Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The advantages and hazards of space exploration
The advantages and hazards of space exploration
The advantages and hazards of space exploration
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The advantages and hazards of space exploration
Apollo 13
This was the first time I have seen Apollo 13, despite the fact that I had heard so many great things about it. After having some time to think about it, I can honestly say I took a lot of things out of it. Each of the four astronauts singled out by the film, Lovell, Haise, Mattingly and Swigart, all responded the many challenges appropriately. Mattingly in particular had a special challenge that he was left behind by his fellow crew members because there was a chance that he could have had the measles. At first he took it very hard and almost resented his fellow crew members for their ability to go to the moon. However, once he found out the precarious situation that his crew had gotten into, he took the appropriate steps and went above and beyond his call to duty by refusing to accept anything but success in his simulation runs. This kind of relates, on a much smaller and less meaningful scale, to my groups dedication to making our model to work. We spent more time then any other group in our period on perfecting our model, spending more then an hour after school doing this, until we had finally gotten it right, just like Mattingly’s refusal to give up. Now on a more technical level, our group could also identify with the struggles of the engineers of Apollo 13 because not only did we test our models, we were also the ones who engineered the models to work. Specifically I could see similarities between our model 4 and the many problems we ran into with it along the way. We had to constantly improvise and improve the model, just with the supplies we had available, kind of like how the engineers had to find ways to find power or lower CO2 levels, just with what’s on board. The interactions between the engineers was act...
... middle of paper ...
...cause of a known and accepted problem (the foam that broke off had caused minor damage before), while the Challenger was the result of a failed part of the shuttle, much like the Apollo 13. The Apollo 13 was an internal failure that occurred during the flight so it was not as catastrophic as the external breaking of the Challenger, thankfully. I think we should still invest in space programs because of the danger we have already put on our Earth and the fact that eventually the space program might lead to successfully moving to another other celestial bodies like Mars should cease with humans until we have explored every facet of the Earth. Nothing in space (that we can travel to) is quite as interesting as the deep ocean crevices we have not explored, because there is actually life down there that might help in explaining how life can survive extreme conditions.
After the accident, Gene Krantz relied on the skills and expertise of his people. A successful leader builds a strong team, but a leader must be able to separate himself/herself from the team to make the best decision. In Apollo 13, Gene empowered his team to come up with a solution for the air scrubbers. By addressing the most critical problem first, he afforded the team time to work on the other problems. The scrubbers were the most critical or they all would have suffocated. By encouraging the team to share expertise and professional opinion and separates himself by taking it all into consideration when making the decision.
As a result of the successful mission that landed the first men on the moon, called the Apollo 11 mission, many people were inspired to provide commentary on this landing. Although these texts describe unique individual purposes about this landing, they all effectively support their purposes through the use of several rhetorical devices.
The following four texts apart of the Culminating Activity were all related to the Apollo 11 mission in 1969, which had first put a man on the moon. The first article was from the Times of London, and served to describe the events of the moon landing from the astronaut's point of view. The article used anecdotal evidence to describe Aldrin and Armstrong's experience in order to inform the audience of what had occurred, as well as the reactions in several different countries.. The speaker is a from a reputable news source, The Times, and is informing the European audience - as this event was apart of America’s space program, NASA - of the landing as a great success. Although
The amazing performances by the crew and ground support was what kept the crew alive. The crew and ground Apollo 13 had a huge impact on space exploration. Many people disagree with this because if they had stopped or changed the schedule of Apollo 13 they may not have failed their mission. Even though they failed at their goals the overall result was success. Apollo 13 was an amazing achievement for NASA even though they did not achieve their goals of landing on the Fra Mauro area of the moon. They landed in the pacific ocean on April 17th 1970. The name of their recovery ship was the USS Iwo Jima. The Fra Mauro site was reassigned for Apollo
Patrick henry is considered a rationalist, he wrote and took part in “give me liberty, or give me death” on march 23, 1775. In this work, we can see evidence of the characteristics, themes and style identified with the rationalist movement which was extant in American letters between 1750 and 1800. Patrick henry wrote during this time period of American literature, and as such, remains one of the most identifiable and iconic writers of his time.
Shortly after Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed and walked successfully on the Moon for the first time in history, another lunar mission almost ended in disaster without the valor and strong leadership it took to get three men back to Earth. Jim Lovell (played by Tom Hanks), Jack Swiggert (played by Kevin Bacon), and Fred Haise (played by Bill Paxton) blasted off on the Apollo 13 mission on April 11, 1970, in trying to collect samples from the surface of the Moon and survey it. Swiggert took the place of the more experienced Ken Mattingly (played by Gary Sinese) since Mattingly was the only one not immune to the measles after one of the other astronauts had contracted it. The flight surgeon on the trip ordered him to remain aground to keep both himself and the crew healthy during the flight.
On April 13, 1970, NASA's Mission Control heard the five words that no control center ever wants to hear: "We've got a problem here." Jack Swigert, an astronaut aboard the Apollo 13 aircraft, reported the problem of broken down oxygen tanks to the Houston Control Center, less than two days after its takeoff on April 11th. Those at the Control Center in Houston were unsure what had happened to the spacecraft, but knew that some sort of explosion had occurred. This so-called explosion sent Apollo 13 spinning away from the Earth at 2,000 miles per hour, 75 percent of the way to the moon. In order to get the astronauts back to the Earth's atmosphere would be to utilize the moon's gravitational pull and send them back towards home, like a slingshot. However, this procedure would require three days, and this demanded more oxygen and electricity than the crew had available to them. Eugene "Gene" Kranz, head of this flight mission, although looking on in horror, began thinking of solutions to the problem immediately after the Controls were aware of the problem on board. Knowing that the options of refueling the spacecraft with oxygen or retrieve the astronauts himself, he needed to think of a strategy for a safe return. In this sense, if his solution fails, it could result in the biggest catastrophe in NASA history.
When the Challenger shuttle was set to launch NASA was feeling political pressure to gain congressional support for the space program, to help gain this support the shuttle crew had a high school teacher on board, Christa McAuliffe, and millions of people were excited and tuned into watch. NASA officials were hoping that this new endeavor would help generate funding since the U.S. budget deficit was soaring and they were afraid that their budget could be cut. Technical failure was the reason the shuttle exploding after take-off but this was not the only reason. With pressure mounting, decisions made by NASA and Morton Thiokol Corporation, the contractor who manufactured the piece with the technical failure, put political agendas in front of the technical decisions, which resulted in the tragedy (Bolman & Deal, 2008).
On April 10th James "Jim" Lovell, John L. Swigert, and Fred W. Haise embarked on one of the most historic missions in NASA history. Three days later on April 13th, while performing a routine stir on the O2 tanks, the Apollo 13 mission suffered a terrible electrical malfunction and was forced to make an emergency return mission. The movie has forever contributed two phrases to our everyday cultural vocabulary, "Houston we have a problem", communicated by Jim Lovell, and "Failure is not an option", voiced by Gene Kranz.
Apollo 11 was about landing on the moon and returning back to Earth safely. The crew on this mission were Neil A. Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, and Michael Collins. Neil A. Armstrong’s job was the commander. Buzz Aldrin’s job was module pilot. Michael Collins job was command module pilot. The backup astronauts were James A. Lovell, commander, William A. Andes, command module pilot, and Fred W. Haise, lunar module pilot (Apollo 11 Crew).
The materials to build a shuttle must be top tier materials. Every time a shuttle launches, some parts are damaged beyond repair and must be replaced. Fuel for a shuttle is also expensive. People must be paid to build the ship and must be paid to work ground control. These expenses, along with others, begin to add up quickly. NASA reported that their average launch costs $450 million (2015, Bray). These funds are being used to do scientific research to help society. Spending that much money just to see space seems ludicrous. However, as Greenberg points out in his cartoon, money has power. A study was done in 1980 to see how many were interested in space tourism. This study found that “over 40 million people would like to take a trip on a space shuttle, and some 55 million would like to take a cruise ship-like space trip” (2015, Chang). In 1994 it was projected that space tourism could bring in about $50 million annually (2015, Chang). Comparing $450 million to the projected intake of $50 million shows just how expensive it would be. $50 million is a large price tag for a suborbital
Carl Sagan once said “every planetary civilization will be endangered by impacts from space, every surviving civilization is obliged to become spacefaring--not because of exploratory or romantic zeal, but for the most practical reason imaginable: staying alive... If our long-term survival is at stake, we have a basic responsibility to our species to venture to other worlds.” The National Aeronautics and Space Administration or NASA, is executing Sagan’s words every day. President Dwight D. Eisenhower created NASA in 1958 with the purpose of peaceful rather than military space exploration and research to contribute to society. Just 11 years after the creation, NASA put Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the moon, the first humans to accomplish this feat. NASA’s research and innovation looked promising but it came at a cost. Money, resources, and spacecraft accidents most famously Apollo 13 all hindered NASA’s research. In the 21st century the debate between funding for NASA is at its peak since the birth of the organization in 1958 especially when there are numerous problems throughout the world. Is the money spent on space exploration worth the advantages and advances it contributes to society?
Mankind has always been fascinated with exploring the unknown. From sailing to distant lands to someday setting foot on other planets, the spirit of exploration is the same. Bur now with the current economic situation and the high cost of sending people to space, NASA is being looked at as a way to free up some much needed funds. Although, there is many problems here on planet Earth that need addressing, the benefits of space exploration far out weight the disadvantages. Space exploration has given us more advanced technology, advances in the medical field, and a boost to the economy and these facts cannot be disputed.
The 1960's brought new advancements for all of Earth. Machines and men were sent into space, and this sparked a new government agency, called NASA. Space was a new frontier, and virtually everyone was interested in exploring it. Over the years, the interest in space exploration has weakened, and NASA was almost terminated from existence, although there have been many advancements in it over that time. Space exploration should continue because it could help solve many problems on Earth, such as overpopulation and lack of resources. Exploration of the final frontier must continue in order for human life to continue.