By Hannah Mohr, Sophomore INSPIRE
We've been seeing a lot of storms on Earth recently, with the terrible disaster in Japan and the record-breaking tornadoes in Alabama. Yet, like always, my gaze is turned skyward; specifically toward Jupiter, the home of a truly magnificent storm. The storm, known as the Great Red Spot, is about twice as big as the Earth and similar to a really big hurricane; Katrina doesn't even come close. Winds can speed up to 270 mph, and it is about 17,000 miles (28,000 km) long and 9,000 miles (14,000 km) wide. In its entirety, the storm is approximately one sixth of diameter of Jupiter.
This storm isn't just big, it's long-lasting; Jupiter's Great Red Spot has been around about four-hundred years. How does this storm last so long in comparison to Earth hurricanes? The answer lies, at least in part, in that the Great Red Spot never really goes over “land.” Land is death to a hurricane, because moisture and heat energy is taken away. Water provides moisture and heat energy, while land does not; therefore, when a hurricane passes over land, it dies. Jupiter's internal heat provides the energy the storm needs to survive, so it does not rely on huge bodies of water. Jupiter's Great Red Spot is as fascinating as it is massive.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Friday, May 13, 2011
Live Chat Roundup: May 12, 2011
By Jim Gerard, NASA INSPIRE Education Specialist, KSC, FL
The Ames Research Center in California was one of the original research centers of the National Advisory Council on Aviation that NASA inherited when it was formed in 1958. Ames, located alongside Moffet Naval Air Station, researched aviation technologies tested at Edwards Air Force Base to the south. Today, while still advancing aerospace with its supersonic wind tunnel and super computer, Ames also is the lead NASA center for astrobiology and green technologies.
Our conversation in last night's Live Chat was with INSPIRE Project Specialist Jonas Dino. Jonas was formerly part of public affairs and often gave center briefings when his boss, David Morse, was unavailable. This happened last night, so Jonas steeped to the plate for the 37 attending the chat and gave a comprehensive review of ARC.
Jonas had two videos to share during the briefing, but we have found that varying Internet speeds prevent us from doing this live. So here are the two videos, which you can watch or download.
FACET 24 Hours of US Air Traffic
Increasing the Awesome
Next week, we conclude the 2010-2011 season of Live Chats when I will again present on NASA @the Movies. I hope you can come and join us: sign up now on the Discussion Board!
The Ames Research Center in California was one of the original research centers of the National Advisory Council on Aviation that NASA inherited when it was formed in 1958. Ames, located alongside Moffet Naval Air Station, researched aviation technologies tested at Edwards Air Force Base to the south. Today, while still advancing aerospace with its supersonic wind tunnel and super computer, Ames also is the lead NASA center for astrobiology and green technologies.
Our conversation in last night's Live Chat was with INSPIRE Project Specialist Jonas Dino. Jonas was formerly part of public affairs and often gave center briefings when his boss, David Morse, was unavailable. This happened last night, so Jonas steeped to the plate for the 37 attending the chat and gave a comprehensive review of ARC.
Jonas had two videos to share during the briefing, but we have found that varying Internet speeds prevent us from doing this live. So here are the two videos, which you can watch or download.
FACET 24 Hours of US Air Traffic
Increasing the Awesome
Next week, we conclude the 2010-2011 season of Live Chats when I will again present on NASA @the Movies. I hope you can come and join us: sign up now on the Discussion Board!
Thursday, May 12, 2011
J-2X Extra Rocket Alchemy: How Paper Becomes Precious Metal
By William D. Greene, MSFC, AL
Alchemy isn't practiced much these days in the medieval sense. That's a shame. A little extra gold would be useful. But there is little doubt in my mind that alchemy is exactly what is going on behind the scenes, deep within the dungeons of NASA as we develop a rocket engine.
How do I know? Because I have been one of the chief alchemists for J-2X (…in fact, I kind of like that title: "Manager of Alchemy"). No, we don't start with a heap of scrap metal and end up with bars of gold or the philosopher's stone. Rather, we start with a heap of paper and end up with a rocket engine – and, well, a larger heap of paper. As much as bending and grinding and welding and balancing and casting and torquing, the story of the paperwork is big part of how a rocket engine comes to be.
Hold on! Yes, I am endeavoring to present here a blog article about paperwork and, further, I am endeavoring to make it (reasonably) interesting. Really. All along I have tried to convey the complexity and scope of what it takes to design and develop a rocket engine. It ain't easy. That's why not everyone does it and even we don't do it very often. And, like it or not, paperwork is what makes it all happen.
Here is how we at NASA develop launch systems:
Joe Mega-genius wakes up with a vision for what NASA ought to be doing. He alone has the image in his mind for a launch system for exploring space. He single-handedly directs everyone at NASA and every contractor as to what to do, what analyses to run, how thick the metal of a feedline needs to be, how the launch pad should be configured, the shapes of the knobs on astronaut's control panels, the material to be used for the springs in the check valves on the engine, everything. He personally takes care of all management and business and procurement activities so that there is a single, non-contradictory point of contact for everything. And nobody at any other NASA center or Congress or the Administration questions what he says so he gets all the money in the world to spend as he sees fit because, after all, he is Joe Mega-genius.
All it takes is one brilliant focal point and everything falls into place easily.
Guess what: That's a lie. This is not how it works. Further, that is NEVER how it worked. Never. All cinematic or mythological approximations of that scenario are, simply, myths. Nobody can know that much or do that much. It takes many, many people and (good) paperwork is the key to get many, many people successfully coordinated.
Note that specifically what I want to talk about is the paperwork that enables and facilitates development. That is somewhat different than the many products that result from a development effort other than the hardware itself. Perhaps we can talk about all of those other products at another time. I also don't want to talk about the paperwork at the highest levels, between the Federal Administration and Congress, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and agency authorization bills and appropriations bills, etc. Interesting stuff, but not quite right for this blog (to say the least).
Let's start with the assumption that we have a mission. Let's say that it is simply this: Get XX payload to low earth orbit. Okay, simple enough.
How? Well, there are lots of ways to launch something. There are different rocket configurations using different propellants in different combinations. Each potential solution brings with it certain positive and negative aspects, consequences far and wide. So, we have a trade study and come up with a "best" solution. That "best" solution has a particular configuration and piece parts that all have to work together. So, we write down what those various parts all have to do. Those are the top-level requirements.
So, we start with one mission objective and now we have requirements for the launch vehicle itself, for the launch pad, and for the launch control center. If we just focus on the launch vehicle, we then have to further break down the requirements into separate groups for the payload section – including, of course, a crew element if we're putting people in space – and the various stages and boosters. And, on those stages there will be engines, so you have to break down the stage requirements into separate groupings for the engines and the tanks and propellant feed systems and the structures and the electrical systems and guidance and control systems.
Thus, you start with one extremely broad mission and, in just a few steps, have dozens of separate groupings of requirements for dozens of different things that all need to work together. At each step along the way, you need to figure out a conceptual design, i.e., a series of plausible configurations and functions for the various components, and then assign those necessary characteristics as requirements before you take the next step downwards. And if you should decide at any point along the way that you want to change something higher up in the chain, then, boom, you have repercussions throughout everything below.
This whole process is called requirements decomposition. The management of the process represents a huge task at the early part of a development program and remains important throughout as you head into the verification phase where you demonstrate that every requirement has been fulfilled. In the diagram below, you see the decomposition process. Every place where there is a dashed line and a red dot I've loft out details, i.e., lots more stuff.
What is the result of all this by the time it gets to, say, the J-2X? Well, for J-2X we've got just about 200 requirements dictated to our development effort from the vehicle project level. These requirements cover performance characteristics and physical properties and functionality and safety and operations considerations and standards as to how things are made and analyzed, plus a bevy of items dedicated to how the engine effectively interacts with the stage. These requirements define, at the top level, what the J-2X shall be when development is complete.
Now what? You're at the beginning stages of a development effort and you've got in hand a book of requirements to fulfill, so what do you do next? You make plans.
• You create a plan for the overall development effort. This includes how many development engines are you going to build and test, how many tests you're going to run, where you're going to run those tests, what you're going to do in terms of testing at the component level, what analyses are you going to do, what level of non-destructive and destructive evaluation will you be performing on built and/or tested hardware.
• You also make plans for how you’re going to manage the office and manage the various "office disciplines" such as risk management, business management, systems engineering and management, and configuration management.
• You have an overall plan for how and what safety-related assessments and analyses are going to be done and by when. This needs to be tightly coordinated with other elements of the launch architecture since the whole notion of safety is a wholly integrated consideration.
• You have to generate a clear plan and process for how decisions are going to be made since nearly all big decisions have budgetary or schedule or technical risk implications. To enable these processes you issue charters to delegate formal authority for decision-making boards.
• And there's much more…
So, that's how you get started. In the beginning, you don't usually have any hardware. All you have is paper (or, these days, computer files). And you'll hear lots of people complain about "paperwork this and paperwork that," but without this foundation of documentation, nothing else can follow. What does come next beyond this foundation is that you fulfill your plans. You do the design, do the analyses, create the drawings, fabricate the hardware, assemble the engine(s), and then test the hardware to demonstrate that you've met the imposed requirements.
Thus, just as the rocket engine is itself a complex machine, so too is the infrastructure coordinating the efforts of hundreds of people to arrive at the final product. In some ways, it's even more complex than the rocket itself: imagine a shiny rocket engine rising out of a pile of paperwork. It is truly, in the end, almost alchemy.
Alchemy isn't practiced much these days in the medieval sense. That's a shame. A little extra gold would be useful. But there is little doubt in my mind that alchemy is exactly what is going on behind the scenes, deep within the dungeons of NASA as we develop a rocket engine.
How do I know? Because I have been one of the chief alchemists for J-2X (…in fact, I kind of like that title: "Manager of Alchemy"). No, we don't start with a heap of scrap metal and end up with bars of gold or the philosopher's stone. Rather, we start with a heap of paper and end up with a rocket engine – and, well, a larger heap of paper. As much as bending and grinding and welding and balancing and casting and torquing, the story of the paperwork is big part of how a rocket engine comes to be.
Hold on! Yes, I am endeavoring to present here a blog article about paperwork and, further, I am endeavoring to make it (reasonably) interesting. Really. All along I have tried to convey the complexity and scope of what it takes to design and develop a rocket engine. It ain't easy. That's why not everyone does it and even we don't do it very often. And, like it or not, paperwork is what makes it all happen.
Here is how we at NASA develop launch systems:
Joe Mega-genius wakes up with a vision for what NASA ought to be doing. He alone has the image in his mind for a launch system for exploring space. He single-handedly directs everyone at NASA and every contractor as to what to do, what analyses to run, how thick the metal of a feedline needs to be, how the launch pad should be configured, the shapes of the knobs on astronaut's control panels, the material to be used for the springs in the check valves on the engine, everything. He personally takes care of all management and business and procurement activities so that there is a single, non-contradictory point of contact for everything. And nobody at any other NASA center or Congress or the Administration questions what he says so he gets all the money in the world to spend as he sees fit because, after all, he is Joe Mega-genius.
All it takes is one brilliant focal point and everything falls into place easily.
Guess what: That's a lie. This is not how it works. Further, that is NEVER how it worked. Never. All cinematic or mythological approximations of that scenario are, simply, myths. Nobody can know that much or do that much. It takes many, many people and (good) paperwork is the key to get many, many people successfully coordinated.
Note that specifically what I want to talk about is the paperwork that enables and facilitates development. That is somewhat different than the many products that result from a development effort other than the hardware itself. Perhaps we can talk about all of those other products at another time. I also don't want to talk about the paperwork at the highest levels, between the Federal Administration and Congress, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and agency authorization bills and appropriations bills, etc. Interesting stuff, but not quite right for this blog (to say the least).
Let's start with the assumption that we have a mission. Let's say that it is simply this: Get XX payload to low earth orbit. Okay, simple enough.
How? Well, there are lots of ways to launch something. There are different rocket configurations using different propellants in different combinations. Each potential solution brings with it certain positive and negative aspects, consequences far and wide. So, we have a trade study and come up with a "best" solution. That "best" solution has a particular configuration and piece parts that all have to work together. So, we write down what those various parts all have to do. Those are the top-level requirements.
So, we start with one mission objective and now we have requirements for the launch vehicle itself, for the launch pad, and for the launch control center. If we just focus on the launch vehicle, we then have to further break down the requirements into separate groups for the payload section – including, of course, a crew element if we're putting people in space – and the various stages and boosters. And, on those stages there will be engines, so you have to break down the stage requirements into separate groupings for the engines and the tanks and propellant feed systems and the structures and the electrical systems and guidance and control systems.
Thus, you start with one extremely broad mission and, in just a few steps, have dozens of separate groupings of requirements for dozens of different things that all need to work together. At each step along the way, you need to figure out a conceptual design, i.e., a series of plausible configurations and functions for the various components, and then assign those necessary characteristics as requirements before you take the next step downwards. And if you should decide at any point along the way that you want to change something higher up in the chain, then, boom, you have repercussions throughout everything below.
This whole process is called requirements decomposition. The management of the process represents a huge task at the early part of a development program and remains important throughout as you head into the verification phase where you demonstrate that every requirement has been fulfilled. In the diagram below, you see the decomposition process. Every place where there is a dashed line and a red dot I've loft out details, i.e., lots more stuff.
What is the result of all this by the time it gets to, say, the J-2X? Well, for J-2X we've got just about 200 requirements dictated to our development effort from the vehicle project level. These requirements cover performance characteristics and physical properties and functionality and safety and operations considerations and standards as to how things are made and analyzed, plus a bevy of items dedicated to how the engine effectively interacts with the stage. These requirements define, at the top level, what the J-2X shall be when development is complete.
Now what? You're at the beginning stages of a development effort and you've got in hand a book of requirements to fulfill, so what do you do next? You make plans.
• You create a plan for the overall development effort. This includes how many development engines are you going to build and test, how many tests you're going to run, where you're going to run those tests, what you're going to do in terms of testing at the component level, what analyses are you going to do, what level of non-destructive and destructive evaluation will you be performing on built and/or tested hardware.
• You also make plans for how you’re going to manage the office and manage the various "office disciplines" such as risk management, business management, systems engineering and management, and configuration management.
• You have an overall plan for how and what safety-related assessments and analyses are going to be done and by when. This needs to be tightly coordinated with other elements of the launch architecture since the whole notion of safety is a wholly integrated consideration.
• You have to generate a clear plan and process for how decisions are going to be made since nearly all big decisions have budgetary or schedule or technical risk implications. To enable these processes you issue charters to delegate formal authority for decision-making boards.
• And there's much more…
So, that's how you get started. In the beginning, you don't usually have any hardware. All you have is paper (or, these days, computer files). And you'll hear lots of people complain about "paperwork this and paperwork that," but without this foundation of documentation, nothing else can follow. What does come next beyond this foundation is that you fulfill your plans. You do the design, do the analyses, create the drawings, fabricate the hardware, assemble the engine(s), and then test the hardware to demonstrate that you've met the imposed requirements.
Thus, just as the rocket engine is itself a complex machine, so too is the infrastructure coordinating the efforts of hundreds of people to arrive at the final product. In some ways, it's even more complex than the rocket itself: imagine a shiny rocket engine rising out of a pile of paperwork. It is truly, in the end, almost alchemy.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Poll of the Week: Microgravity
By Jim Gerard, INSPIRE Education Specialist, KSC, FL
Microgravity is the condition that exists when the only force acting on an object is gravity. That, at least, is a classical definition. Microgravity has several names, like weightlessness, zero-g, and freefall. But enthusiasts have another term for it: air time. We all experience it in our daily routines when an elevator drops suddenly or the bus drives over a bump or hill. You also feel it on the playground, specifically on the swings. You know, you pump up as high as you can, and as reach the top of your arc, you feel things go momentarily slack before you begin you downward swing. Thrill seekers have sought ways to lengthen that time, from the development of roller coasters and drop towers to bungee jumping to sport skydiving. The ultimate will be the upcoming flights of Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo taking passengers on a 15 minute suborbital hop. One day in the not-distant future, tourists will launch to orbiting resorts and experience an unlimited microgravity environment.
Last weeks' poll asked OLC members where they have experienced the most microgravity. Over half chose "Roller Coaster", which was to be expected. These are popular rides at amusement parks across the country, and compete in offering the longest, most thrilling ride. Next came drop towers, essentially falling elevators. OLC members commented
Some OLC members have experienced microgravity aboard aircraft, albeit unintentionally:
This week, we ask your opinion on NASA's budget for aeronautics (the first 'A' in NASA!) and if you think it is enough. Make your selection, then let us know why you chose that on the Discussion Board!
Last weeks' poll asked OLC members where they have experienced the most microgravity. Over half chose "Roller Coaster", which was to be expected. These are popular rides at amusement parks across the country, and compete in offering the longest, most thrilling ride. Next came drop towers, essentially falling elevators. OLC members commented
Space Shot in USSRC. Very cool ride!!
Tower of Terror at Disney World--drops you faster than gravity's acceleration!The comment on the Tower of Terror is correct - to enhance the thrill the car you ride is pulled down faster than a free fall. The mechanism is programed to travel up and down the shaft in many different ways, offering different experiences each time you ride. One segment offers a true vertical 'parabola', where a free fall trajectory is mechanically induced offering the longest amount of continuous air time I've experienced (outside of the Vomit Comet, that is)!
Some OLC members have experienced microgravity aboard aircraft, albeit unintentionally:
The most microgravity I've ever felt was when I was flying and volcanic ash stalled the plane engine and it started to free fall. Luckily, as it was falling, the ash came out and the engine started up again. It was great!While it is not something we would hope for, after the event when all are safe it could be a pretty cool experience!
This week, we ask your opinion on NASA's budget for aeronautics (the first 'A' in NASA!) and if you think it is enough. Make your selection, then let us know why you chose that on the Discussion Board!
Monday, May 9, 2011
Gems from the NTRS: Suggestions for Popularizing Civil Aviation (NACA-SP-1)
By Gerald Steeman, NASA Scientific and Technical Information Program
Imagine you are a woman who was born at the end of the 19th century. Imagine being a motorcycle dispatch rider in WWI. Imagine being an athlete and setting a world record for the high jump. Imagine being the most famous aviatrix of the day. Imagine being all of these things and you would be named Mary, Lady Heath (born Sophie Catherine Theresa Mary Peirce-Evans; married name, Eliott-Lynn), Britain’s Lady Lindy.
Lady Heath led a remarkable albeit tragic (she died destitute) life by anyone’s standard. Above all, she was an outspoken advocate of aviation in actions and words. You can connect to this remarkable personality by reading her “Suggestions for Popularizing Civil Aviation” available on the NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS).
Lady Heath begins her argument stating that “[t]he public generally is taking very little interest in the progress of Civil Aviation, and the time has come to educate the public in aeronautics and to make them realize the far-reaching importance of air transport.”
The document is a fascinating window into the dawn of aviation, its fledgling growth, and the excitement that surrounded the burgeoning 20th century. Lady Heath proved prescient in many areas. She foresees frequent flyer miles: “Air travelers should be encouraged by receiving prizes for biggest annual air travel mileage” (p.11). She also provides an accurate description of modern flight arrival and departure monitors (although the entertainment value may be debatable these days):
In the public enclosure there should be electric signs operated from the control tower, announcing name of aeroplane just arriving or just departing, destination, or where come from, so that visitors can take an intelligent interest in what is going on, instead of standing aimlessly about and being hopelessly bored as they are at present. (p.5)
When juxtaposed with our present-day sensibilities, she also provides several curious ideas that would be unimaginable today. One example involves maximizing the marketing value of aircraft during their transport on ground: “Aeroplanes in transit by road anywhere near the Capital or other large towns should be deliberately carted through the main streets of towns” (p.4). Imagine a 250-seat airliner carted through Washington, DC on the way to Reagan National Airport!
Other ideas she offers have come and gone: “[I]n all-metal aircraft smoking is permissible, which is an important item of comfort on long journeys” (12).
Take a look at the document. It is sure to amaze and bring a smile to your face, especially her idea on what well-known actresses could do to help with popularizing aviation. Find it on page 11.
More:
“Suggestions for Popularizing Civil Aviation” (NACA-SP-1): http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20090015031
More about Lady Heath: http://historicalaviationireland.com/archives/heath.html
Imagine you are a woman who was born at the end of the 19th century. Imagine being a motorcycle dispatch rider in WWI. Imagine being an athlete and setting a world record for the high jump. Imagine being the most famous aviatrix of the day. Imagine being all of these things and you would be named Mary, Lady Heath (born Sophie Catherine Theresa Mary Peirce-Evans; married name, Eliott-Lynn), Britain’s Lady Lindy.
Lady Heath led a remarkable albeit tragic (she died destitute) life by anyone’s standard. Above all, she was an outspoken advocate of aviation in actions and words. You can connect to this remarkable personality by reading her “Suggestions for Popularizing Civil Aviation” available on the NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS).
Lady Heath begins her argument stating that “[t]he public generally is taking very little interest in the progress of Civil Aviation, and the time has come to educate the public in aeronautics and to make them realize the far-reaching importance of air transport.”
The document is a fascinating window into the dawn of aviation, its fledgling growth, and the excitement that surrounded the burgeoning 20th century. Lady Heath proved prescient in many areas. She foresees frequent flyer miles: “Air travelers should be encouraged by receiving prizes for biggest annual air travel mileage” (p.11). She also provides an accurate description of modern flight arrival and departure monitors (although the entertainment value may be debatable these days):
In the public enclosure there should be electric signs operated from the control tower, announcing name of aeroplane just arriving or just departing, destination, or where come from, so that visitors can take an intelligent interest in what is going on, instead of standing aimlessly about and being hopelessly bored as they are at present. (p.5)
When juxtaposed with our present-day sensibilities, she also provides several curious ideas that would be unimaginable today. One example involves maximizing the marketing value of aircraft during their transport on ground: “Aeroplanes in transit by road anywhere near the Capital or other large towns should be deliberately carted through the main streets of towns” (p.4). Imagine a 250-seat airliner carted through Washington, DC on the way to Reagan National Airport!
Other ideas she offers have come and gone: “[I]n all-metal aircraft smoking is permissible, which is an important item of comfort on long journeys” (12).
Take a look at the document. It is sure to amaze and bring a smile to your face, especially her idea on what well-known actresses could do to help with popularizing aviation. Find it on page 11.
“Suggestions for Popularizing Civil Aviation” (NACA-SP-1): http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20090015031
More about Lady Heath: http://historicalaviationireland.com/archives/heath.html
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
It was AWESOME
By Carlimar Collazo, Senior
I can’t believe the OLC it’s about to end it’s the end of my year here. I can’t believe it here where I learned so many things and met so many people. This was the best experience I have ever had in my entire life. I regret the fact that I didn’t knew about this community earlier, I knew about it when I was about to be a senior so I only had this year left. But I’m super exited because this year has been beyond my expectations. At first, it was hard to get used to applications and how to use the website but I knew I wanted to do it and I dedicated more time and some effort, too. I really loved the live chats and learned everything I could with them; I even have a notebook because when I was taking the chats I would be writing important facts and things to research about. It was AWESOME. I participated in some challenges which I enjoyed to the last day that I had to submit proposals. I made the proposals with different students and had fun just exchanging ideas with them. It was interesting how the live presenters were willing to answer questions and make sure we, the students participating in the live chat, have all the concepts right! I really appreciate the time and effort of everybody that works in this OLC to make this a huge success.
Thank You really this has been the best experience!
I can’t believe the OLC it’s about to end it’s the end of my year here. I can’t believe it here where I learned so many things and met so many people. This was the best experience I have ever had in my entire life. I regret the fact that I didn’t knew about this community earlier, I knew about it when I was about to be a senior so I only had this year left. But I’m super exited because this year has been beyond my expectations. At first, it was hard to get used to applications and how to use the website but I knew I wanted to do it and I dedicated more time and some effort, too. I really loved the live chats and learned everything I could with them; I even have a notebook because when I was taking the chats I would be writing important facts and things to research about. It was AWESOME. I participated in some challenges which I enjoyed to the last day that I had to submit proposals. I made the proposals with different students and had fun just exchanging ideas with them. It was interesting how the live presenters were willing to answer questions and make sure we, the students participating in the live chat, have all the concepts right! I really appreciate the time and effort of everybody that works in this OLC to make this a huge success.
Thank You really this has been the best experience!
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Poll of the Week: Orbiter's Retirement
By Jim Gerard, INSPIRE Education Specialist, KSC, FL
In a few months, the final flight of the space shuttle will take place, and we will reach an end of an era. The orbiters will retire, having provided a means to make travel to low Earth orbit almost routine (although each flight is treated as an experimental test flight), the orbiters will take a well deserved rest as they are scattered around the country to be placed on display. A well publicized competition took place to determine those display locations (resulting in a few lawsuits from those who disagreed with the decision), and last weeks poll asked which orbiter would wind up closest to where you lived.
While the breakdown was very close, it offers some interesting insight. If we assume the OLC is a good analog for the US population as a whole, it appears the placement provides the best opportunity for everyone to see an orbiter. It would have been nice to have had one more orbiter to offer (I still miss Columbia!), but it looks like the judgement in placement was sound.
Most of you will be closest to Endeavour, which will be located in a new wing at the California Science Center in Los Angelos, CA. Joining the Mercury MR-2 (which launched space-chimp Ham), Gemini IX, and the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project command module, the orbiter will be close to it's home in Palmdale, where it was built 25 years ago.
It was almost a toss up between the Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex and the Smithsonian's Stephen Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, VA. The Smithsonian is the only museum to have display space already available (that is, once Enterprise is rolled out), and Discovery will find home in a large hanger filled with space artifacts, including the Gemini VII spacecraft. KSC will need to build a new facility, which will be matched with its Shuttle Launch Experience into a comprehensive display. You will enter into a preshow on the history of the orbiter, then walk into the display area where the orbiter will appear to be in orbit above a rotating Earth. On the main floor will be displays about Hubble, ISS, and other factors in STS history. Then, you can go take a (virtual) ride on one. I can't wait!
Finally, Enterprise will be placed on the dock adjacent to the Intrepid Sea, Air & Space Museum. A new glass dome will be built to protect the orbiter and provide display space. This placement has created the most controversy, but other artifacts, such as simulators and trainers, will wind up in Seattle's Museum of Flight and Chicago's Adler Planetarium. What is your take? You can continue to comment in the Discussion Board, and share you opinion on the placement.
This week's poll asks where you have spent the longest in microgravity. You feel microgravity swinging on swing (for an instant) or diving off a board, but you can feel upwards of a second or two on some amusement park rides. Or has anyone taken a plane flight that lets you feel weightless? Take the poll, and then tell of your experience on the DB!
Monday, May 2, 2011
FIRST Robotics Competition
By David Liu, Sophomore
This year marked the twentieth season of a program, the FIRST Robotics Competition that, despite receiving little attention from the public and having few people that know of it, is far more important than what goes on in the world of sports and celebrities, since it is something that will profoundly affect the future of our world. FIRST does not have the purpose of entertaining or making a profit, yet it has a goal higher and more important than either.
In the FIRST Robotics Competition, teams of students and volunteer mentors create robots that are designed to perform certain tasks. This year, the task was for robots to pick up inner tubes and place them onto racks, and also deploy smaller robots to climb up poles. The robots are tested by having them perform this challenge alongside other robots, and the challenge functions much like a game, with robots on both sides of a battle, fighting it out in on the playing field.
One might ask about the purpose of a program that spends the time of students putting together robots for such seemingly silly and useless tasks. However, the purpose is explained by FIRST founder Dean Kamen. He says that FIRST Robotics is not about the robots, but like every student in FIRST knows, the mission of FIRST robotics is to spark interest in science and technology in the minds of young people, so they can develop the skills that will sustain the technological society of the next generation. After all, it’s what FIRST means: For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology. FIRST Robotics is also geared towards teaching students creativity, teamwork, and the indispensible virtue of gracious professionalism (a term coined by FIRST national advisor Woodie Flowers.)
I had the great privilege of being on the FIRST Robotics Team 2202 for Brookfield East. With the help of parent volunteers and mentors, the team created a robot using nothing but metal, plastic, electronics, and most importantly our ideas, cooperation, and determination. The result was an awesome robot that was able to do everything we had intended it to from day one. As a result of our efforts to make our robot simple, yet effective, the team won the prestigious Industrial Design Award, and prize given for excellent design.
Although our robot did not continue beyond the regional (we were 2nd in the qualifying matches and 3rd place overall), we all went home with smiling faces, proud of what we had learned and accomplished. Because as Dean Kamen emphasized, it is the journey that matters, and not the destination. So no matter what happens at the competitions, I hope that every team was able to celebrate success, because in the spirit of what FIRST is all about, everybody is a winner.
This year marked the twentieth season of a program, the FIRST Robotics Competition that, despite receiving little attention from the public and having few people that know of it, is far more important than what goes on in the world of sports and celebrities, since it is something that will profoundly affect the future of our world. FIRST does not have the purpose of entertaining or making a profit, yet it has a goal higher and more important than either.
In the FIRST Robotics Competition, teams of students and volunteer mentors create robots that are designed to perform certain tasks. This year, the task was for robots to pick up inner tubes and place them onto racks, and also deploy smaller robots to climb up poles. The robots are tested by having them perform this challenge alongside other robots, and the challenge functions much like a game, with robots on both sides of a battle, fighting it out in on the playing field.
One might ask about the purpose of a program that spends the time of students putting together robots for such seemingly silly and useless tasks. However, the purpose is explained by FIRST founder Dean Kamen. He says that FIRST Robotics is not about the robots, but like every student in FIRST knows, the mission of FIRST robotics is to spark interest in science and technology in the minds of young people, so they can develop the skills that will sustain the technological society of the next generation. After all, it’s what FIRST means: For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology. FIRST Robotics is also geared towards teaching students creativity, teamwork, and the indispensible virtue of gracious professionalism (a term coined by FIRST national advisor Woodie Flowers.)
I had the great privilege of being on the FIRST Robotics Team 2202 for Brookfield East. With the help of parent volunteers and mentors, the team created a robot using nothing but metal, plastic, electronics, and most importantly our ideas, cooperation, and determination. The result was an awesome robot that was able to do everything we had intended it to from day one. As a result of our efforts to make our robot simple, yet effective, the team won the prestigious Industrial Design Award, and prize given for excellent design.
Although our robot did not continue beyond the regional (we were 2nd in the qualifying matches and 3rd place overall), we all went home with smiling faces, proud of what we had learned and accomplished. Because as Dean Kamen emphasized, it is the journey that matters, and not the destination. So no matter what happens at the competitions, I hope that every team was able to celebrate success, because in the spirit of what FIRST is all about, everybody is a winner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)