Why Sport Rocketry *must* continue!

[jflis]

I got this pointer from rmr and it highlights better than most anything else i've seen, the "WHY" of why sport rocket needs to not only be "saved", but expanded, grown, nurtured and made healthy.

It's a somewhat longish article, but a good read... read it, absorb it. Heck, it should be of interest to most of us as it has to do with the Rover Mission to mars, titled "A day in the life of a martian scientist"...

As you're reading it, check out the last picture showing a young (9 yr old) Dr. Jim Rice.



https://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/spotlight/dayinthelife01.html

jim

 

[Rocketmaniac]

Very interesting....... I learned a few things from that article....... I did not know that Mars rotates about 40 minutes slower that earth.......

 

[illini]

Good thread...I love these philosophical ones. This is something I've been thinking about a lot lately:

<i>What is it about sport rocketry that is uniquely beneficial to training the next generation of scientists and engineers? </i>

There are many technical hobbies that teach engineering skills, but sport rocketry stands out in my mind as being uniquely beneficial. It is, in my opinion, a microcosm of the engineering profession. With sport rocketry you have the opportunity to learn all aspects of design and construction of a complete system. Sport rocketry teaches you to make design tradeoffs in all of the major subdisciplines of aerospace engineering: 1) aerodynamics, 2) propulsion, 3) stability and control, 4) structures. It is also sufficiently inexpensive that you can iterate and improve designs without breaking the bank. You even learn about the different approaches for developing a new design, such as: build 'em n burn 'em (favored by my former employer), simulation, and even pencil and paper math and physics. In short, anyone who has immersed him/herself in sport rocketry has learned a *lot* about how engineering is done. Even if that person doesn't go on to become a scientist or engineer, having such an understanding is a good thing...a *very* good thing. Society today doesn't think of engineers as well rounded unless they've had a healthy exposure to art, literature, and history. I agree, but that knife cuts both ways. I don't know how the liberal arts crowd can consider themselves well rounded until they've had a healthy exposure to physics, math, and engineering.

 

[Chilly]

Originally posted by illini868891
...but that knife cuts both ways. I don't know how the liberal arts crowd can consider themselves well rounded until they've had a healthy exposure to physics, math, and engineering.

Bingo. My alma mater (The Citadel) prides itself on having a well-rounded liberal arts curriculum. It drove the engineering and science majors crazy, and those of us majoring in liberal arts also had to take a fair amount of math and science. But in the end I think most everyone saw the benefits of it. Personally, my interests have always leaned towards scientific/engineering-type things, but unfortunately I'm Mr. Bad Math guy despite my old professors best intentions!