Space Camp: Not Just For Kids Any More 48
The L.A. Times features a description of what space camp is like, not for for its traditional demographic of teens and pre-teens interested in science (and possibly thinking of careers in space), but for adults. The Huntsville program where writer Jane Engle spent three days playing astronaut gives adults a chance to experience simulated low gravity and fighter jet simulation. "We also spent hours inside mock-ups of a space shuttle cockpit, NASA mission control and the International Space Station, the settings for simulated shuttle missions that formed the core of our training. Working in teams, we took turns crewing the space shuttle orbiter, monitoring the mission, conducting research experiments and doing extravehicular activities, a.k.a. spacewalks, to make repairs." The price strikes me as surprisingly reasonable, too: about $550.
Re: (Score:1)
Space Camp had adult programs back when I went there, as a middle schooler, in the early 1990s. This isn't news.
Re: (Score:1)
This is not new.
I'm 37 now but when I was about 12 I did Space Academy I (http://www.spacecamp.com/camp/sa), then later Aviation Challenge (http://aviationchallenge.com/) and then when I was a good bit older I came back and did Academy level II. Even then I remember adult and older kid programs.
It is good fun and you are right in the middle of where the real stuff is made (rockets) so I'd suggest it for anyone with time.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it's not new.
When I was in highschool, 20 yeaars ago, I went to both Space Acadamy and Space Acadamy II. During the week I was there for SA-II, there were 2 groups of adults, one in SA, the other in SA-II. Their programs were completely seperate from ours, but we did get to talk with some of them. The adult versions of the programs were a lot more "hands on" then the highschool versions. We did a lot of science projects while the adults more than twice as many simulations. And we "kids" were awarded "cr
Re: (Score:1)
who the fuck said it was new? the author fully acknowledges the program has catered to all for 30 years.
FTA
"The three-day program is among more than a dozen versions of Space Camp, which the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville created more than 30 years ago to give visitors a taste of what it's like to train as an astronaut. Lasting up to a week, Space Camps are variously tailored to children, adults, families, corporate team-building and other groups."
SpaceCamp Launch was fictional! (Score:1)
I know I worry all the time about some kid at Space Camp flipping the wrong switch and starting a terrifying chain of events, but have you ever noticed how there is no space between the words in the title of the documentary they made about it? [imdb.com] Get it: NO SPACE! There's your first hint that it was all staged, like Neil Armstrong and the Capricorn One landing.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a space in Err in Space Museum
Thinking of a career in space . . . ? (Score:2)
Go visit Congress when they are discussing NASA. That will change your mind.
Should I laugh, cry or applaud? Not sure... (Score:3)
It seems to me, from far away, that in reality the US is going farther and farther away from space exploration and research in general, so I am not sure if these efforts are "placeholders" and "proxy actions" by people so that they don't have to see the painful reality as much. Which doesn't make it bad of course! Just saying it also serves a psychological purpose for those creating such programs. We just had headlines about a NASA conference that excludes Chinese scientists (incl. those already doing research at US universities). Then there's the government shutdown, and the big political and economic problems - basically ZERO change after the last financial crisis, same people, same actions. From where I am (not in the US but reading as much as I can - used to live there for many years) most people couldn't care less about space, and it only gets worse.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't mind the focus on robotics AT ALL. Humans have a VERY hard time up there with the currently available space ships/technology - just because we find enough volunteers (>200,000 just applied for that one-way(!!!) trip to Mars) doesn't mean it's worth it.
No, my point is the country doesn't seem to be willing, able, interested, etc. to do even THAT.
Oh yes, there's the "money" argument. The sad part is that people completely mix up the very different meanings of "money" on small (individuals, business
Re: (Score:2)
Good points and well said.
I noted that even in July '69 the great bulk of the enthusiasm was not shared by great swathes of the populace but was also as ephemeral as a team winning the Superbowl, based upon my own observation, polls, editorials, and letters to editors. That situation hasn't gotten better. As far as I can figure people don't care.
There is to me a distinct lack of vision and imagination permeating everything unless it be an infatuation about something that will make gobs of money short-term
Re: (Score:2)
When basic research is under attack at all levels, from the National Institutes down, from companies outward, I don't see a favorable outcome. Policy makers and purse holders have forgotten that applied- science, research, engineering, all stem from pure, and that basic research itself stems often as not from whimsy and speculation.
This is the tragedy of the commons. If the US spends the money on basic research, it is just as likely that a company somewhere else in the world will be the one to capitalize on it. If the US does nothing and Europe funds basic research, a US-based company can still sell the new widgets based on the results of that research. As a result, nobody wants to spend money on it.
That's the problem that patents were intended to solve (whether they work is a separate argument). However, nobody really thinks that
Re: (Score:2)
You raise some good points. The commons bit and poaching off pure R done by another country frankly hadn't occurred to me at all.
Was a time - within my own lifetime, no less - that pure research was pursued as a matter of course by any and most every country in some fashion. When cash didn't exist, there was other support - lodging, food, such supplies and gear as could be borrowed or cobbled. It wasn't just for prestige, either. For a period of time many were able to see that research for its own sake
"Space" Camp in actual space (Score:3)
I want to see a NASA space camp run in actual space...like at the ISS.
First of all, we should be mining the moon/asteroids and walking on Mars right now (and working towards Jupiter's moons)...basically right now...
I know that's not the case, but we won't ever get there unless we start education programs that make spacefaring a common activity.
I love NASA. If they could get non-political, operational leadership and budget NASA could put this together.
Every gov't agency has training courses and such. FBI has Quantico, etc...NASA has this too it's just not well known.
I say **build it out**....build out NASA's education program to provide challenges worthy of college and graduate-level students...make a pipeline to being the next 'Buzz Aldrin' without having to be in the military.
And make part of the course a short visit to the ISS.
Of course grad students would be going up to do research projects...
It can happen...really this can start tomorrow...it really is just a matter of paperwork!
We could do it...
Re: (Score:2)
This already exists. You just need $20 million to throw around.
check defense budget (Score:2)
The DoD spends this on belt buckles & shoelaces. Don't tell me we don't have it.
The money is there...more than enough in the budget...the problem is the GOP of course...Republicans (read: the ppl that fund them) are running the 'divide and conquer' using the federal budget.
we have it before we spend it (Score:3)
yeah,
you know that we decide what the government spends its money on, right?
there are people, real actual humans, who actually decide what projects to fund and not...
you agree with me, and are proving me right...my point is that the money is there, but we can't use it for productive things b/c of one rump party suiciding itself administratively
Re: (Score:2)
So, are you proposing that we should maintain a military without shoelaces in order to send one lucky kid to the ISS.
I can't argue that we spend way too much on the military, but sending kids to the ISS isn't really an effective way to educate them. Sending 1 kid per year to the ISS costs WAY more than $20M if you ever want to scale it up. The $20M figure probably assumes that there is a free spot on an otherwise-funded launch, and that there is a free spot on an otherwise-built ISS for them to stay in.
you can't handle it... (Score:2)
Why does the truth of what I'm saying incite such cognitive dissonance??
let me FTFY
your $81Mil. per person figure is based on the same BS accounting that the GOP uses when they want to use "fiscal crisis" as a reason to end a program that hurts Oligarch's revenue stream in some way.
why? why? why?
why is the notion that we should have a vision of human exploration...a
Re: (Score:2)
Actually $81M is low - I didn't factor in time-value of money. If the money were sunk into retiring the national debt you'd save considerably more than that. So, the actual cost is probably close to double that.
Just how do you propose building a cheap space station for less than that? The ISS did cost $150B. Launching payload to orbit is expensive - tens of thousands of dollars per kilogram. And that is the cost for an unmanned mission, which of course would be adequate for lifting the station componen
just making stuff up now... (Score:2)
this is not a debate....you're just trolling and stroking your own...ego...at this point
your attitude is why we don't: (Score:2)
right...exactly my point...it's "sufficient" for what we do now in space...jack shit...It is woefully inefficient to train astronauts to mine the moon and colonize Mars.
the 'middle ground' fallacy is in play here...the middle ground isn't by default the right way...
We need an evolutionary step forward in NASA and our concept of space exploration...we're limiting ourselves for absolutely no reason...b/c of the 'middle ground' fallacy.
fine print (Score:2, Funny)
The price strikes me as surprisingly reasonable, too: about $550.
Sure it does, until you realize that's for their "Space-Shuttle Challenger" package.
It's not worth it any longer (Score:3)
I went when you could actually FLY, from Huntsville to Macon. It counts towards your pilot license as well.
All you get now is simulated crap.
I'll go... (Score:1)
Why all the shuttle stuff? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Replacing all of the Space Camp infrastructure is prohibitively expensive. Besides what would they replace the Shuttle with? The Constellation program was cancelled and there is always the chance that the next U.S. President will just cancel the current President's vision for a manned space program. You could replace all the Space Shuttle stuff with a simulation of the ISS but you'd probably hit the ISS's end of life (2020) before you could get all the Shuttle stuff replaced at Space Camp.
Remember; the shut
Re: (Score:1)
On all other points you've made, kudos. However, Space Camp does not operate within the budget of NASA. It is part of the United State Space and Rocket Center Museum. Having developed and sold a simulator to Space Camp, I wish they had part of NASA's budget. Museums are not deep pocket customers.
I don't believe the value of the current simulators (none of which I worked on, btw) is diminished in the least by being reflective of the last 32 years of manned flight. The important parts of what is being ta
Movie Coming Out about Space Camp (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I believe it is called "Ender's Game".
Um... Not exactly. 8-}