the very future and whether or not we exist. the reason we were not ready to go into human spaceflight from the u.s. right after we phased out the shuttle, we could not convince the congress that a commercial spaceflight program was the way to go for the u.s. the reason that we went to the moon was because we had a president surrounded by people like george lowell. tom talked about some of them yesterday, but people who refused to say "we can't do this." we don't know how, is what they said, but we will find a way. apollo inspired me to work that way with people who make decisions, to help them understand why. social media has changed the game. pro and con. following
6:57 pm
the example of spacex and the way they utilize social media, nasa has changed the game of informing people. when i talked yesterday about it, it is not either/or. it is an and. government and industry occupant was have to work together. that was my inspiration from apollo. a lot a people don't have a clue what you are doing and could care less, but they are the ones that are going to help you do it. >> tom? you were in space even before apollo. >> of the four missions i flew, as part the most impressive is the views. that is unique. when you are out there, it is about the size of an orange. that is what i wanted to find a color tv to share that with people
6:58 pm
and it worked out real well. speaking about that, the experiences you go through like gemini nine, literally a heck of a time getting that spacecraft. we could have lost them and myself. from that, we trained underwater. there is a great movie out. i recommend it to you. it was made in russia about alexi, my good friend. it had the premier at the kremlin and vladimir putin was there. actually, about 6000 people. the iss advisory task force. they had a special showing in the museum. it showed us that movie. i think apollo 13 is probably the most realistic of the space movies you see in the united states. but this movie called "space walker, " you can
6:59 pm
get it from amazon. it has english subtitles. probably one of the best movies and most realistic i have ever seen. it is unbelievable. i recommend it to all of you. it is about a two hour movie. something you will never forget. i told him this at dinner last night. i did not have time to go into it yesterday, but on the second stage burn, the third stage on the lunar injection, picked up the 11,000 feet per second. it was like a pogo, but it wasn't. the frequency was the same. the amplitude was building. i said, john, this feels like flying but there is no aerodynamic forces on this thing. kept getting more and more and more
7:00 pm
and more. i remember about 34, 000, 35,000 feet, i could not read the instrument panel. i thought the thing was going to blow apart. here was the abort panel. that would have shut the engine down. i knew i would be gone a day and a half or two at least aboard. this is why you have test pilots. if it blows, it blows. it picked up 11,000 plus feet per second, 36,600 feet per second. within 6/10 of one second. what the hell was that thing? i could not believe it. john turned around and said, hey, you got to look at this. apollo stabilized it to the
7:01 pm
spacecraft. the last thing before they close the hatches, stabilized it and lock it down. guess what? he did not disconnect it. furthermore, we got this vibration. i said it is really something. it looks like we have a problem with the tank pressurization. about a week later, i got a call from the doctor himself with his german accent. he says, tom, we owe you an apology. (laughs) what is that? he says, you
7:02 pm
remember a vibration you had at the end of the burn? you remember that? i said i remember. hell, i will never forget it. he said, the tank pressurization valve was set to close too close to the valve and got into a harmonization sequence. that went down into the engine. and then we were on the stabilizing bar. but we fixed that one real easy. we made double sure that when they closed the hatch, the stabilizing bar, two people. they set a wide variance between the tank pressurization and the valve. no other apollo did not have the problem. >> amazing. i am so impressed that your memory is like a chat. he is quoting speeds. so impressive. all right. so onto the next question. i really want to look to the future of space travel or human spaceflight. on the horizon, we have so much excitement. we
7:03 pm
have a commercial crew program. we have space tourism. you have artemis. we are going to the moon. we are using that as a steppingstone to go to mars. some people want to retire there one day. there is so much excitement. i would love for each of you to share what you are looking forward to most about the future of space exploration and what you think the critical technologies are that will get us there. start on the end, charlie, and we will come back this way. >> the critical technology is what we call we have to figure out how to land. we are talking about landing on mars. so that
7:04 pm
is something we've got to figure out. again, if i go back to it space is doing and has done, we talked to them about flying a dragon to mars and landing because it would give us data. data about a proposed landing retro. working with the private sector and the experiments they are doing, it allows them to go on and develop the exploration part of the program. the other thing is the human body. we know quite a bit more than we have ever known before things to a lot of the experimentation going on on the station today. but long-term survival on mars, i think we will be ok. but it is just sort of like a commercial you see on television. well, i think we will be ok. ok is probably not good enough. so we probably need to figure out exactly how we are going to keep the crew safe and the radiation in the radiation environment of mars. i'm a big fan of going underground and using the martian soil as a
7:05 pm
safeguard so humans live underground and that's enough for me. >> spacex was built with the background of making the human species multiple planetary, which means earth and mars for now. obviously, the big technical problem going to mars is money. >> there are some technical problems, too. money plays into that, too. spaceflight is super expensive. so one obvious term is reusability. currently, the design for 10 times, we will
7:06 pm
start fourth the for the next launch actually. dragon has been used three times. another will be used up to five times. all these things help because you don't have to build something again. you have to expect it and refurbish it. ideally, you want to keep that really low. ideally, you want to keep it as low as possible. so you inspect it, it is fine, and you have scheduled regular maintenance on boosters and others. we just recently recovered something coming from the second stage basically in a big net and safety from falling into the water, which is super useful. we will refurbish that. obviously they are working hard at that part. starship is working on that. it is going to allow us to use the second stage again. it really becomes the cost of fuel and some maintenance and the operations basically. that is where we need to go. that is the technical side. we need on the other help in terms of payloads, resources, people that actually use that service. that is basically where everyone can
7:07 pm
pitch in here and help us. because obviously, if they have the capability, somebody needs to use it. that is super important, too. i think that is primarily it, mars usability. not to mention reliability and safety. you see the booster coming back. you see possibly leaks, get more data, video cameras all over the place. we just pulled them up and look at them. so that helps you, too. so reliability and safety. >> i think the biggest asset we have right now that will enable us to get to mars in the not far distant future is about 200 kilometers that way, the international space station, the place we are living to learn and work for long durations. how do we purify water? how do we get to recycling 95%, 98% of the water? how do we remove co2 from the air? how do we at oxygen? how do we make this in a system
7:08 pm
that aptitude leak positively must function for the duration of time it takes to get to mars and back? we are perfecting those systems on the international space station today. i think we have to look beyond 2028. where the current end of the iss's life is. where are the users? who will build the replacement for the place to test and develop long-term assurance that these systems will in fact work on the day that we eventually do leave for the martian service i look at this two >> different ways. number one, breadth of access, which we are trying to create. the biggest barrier to that is really the cost of getting people and things up there, which our industry partners are working on to try and reusability is a key. trying to lower the launch costs. but also frequency of launch. if you go to the case of the users, if you are a user,
7:09 pm
you want to be able to. based on whatever the pace of your business model requires. those are two dynamics that are still playing out. we will see where we get with the current plans. with respect to going further beyond the earth's orbit, the key to the radiation question, we have a lot of questions there. we need to understand the answers to those questions and manage that problem because radiation is not going to go away. that is sort of i think what we have to do their. to chris's point, recycling is important, but i would say it is beyond just creating a 100 percent life-support system. a 100% life-support. think of the logistics training we might have to establish to support people on mars. it is we dig us to imagine. how do you manage that? we have to figure out how to recycle everything we take into space, how we can use the materials on the planetary bodies upon which we place
7:10 pm
humans, and there is a lot of work that has to be done in that area. oh, by the way, that kind of work will eventually come back and benefit earth. because we have finite resources on our planet. we have to figure out how to recycle a little bit more here, too. doing these technologies that we can be working on will help humans beyond the orbit and on our planet. >> well, i do firmly believe humans will visit mars someday. before we do that, not only learning to live off the planet on the iss, but we need to learn how to live on another planetary body. we are lucky enough to have the mood and that is a few months going to mars. this is a great test ground for learning how to live off this earth that we are all lucky enough to do. there were many there are many questions to be answered. radiation being
7:11 pm
the significant one. we ought to take advantage of that. the trips that we did make to the moon were all little camping trips. they were short, short duration kinds of things. to live there is a totally different problem. we need to solve that. >> bob really brought some points that we outlined in this year's study for president bush senior, how we go about to the moon and mars. he hit it right there. but one thing, you are going to need thing, you are going to need a big booster. there is no doubt about it. people have things to sell. small boosters and put them together, but that does not work. we have been through it many times. radiation, absolutely. we ought to have a way to protect for radiation. that is one of the big risks. assuming your systems
7:12 pm
engineering is good and your systems have enough reliability to get you up there, perhaps you need a rocket for mars, not for the moon as far as upper stage propulsion. oh, again, the two things you got to recycle is water and oxygen. for example, apollo 10, 6.4 million pounds of mass. 300,000 pounds taleo, the rover. 100,000 pounds. >> how do you do that? >> well, 4.8%. what i had of useful payload was 1.6%. the human being uses about 2.2 pounds, depends on your weight,
7:13 pm
2.2 pounds of oxygen a day. that means you are going to have to have 50 to 75 pounds of mass for every day you every day you breathe unless you recycle. you are going to have to have 6.5 pounds of water a day. that is going to take that much more. so you've got to recycle that. so there is a lot to be done. we hear the word commercial. well, i was on the backup of the first jiminy flight. i was the backup commander of the first apollo flight. i was there really from the start to the finish. everything nasa bought and purchased was from commercial energies. we got insight into regulatory requirements. two were commercial, nasa to work commercial, nasa steps out of the way. i disagree. gemini,
7:14 pm
apollo, all done by commercial people. none by nasa. zero. so i want to bring that up. (laughs) (applause) >> prior to this, something i did not include in your bio was the guidance system that you did hand calculations in space because the guidance system failed. correct? now you understand how he can do that. he is a human calculator. i love it. so we have a short time here. we will have one question before we go to the audience. the space industry is highly competitive, as we know. it has a history of being competitive. but it is also highly collaborative. the scope of what we are trying to achieve requires us to really collaborate. now, in the commercial era, still highly competitive and highly
7:15 pm
collaborative. how does that balance? give me insight on the delicate balance and why we need both. i would love to start with sandy, because i know you did a lot of work with international agencies giving your time at nasa. >> yes, it is a delicate balance. it is a good dynamic because there is a push and pull amongst the different entities. the competition is good because it makes everybody keep innovating. the collaboration is good because we learn from each other because it is still quite risky, quite dynamic. keeping that balance where the learning happens across the community, but there is enough competition and poking at each other to spur people to do better is really awesome. i think it all works at the end of the day because in my experience
7:16 pm
working with people around the world in the space program, everybody is really, really passionate about the mission of flying in space. whether that is machines or people or both. and because everybody buys into that and feels that and is passionate about that, we can conquer all kinds of issues that might otherwise create fractionalization and complete dysfunctionality. we still have some, but in general, the whole community pulls together because they believe in that passionate thing. it is one thing that i talk about with respect to the international space station program. it shows you going back to collaboration and cooperation, it shows you, that program, what we can do as human beings if we want to accomplish something difficult. it is the most complex, highly technological program ever conceived and executed by people. and it involved numerous different countries, different agendas, different languages, the english system, the metric system. that is a mess, too. the political
7:17 pm
situations. this project, this multi-decade project worked because everybody who was engaged in it at the end of the day really believed and worked towards it. there is no reason why we cannot solve any problem that is facing us as a global population if we take the same attitude. the space program, because of this passion and total commitment to achieving the end goal. >> we don't have a ton of time, but who wants to take this one? charlie?. >> ditto.. >> ditto? >> how do you take that one? >> i don't know. competition is good. and it was also a level
7:18 pm
of cooperation on the launchpad that everybody works for the mission. it does not matter which company they work for in many cases. the same applies to when things go wrong, that everybody feels terrible that things go wrong. i found this, at the end of the day, people who work in space are passionate about space. you know, they want their company to succeed, of course, but there is a working level that people want things to go well and to be safe and reliable. that in many cases is actually more important. i find that pretty refreshing in many cases. >> i will just talk dollars quickly at a very high level. if you look at what cost to develop the shuttle, it was between $30 billion and $40 billion, give or take what source you look at. the program was $3 billion per year. that got you about four or five flights per year, depending on the year. if you look at the way the commercial crew program is evolving, for the cost of operating the spatial program
7:19 pm
for two years space shuttle program for two years, you are getting two different providers that are contracted to do a full development, two test flights, and six service flights back and forth to the international space station. just looking at the dollar value, it will turn out to be a very good value for the american taxpayer when we execute. so where does that reinvestment dollar get paid? the intent is to reinvest that exploration technology to get to the moon and to mars. the idea being, like i said earlier, let's invest in lower orbit, provide commercial capability to get cargo back and forth from there and soon humans back and forth from there and go beyond the orbit with the taxpayer. >> we're going to transition to the audience for questions. we have mike's set up and we will have some of who's going to walk around. if you have a
7:20 pm
question, raise her hand and someone will come meet you with a microphone and just raise your hand. just raise your hand. >> i am with materials engineering and a and ae. my question is about's and nae. my question is about space force. a new military branch was created last year. so we are going to have a new military branch for the armed services. experiencing space, your perspectives are very valuable to make sure it can operate to its maximum efficiency and deliver the best value. i would like to see the panel to share some of your views, and maybe specific suggestions. so the
7:21 pm
space force will be operated accordingly. >> the question is, your views of space force. >> the way the force has been evolved over the years started with armies and later someone invented a navy, and that went on for years. but who invented the boat and the wheel. in the air. i think the first shot ever fired was italian, across the english channel in 1910. and some fight in the balkans
7:22 pm
and someone fired a rifle out of the backseat. i do not know they hit anybody. but then air became a domain of force protection. force protection force projection. in this case, you're going higher and you're going faster. to think that it is not going to be, i think is a little naive. we are all familiar with what the chinese are doing with hypersonic guide vehicles. and that is out in space. >> does anyone else want to take that. (laughs) >> my name is dan baker from the university of colorado. i'm a prosecution or of space weather. many of you on the panel i'm a practitioner of space weather. many of you on the panel mentioned radiation as a concern. how important is
7:23 pm
it to you in your mind for the future to have forecast of what the space environment is going to be, and what the space environment is going to be, and to have adequate warning for the more transient space radiation effects. >> i think it is important for astronauts but not nearly as important as it is for us on the planet. space weather today, i'm speaking to the choir here, it is how we answers bit problems to communications. we have been very fortunate in that we have not had a major space weather occurrence that has knocked out satellite communications and the like. with that is a possibility. i think long before we need to worry about what is the risk to a crewmember flying in space, we have to continually have an ongoing improving, technologically developing space weather capability just to protect us here on the planet.
7:24 pm
>> i think some of the eyes ideas that a been floated some of the ideas floated on protecting astronauts from space radiation, and i understand there are being made in polymers, but one of the most practical applications i've seen is to essentially create anti-vanallen belt an effective van allen belt around the spacecraft. this is a problem we are going to have to solve. while i strongly advocate up addiction of such events, i do not know how good i'm going to get how i advocate the prediction of such events that i do not know how good we will get to be able to say you're good for three years. so i think we have to beat the problem. >> from my perspective from my perspective, i watch the space weather for launch every time.
7:25 pm
it has a different effect in the sense that you care about life on board and the other electronics rather than wind in the upper atmosphere. it is a factor that goes into the whole picture, the whole environment. >> we will take the next question. >> from a commercial perspective, what is the end goal? where you see this program in 25 years or 50 years. what is your vision echo your vision? >> it is good question. we were currently on fixed contracts. and i find one of the biggest discriminators, whether you are somebody. this is the amount of
7:26 pm
money you get and you are on your own, mostly, is not quite like that. we do get some support, obviously. and we work as a team always. but at the end of the day the money is finite that you get for something. that is the model i can see helping the cost keeping in control because we are very cost conscious. it is not billable hours like you have in other professions. so, because that is basically what cost plus is. it is billable hours and it goes up so the incentive is not there to keep a low cost. i see this as a currently, we keep these contracts that way. because it is more of a service. and i forgot who said it, it could be like a service that you book it like you book your ticket
7:27 pm
basically, you're a certain amount of money to bring staff from the ground to the moon. and some amount of money that goes to mars. fundamentally, cost must come down dramatically in the next 25 years in order to make this work. in order to make the whole economics of it close. otherwise it might be too extensive. >> in a perfect world, 25 or 50 years from now, the cost of launch will have come down. so people like you guys who are creative and have good expertise in certain areas, have an opportunity to go have these perception shifts that i mentioned earlier. and then the creative juices flow, and you think of things you can do in
7:28 pm
low earth orbit, things and the creative juices flow, and you think of things you can do in low earth orbit in microgravity. we have a lot of capabilities that will be coming online, but we have not yet figured out how to develop the markets. or how to develop the use cases for the broader private enterprise if you well if you will. getting access for people to get up there and have good ideas, figuring out what are the platform's beyond the space station, and what other kinds of adventures we can create in space such when we are 25 to 50 years from now, i'm hoping we have started this becoming normal. >> i am internal optimist. however, this is one thing that bothers me. because we all talk about 25 to 50 years from now. we do not have that long. the international space session is a machine. and all of you in this room, most of you, our engineers and scientists i am neither but i have been around you long enough to know that
7:29 pm
machines break. we have probably four to eight years, i think, of life left on the international space station. money is not going to help that. we just you do not have a way to get enough pieces and parts there to refurbish it and make it new. so something has to step into its place. so we will be exactly where we were when we shot the space shuttle paired we are going to shoot the station the station was nowhere to go out. so i have to come up with a business case that helps people understand that there is value in going into lower earth orbit and having a pharmaceutical laboratory. there is value in going into lower earth orbit and having a materials processing laboratory. because we have demonstrated all of that on the international space
7:30 pm
station now for 19 years. that is what the state space station's purpose was, to demonstrate for people in business that this is an incredibly potential moneymaking venture. and until somebody buys that case and makes the investment, and says i'm going to put a platform up there. i thought bob bigelow was going to do it. he has had the beam on the international space station now for four or five years and it has not stepped off yet. so am i being critical? you bet i am. because nasa spent a lot of money, the government spent a lot of money allowing the private sector to go and use this test facility so they could step off and go make money. you do not make money if you're not willing to take a risk. and hanging around the international space station is risky in one respect. but it is not a business rest. because business rest. risk. because you're having remembered provided by the government. for all of you conservatives who believe in the free market, you have an opportunity. jump off the international space station
7:31 pm
and build the low earth orbit infrastructure we have to have we are going to successfully send humans back to the moon and onto mars. (applause) >> just to bring the point home. boeing and spacex at no small cost to the taxpayers are developing two new capabilities to get too low earth orbit. we have one customer right now, the international space station. we need other markets to evolve. this is the first time we have done this as a country in 40 years since we developed the space shuttle. without a destination in 2028 or commercial market that builds, we really be ready to retire the capabilities to get back and forth with humans? i sure hope not.
7:32 pm
>> yesterday i mentioned how fast the apollo program was turned on. it was done in about three weeks. in the same way, the space exploration initiative that president bush senior started that started off by william jefferson clinton when he was in office. bush started off, boom. and in the obama administration, the constellation program. i do not of who will win the election a year from now, but that could be turned off really fast, what we have there. so i cannot forecast who is going to be the chief executive in their the next cheap executive in the next two or three cycles paired but that can go on the next chief executive in the next two or three cycles. but that can
7:33 pm
go on and it can go off. that is the big risk. >> next question. >> hans, i'm glad you can see well. what about the competition, jeff bezos versus spacex. their company also has the rocket lands and it took off and that is quite amazing. is that serious competition to spacex? >> i would definitely say, they are competition. they are building great vehicles. and we are ahead of the game right now. there is one big step a rocket needs to do and that is go to orbit. and that is in
7:34 pm
some cases, has been proven to be harder than people thought. i have learned that myself. it is hard to get to orbit. so we have that advantage now. at the end of the day, it is competition and we welcome competition. we feel like it gives us an edge because we are now in a push to work harder. we push to work on lowering the cost and becoming the best competitor among other competitors. >> >> next question. >> hello my name is tom jones, university of wisconsin at madison. i want to thank the academy and the panel for an exciting session. since we have a lot of engineers in the room, i want to ask a question about the future commercialization of space. and striking right balance between speed and safety. we have seen during the session, and the incredible advances that are being made, driven by competition, in terms of advances very rapidly. in
7:35 pm
terms of the technology, argued lee not fast enough. that on the last arguably not fast enough. but in the last year we can see that speed can lead to screw ups in aerospace engineering in terms of redundancy. so finding the right balance between those two is a challenge i'm curious what the panelists might comment on about what is going on and what the future holds, the role of nasa on the one hand of advocacy and on the other hand involved in dare i use the term regulation or providing that safeguard against a kind of disaster that would be a blow for the whole industry if it happens at a critical moment. >> i think the heart of the
7:36 pm
question is about how to use balance speed and safety. how do you balance speed and safety that canand safety? >> you need to have both. safety is a mindset as much as anything. hans and i were talking at breakfast this morning. the safety mindset says we may 2 seconds from launch and i do not feel well and i say stop. that is the critical part, is having people who have the ethical background to say, this is not right. the shortcuts we are taking are not right. and you go back and look at the program that you have in place and adjusted as necessary. the government doing it, nesta doing it, does not mean, because nasa doing it, because we generally take longer, that does not mean we are anymore safe than the
7:37 pm
private sector. going slow does not guarantee you're going to be safe either. (laughs) is the delicate balance, a mindset. i visited with an engineering school and one undergraduate said we need to become taught an ethics course for engineers, so that we do not, one of these days i'm going to have to make a life and death decision. and that needs to be ethically grounded. so there a lot of things that do not have anything to do with math and science and engineering that we have to make sure the young people of today understand. there is right and wrong. there is what is ethical and what is not ethical. and there's a good book for people to read and there's a good book for people to read and it talks about how
7:38 pm
the challenger occurred, the underlying title is, i forget. that's what happens at my age. when we allow things to go on that we know are not right, we infuse that attitude or that culture and our young people. so we has engineers and scientists have got to teach them how to think ethically and how to make the right decision, even if it means the program is slowed for a while. because nothing will end a program like rushing to the end and having it blow up on you. that is done. that is that. people get over being years late and dollars over. people do not frequently get over... we have never recovered from losing two shuttles. i think all of us have who have been on spacecraft will say that. you do not recover from that, it is noise the scar you carry with you. so get it right. >> the other thing to thing about as opposed to speed is just complacency. you forget to question things because things
7:39 pm
are normalized. it is not necessarily a speed thing but a matter of staying always alert and thinking about what you are doing, and questioning and listening to the system. and making sure you can have an environment where people can bring up questions. because that is where you are really going to create the right safety environment and avoiding that complacency. and that is hard. i talked about earlier how adaptable we are human beings and how we normalized to situations. if you look at those accidents, it was really all about complacency. we were not questioning as carefully as we should have been doing. >> there is another way of saying it than going faster slope. the worst thing you can
7:40 pm
have is a time failure. (laughs) >> chris, you're going to be on board one of the test flights. what is your thought about speed versus safety (laughs) >> i did not hear your last line. i do not think that speed and safety are synonymous i've had the unique opportunity to watch every phase of our vehicles designed from the engineering the parts coming together. does that make me an expert? no, it makes me an interested watcher. we also worked to eight pretty specific set of requirements that come from nasa that are bathed in the mistakes that nasa has made in the way it has run space flight operations in the past. and we have a lot of help from nasa. sometimes too much help. but i tell you any amount of help in the right area is a good thing. so i think that this is a very appropriate
7:41 pm
transition between a government run and managed program, over to a commercially run and managed program, with just enough of the past steeped in. and boeing or it's legacy companies has been involved in every human space but program since the beginning every human spaceflight program since the beginning. so a lot of that mentality and mindset is still there. ultimately, i think having folks on the floor and washing the hardware come together, and i have had the unique opportunity watching the hardware come together does build a lot of confidence. >> i want to add, my motto is only the paranoid survive. you have to have the right amount of paranoia. weather means stopping the launch and explaining to your customer if it means stopping the launch and explaining to your customer white have stopped it for three days. it is more important your customer why you have stopped it for three days. it is more important to get things right.
7:42 pm
>> question. i've heard so much about bringing things from the earth to low earth orbit. the concept in science fiction and in serious aeronautical journals has been the space elevator. is anyone still thinking about the concept of the space elevator? >> i can tell you that when i was executive director, with a very passionate community inside the aerospace industry that is very enthusiastic about the space elevator. it is still out there as a concept. technically, i think there are still roadblocks. a lot have to do with the strength of cables and people are looking at nanoparticles and can we weave together some cables of these kinds of materials that are really superstrong and could handle the tension. but i do not know all of the details. i just know there is a very passionate community out there.
7:43 pm
>> materials science, very serious materials science problem we sell things like that. >> ok next question. >> andrew jackson, section 10. i do not want to be a downer on this we are talking about human spaceflight. humans are fragile. and when i hear colonel stafford tell us how many pounds of this and we need water and we need food. is there an interim step that could be less expensive tell us have an eight pounds of this, water and food. robotics, artificial intelligence, would it be better to construct a community on mars which is based on robots, not on people. but the people can control the
7:44 pm
robots so you have that experience? it seems like a huge amount of the cost in getting us to mars is protecting these fragile beings. we talk about radiation. any thoughts on an alternative way to create a community on mars without necessarily sending people their first, they could go there later. >> you have curiosity and sin you will have march 2020 but ask bearman called moxie and soon you will have mars 2020 with an experiment called moxie. it is things we hope people will do later, like extract oxygen from the carbon dioxide i was fair. so we can make breathing oxygen and oxygen as part of a fuel we have been doing that, and we have been doing that for 50 years. i'm not a geologist but i have geology friends who tell me if we had one geologist on the surface of mars for as long
7:45 pm
as curiosity has been there, we probably would have explored the planet by now. and i do not say that as a trivial, is not a joke. but there is this innate curiosity humans have that we are not able, yet, to teach a robot. i mean artificial intelligence and all these other things will be here one of these days we think. an example i will give you, hubble space telescope. when we found out that hubble had a spherical operation and we decided we were not going to send the shuttle up to get hoddle to get hubble. the national academy together a team of people to go determine how we could save hubble. that was the title of the study group, saving hubble. we went into it, all of it all of us, even the human spaceflight people saying we have to find a robotic capability to do this. the technology was not there at the time. if that happened today, i'm confident we could probably put together a robotic mission that could do a lot of the repairs on hubble that have been done to date. but that is because we have the experience of humans going up there and messing around with it and finding out things you can do that we can automate. that is essentially the story, you have robots running around. we are trying to find out how do you
7:46 pm
offload the human from doing mundane things. and it is now time to send humans to mars to try to put together some of these things that the robots have been doing for 50 years now. i think. >> look at it as a toolbox. humans have certain schools and they come with certain pros and cons. certain skills, with certain pros and cons. machines have certain skills with certain pros and cons. like your toolbox in the garage, you cannot do anything with all screwdrivers. you need a mix depends on what is the mission and what you're trying to accomplish. they both come with expensive infrastructure on the in space and on the ground. in the book, fragility see design the mission. pick the tools based on what your objectives are. i don't think it is going to be an or, it is going to be
7:47 pm
in and at some level. >> again, i'm a big fan of mars. and i'm a big fan of using robots in the right place. i think before we put a human foot on mars should have an army of robots that are put there to burrow into the surface, build out the infrastructure, just the same way we do for any american soldier marine, airman or anybody goes to any of these places today. when they get there, they walk in, they do not build it. kbr or somebody with a lot of robots has taken prefab stuff and they go into an air-conditioned space where they can do stuff. you still have to dig a foxhole when you get out into the remote parts. but we can use robots to build habitats. that is a business. that we could be working on right now. >> it might be slightly apples
7:48 pm
and oranges. we talk about curiosity on mars. three and a half years to cover the same distance that someone else did in three days. they brought back 245 pounds of rocks. you need both. but it cost more too. >> next question. >> a short question, likely controversial. you talk about competition and collaboration. it seems to me one of the big elephants in space, china. i'm interested in your response in addressing the relationship in terms of space and china. >> why does everybody look at me? (laughs) say what you will
7:49 pm
about president obama and the obama administration in 2010, we thought we were on the verge of having another oppose so use another apollo soyuz, and it got shut down by the congress. all of you recognize because a lot of your intellect will and partners are chinese. we got problems with everybody intellectual and academic partners are chinese. we've got problems with everybody. what make us what makes us able to work with some people on the international space station so well echo his mission focus. when i was named to command my last space shuttle mission, george set i want you go back to houston and fly another shuttle mission. i was hoping it would be to go repair
7:50 pm
hubble. he said no, not on your life. he said i want you to go commands the first mission that will carry a russian cosmonaut. i said forget it, i am a marine. i've trained all my life to kill them and for them to kill me. and i do not to fly with any russian. and i do (laughs) and he said, down and go have dinner with them he said, down,. he said just go have dinner with them. and we talked about our kids and what we wanted to do for the future and we became mission focused on figuring out how we can get our two teams and successfully work on that mission. and now the international space station. and i think tom will
7:51 pm
tell you the same thing. >> exactly the same thing. i graduated and then what it to the air force. i wanted to go to korea and kill commies. then i ended up on apollo soyuz, and i realized all the russians were not communist. and since then, alexi one is my dearest friend, like a brother to me. his granddaughter is named after my daughter. and my two grandsons, a different site is named after alexi. a difference on a different son named after him. and i was the one who told george, we have to work with the russians because we need an escape vehicle and the soyuz
7:52 pm
was there. alsom i do not know that 28 years later i would be adopting two russian orphan voice. boys. >> i loved what you said about ethics. i wonder whether we at nae might think about a hippocratic oath. my question is with this, there are so many people, apollo and the space mission were born at the same time as massive civil rights work was going on for race equality, gender equality, lgbtq, and at the time there was a lot of descrimination of choosing who got to go and do different things a lot of
7:53 pm
discrimination in choosing who got to go. and still some people got in. i'm hoping the panel could lift one or two ideas or stories. one i would share is betty who the mercury seven used to call seven and a half and she sat down for a look magazine, time magazine story. met every single test. their are beautiful pictures in the 19 six when article. there are beautiful pictures from the 1961 article. the spacesuits did not fit her then either. they still don't. were there women or men of all races or lgbtq folks you might reflect on that maybe less people don't know, and things we can do as an academy to make sure the
7:54 pm
stories are better known. thank you >> .i would like to share a story that addresses the root of what you're asking about. i was in middle school when i dreamed of being an astronaut. i had no idea how i would do it. i had no idea if was even possible. but it was something i really decided, it was just who i was. in 1978, when i entered high school, there was an article on the front page of my hometown newspaper. women accepted into the nasa astronaut corps. it had all picture of all the women in that 1978 class. when i saw that newspaper article and that picture, i started crying quite frankly. at that moment i realized that the dream that i had was possible, there were people like me that i could identify with doing the thing that i had always dreamed of doing. and over the years, i have synthesized that moment into the power of role models.
7:55 pm
and how important it is. everyone in this room is a role model for some constituency. i'm not talking about gender or necessarily race. but your hometown. your nieces and nephews, because kids never listen to their parents. there is somebody, somewhere, that you are a role model for. to your point, what could nae do? this group is an incredible group of people who are very talented and successful. i would encourage you to get out and be role models and encourage people and excite people about your passion in stem. and that is really what is going to take to create more and more people engaged in our field. but do not underestimate
7:56 pm
the power of role models. >> i will bring up one point. i have daughters. and i became convinced early in my career that women could do whatever they wanted to. i had the pleasure of having sally ride on my crew, sdf-7 and she lived up to everything i expect to have her. and went on to help inspire other young girls to get involved in stem projects. 35 years goago today, kathy sullivan and sally ride were on my crew on 41g. and we're going to prove that kathy was quite capable of doing a spacewalk because a lot of men doubted a woman could. she went out and did the job superbly. and proved that. and subsequently we have had all kinds of women do spacewalk. and somebody brought up we may have two women go out on the international space station
7:57 pm
together soon. >> i'm sure bob and charlie cannot imagine flying in the 19 six descent 1970's with a woman. women in tactical 1960's and 70's 90 70's. 1970's. women in tactical aviation came around during my career. it was a rocky start. but now we don't really think about it. we have a crewcommand a colonel in the marine corps, a boeing hornet pilot, and she is awesome. it is amazing how quickly things have come about, and opportunities in aviation and engineering. we have lead flight directors, two of whom are women. lead a spacewalk or swear women. the metamorphosis of the last 30 years have been incredible. lead spacewalkers
7:58 pm
who were women. >> and artemis. and we're going to have a woman put on the moon. it is phenomenal. it is time for us to begin wrapping up, unless someone at the nae gives me permission to go further. ok, it is time for us to wrap up. we will be quick but i will give each of you one sentence to give a close. one sentence. >> work hard. (laughs) (applause) >> >> don't screw up. >> be a good role model for those around you. (applause) >> the next 12 months is going
7:59 pm
to be pivotal for human spaceflight. >> i repeat, don't screw up. that is a nice version. >> you have what you have in the time you have in the place you are. >> do all you can in the time you have with what you have in the place you are. >> i will close. i had the opportunity many years ago to have dinner with the last person to walk on the moon. he told me about ingenuity. my heart swells realizing is not just the people in space paired it is the scientists, the engineers, everyone, the entire community. the space program has inspired our nation. it has inspired our world is competitive. it is collaborative. it has inspired adults and kids. i cannot wait to see what the next generation and the current generation of
8:00 pm
scientists, engineers and astronauts do in space over the next 50 years. thank you so much for all of you being here and your wonderful questions. take you so much to our panelists. it has been an honor. (applause)
8:01 pm
8:02 pm
8:03 pm
he spoke about the coast guard mission, including modernization efforts, and military efforts. from the center for strategic and international studies, this is little less than an hour. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to csis. thank you. i'm kathleen hicks. i direct the national security program here. our ceo wanted to be here this morning to welcome the commandant, but he's been under the w


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on