AP Biology George Daskalakis Current Event 10 12/07/16
Chang, Kenneth. "SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 07 Dec. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.
In this article, Kenneth Chang, wrote about the next step in space travel. He wrote about landing a rocket on Earth. This may sound like it is an easy objective, but no rocket has ever been up to space, and landed on land. All other cases of rockets returning into Earth’s atmosphere have ended with the rocket landing in the middle of the ocean, making it unable for reuse. Mr. Musk, the chief executive of the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation, stated, “Reusability is the critical breakthrough needed in rocketry to take things to the next level.” In a attempt to land a rocket from space on land, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket is to life off from the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida, and land on a landing platform, that is 300 by 170 feet. Mr. Musk predicts the chances of success is less than 50%, but they are going to continue many attempts throughout 2016.
This is a very significant idea to humanity, as it will save a lot of money in space travel. It costs millions each year to make the rockets that go into space. If the rockets will be able to land and are reusable, fewer rockets will have to be made, therefore saving billions.
In this very well written article, the one criticism that I have is that there were a few words that one might only know with prior space knowledge. As I did not have much prior space knowledge, I had to look up the words to understand the sentence. This however was a very well written article and I enjoyed learning about this topic.
Allison Barker
ReplyDeleteCurrent Event Comment
AP Biology
December 15, 2016
Chang, Kenneth. "SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 07 Dec. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/science/space/next-frontier-for-spacex-and-elon-musk-landing-a-rocket-on-earth.html?ref=science&_r=0
I greatly enjoyed George’s review of the article, “SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth” by Kenneth Chang. I found it very interesting and informative about a topic that I had previously not known much about. I appreciated that George included the fact that no rocket has ever landed on land after traveling into space. I had no idea that this was true, but it seems very significant that we are attempting to land one on land now. I also liked that George included an expert quote on the importance of the reusability of rockets. I had not even considered reusability in the usefulness of rockets, but now that the point has been brought up, I understand the importance of being able to land a rocket on land, as the rocket could break if landed in the water. Finally, I liked that George made his explanation of the topic easy to understand. I know barely anything about rocketry, and I was able to comprehend the significance of the attempts to make a rocket land on the earth.
If I had to change certain aspects of George’s review to make it even better, there were two things that I would change. First, I would add statistics to the review. George mentioned that creating a rocket that could land on land would save billions of dollars in the creation of rockets, but the reader would have had an easier time understanding the importance of creating such rockets if they had known exactly how much money was at stake. Second, there were a couple of grammatical errors that, if fixed, would have allowed the review to flow more smoothly. Overall, though, I very much enjoyed this review.
One thing that I found interesting was that no rocket on Earth has ever landed on land before. I had never realized that this was true, and it puts the importance of space study in a new light.
I chose to critique George’s review on the article, “SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth” by Kenneth Chang. One thing I really liked about his review was that in his summary, he discussed an expert’s opinion on the topic (Mr. Musk, the chief executive of the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation), and provided a quote from him so the reader knew that this article was credible. Quotes, in general, also give the reader a sense of what kinds of people are involved in this topic, so that was really good. Additionally, I liked how he ended his summary with a little bit about the future of this topic, which is a very effective way to end a description of something, because then the reader knows what the current situation is, and what’s to come. Thirdly, he had some good thoughts about how this could help society in his second paragraph. It was uplifting to hear that this experiment, if successful, could help save billions on space travel.
ReplyDeleteWhile his review was really good, there were a few things I would suggest to make it even better. One could be a more thorough critique paragraph so the reader knows if this is really an article worth reading. Also, It would have been interesting to hear something about why George chose this article, and if there was any personal connection. Personal connection can help the reader see what kind of person would enjoy this article, and helps them decide if they should read it or not.
Overall, it was a great review and I was really fascinated to learn that they were undertaking this project because I had no idea this was something they were working on. I’m interested to see what will happen, so I’m glad I read this review.
I chose to comment on George’s review on the article, “SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth” by Kenneth Chang. I really liked how George discussed an expert’s opinion on the topic and provided a quote to make the article seem more credible. I also liked how George included information on the future of this topic. Finally, I liked how George took an optimistic approach in his connection to society. If this experiment is successful, it could help save billions on space travel.
ReplyDeleteWhile George’s review was overall good, there were some areas that could be improved. George could have been more critical in the critique paragraph to make his review seem less bias.. Also, it would have been interesting to hear why George chose this article to get a sense of a more personal connection.
Overall, I found George’s review and the article extremely interesting and well-written. I found it interesting that no rocket has ever actually successfully landed on land. Given all our previous space missions I would have assumed that we had successfully landed a rocket on land. So I found this article fascinating.
In George Daskalakis’ response he was able to provide a succinct and informative summary of his article. George chose a very unique topic as he discusses how space engineers are attempting to have rockets explore in space and then actually and back on land on earth. The study of rockets is very complex and George did a great job of simplifying it so that we could easily understand the general idea of the article. A second aspect that was well done was the relevance paragraph, for George described how discovering a way for rockets to land back on earth would save billions of dollars since the rockets and their parts could be re used. A third aspect that George did well was his incorporation of a proper citation and link.
ReplyDeleteGeorge could have improved the structure of his summary paragraph. George jumped from idea to idea without connecting them so it sounded patchy and unorganized. George went from generally summarizing the article to talking about a specific point made and there was no transition so it was confusing to read. A second aspect that George could have improved was his relevance paragraph. George only briefly mentioned that this could save money but never discussed the importance of the technological advancements involved with the ideas discussed in the article.
I learned that rockets rarely are able to travel into space and then land in one piece back on earth. This causes significant financial blows since rockets cost millions of dollars to make. This changes my perception of the study of rockets for I now know that research is limited due to expenses and any possible solution that could save money could help us as a nation become more advanced in our study of rockets and space.
Chang, Kenneth. "SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth." The New York
ReplyDeleteTimes. The New York Times, 07 Dec. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/science/space/next-frontier-for-spacex-and-elon-musk-landing-a-rocket-on-earth.html?ref=science&_r=0
George wrote a great review of the article “SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth” by Kenneth Chang. I liked George’s immediate explanation of a major challenge of space travel, which is landing a rocket on land. He explained that every other rocket has landed in the ocean, rendering it useless after the voyage, so it costs millions of dollars to design and build a new one for the next mission. By presenting the problem successfully, the reader is better able to understand the context of the article. I thought George did a great job in choosing an expert quote from a chief executive of Space Exploration Technologies Corporation because it supported his claim that the reusability of a rocket is extremely important. Finally, I appreciated how George connected the possible success of SpaceX’s Falcon 9 Rocket to billions of saved dollars. In his description of the article’s significance, the reader can learn how important this new project is to the future of space travel.
While George wrote a concise and well-written current event report, there are two areas that could be improved. He could have included how the new rocket differs from old rockets and how that difference will allow for a landing on land. If he had discussed this in his report, the reader could understand the mechanics and the science involved in this new rocket. I also think that George could have written a more thorough criticism of the article because the one that he included is merely based on the language of the piece. If he had included information on the content or the connections detailed in the article, his review would have been more thorough and informative.
After reading this current event report, I learned about an important project that may possibly change the face of space travel and potentially save millions of dollars. I also discovered that a rocket has never actually landed on Earth which is extremely interesting. I am now interested in how successful these attempts will be and I will definitely pay close attention for any updates.
Chang, Kenneth. "SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth." The New York
ReplyDeleteTimes. The New York Times, 07 Dec. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/science/space/next-frontier-for-spacex-and-elon-musk-landing-a-rocket-on-earth.html?ref=science&_r=0
I read George’s review on the article “SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth". I think he did a great job writing his review. I like how George used a quote in his summary. He states, “Reusability is the critical breakthrough needed in rocketry to take things to the next level”. This helps his summary become more descriptive. A second aspect of his review that I liked was the fact George included statistics in his review. For example he said, “[...] that is 300 by 170 feet. Mr. Musk predicts the chances of success is less than 50%, but they are going to continue many attempts throughout 2016”. I think this adds to his review explaining a bit about how successful it could become. And lastly, I liked how George was able to clearly explained his topic.
Although I thought that George’s review was very good, there are aspects of his review that I think he could have improved upon. In the first place, he could have explained what the the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation was. I think that it would have improved his article and help it and made it more specific. And lastly, I think that he could have gone more in depth within his explanation as to how he thinks it will help the future. He was a bit vague and could have been a little more specific.
Overall I think he did a very good job. I did not know that recently there was going to be a new planned step in space travel which I found very interesting. George did a great job.
Connor Barrett
ReplyDelete12/16/16
AP Bio
Current Event 11
Chang, Kenneth. "SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 07 Dec. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/science/space/next-frontier-for-spacex-and-elon-musk-landing-a-rocket-on-earth.html?ref=science&_r=0
George’s review of "SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth." was very interesting to read. The explanation of the challenges one would not expect in landing a rocket on earth was very intriguing. He also correctly compared and contrasted SpaceX’s special type of rocket to a traditional type of rocket. Not only did George explain the problems with creating reusable rockets he also detailed the significance of the research SpaceX is doing. Saying that their goal of creating a reusable rocket is “very significant to humanity”.
While I enjoyed reading George’s critique there were two things that he could have improved. I felt that the lengths of his responses to all three sections were shorter than they could have been and there was room for him to provide more critical information. Also, while I appreciated his criticism of the article for having too many technical phrases his argument would have been strengthened by including some examples.
I chose to read George’s review because I had previous interest in SpaceX and wanted to see the most recent news about them. The review left a positive impression with me and I hope George writes more about similar topics in the future. I find this topic to be extremely important and revolutionary and will look out for more about the subject in the future.
Chang, Kenneth. "SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth." The New York
ReplyDeleteTimes. The New York Times, 07 Dec. 2016. Web. 07 Dec. 2016.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/science/space/next-frontier-for-spacex-and-elon-musk-landing-a-rocket-on-earth.html?ref=science&_r=0
George’s review of the article, “SpaceX’s Next Frontier: Landing a Rocket on Earth” was very well done. His summary was clear and concise, while still providing a depth of information about this topic. He also incorporated relevant quotes from his article that definitely added to the credibility of his review and helped me understand the information better. For example he included a quote from Mr. Musk, the chief executive of the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation who said, “Reusability is the critical breakthrough needed in rocketry to take things to the next level.” Finally, I thought George did an exemplary job giving constructional criticism to the author of this article. He made a very strong point about the vocabulary used and how that hindered his understanding of the piece due to his lack of prior knowledge.
Overall George did a good job, but he still could improve a few areas. For example, he could have combined certain sentences to help the flow of his review as well as edited the sentence/paragraph structure in certain parts. Also, he could have expanded upon the effect on society as well as what the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation is. I found myself wanting to know more about this. .
I was very interested in George’s review and the article he cited. I had brief knowledge about this topic before and was unaware that they were trying to achieve this. But I learned a lot from reading this as it definitely helped to update me on the next step in space travel.