Structure of Competition[NEW STRUCTURE]

Hello Everyone,

In efforts to organize the already done discussion and to further more discussion in an organized manner, i have come up with the new discussion groups alongside which says[NEW STRUCTURE].

This forum topic will specifically deal with issues such as: who are the judges, what areas of expertise, what type of participants (univrersities, colleges...age groups ?)

I know a lot of it has been discussed, but we have to bring it to a concluding edge at somepoint. Therfore this re-structuring.

Any suggestions are welcome for the new re-structuring.
So far this is the main areas or Forums that we must have:

1) Structre of the Competition
2) fundraising,
3) Personel Relations(PR)-Advertsing etc.
4) Agenda and Strucuture of "DAY OF SGC"

Let me know if we can add more topics or modify these broad categries.Note : I will try and copy paste all the previosu discssions, in one of these 4 forums. So if i make a mistake in doing so, kindly correct me !

Thanks and all the best !

You guyes have already done amazing discssions, keep up the Thrust and Impulse !, we will reach our destination !

Best,

Karanjeet

I'm not happy with the selction yet.

I dont think Power is a Space Transportation issue (unless you want to improve the solar arrays for solar-electric engines but I dont think this is the core issue we are talking about).

Also the others need some polishing. I think we need to identify the major issues regarding Space Transportation and then look at the sublevel.

Propulsion:
- chemical
- nuclear
- solar sail
- electric
- etc.

Trajectories (orbital mechanics):
- time and energy optimisation
- interplanetary superhighways
- aerocapturing
- etc.

Lift-Off (from Earth,Moon and Mars):
- SSTO
- space elevator
- conventional chemical rockets
- magnetic launchers
- etc.

Descent (some of the Lift-Off systems when reversed could do the same):
- tethers
- vertical/horizontal landing
- etc.

I think we should concentrate on the major issues as this list is far too long to put it on a flyer but it will give us an idea what we can expect as entries in the different fields. We can decide if we want to limit that or not.

The preliminary specialisations list would be:
Propulsion Systems, Lift-Off, Descent and Trajectories (Orbital Mechanics)

This looks very much like Tiffany's list I have to admit - all the better, so we have less to argue about :-) Is everybody happy with this list or did we miss something?

The structure of the competition is very nice ,but if we add one more toipc to the structure of this competition it meight be better:
the topic shuold be like:

AIRFRAME AND AEROSPACE MATERIALS

I think it is the major factor which shoulod be discuss in the competition.

Actually I remembered something - this competition has a big MoonMars Workshop in its name. We should therefore concentrate on entries regarding the Space Transportation for human missions. That way we can delete some of the sublevels - nobody will go to Mars using solar sail etc. Do you agree?

Pranit, could you please let us know why we should add Materials to the list - I dont see the connection (unless you mean higher heat resistent materials for engines etc., but that would just improve transportation technology marginally).

I think it comes down to the question in what fields can advances get humans to Moon and Mars faster, safer, cheaper?

Ok, i think we must no limit ourselfs to human missions only. If we go to MARS or MOON, we will be sending cargo separatly at times...so i say lets levae it open ended, but what we can limit is the places to such as Mars is the max we must cover in our competition.

Generally I agree with Karl's categories, though I think a subtilte "rendezvous and docking" should be added under the Trajectory category. We need consider this when doing transportation and this field is technically independent.

Folks,

After a review of the some of the previous comments, here are some of my thoughts on this matter. I think the categories that have been discussed may be slightly too vague and overlapping. I believe the specializations listed: Propulsion Systems, Lift-Off, Descent and Trajectories (Orbital Mechanics) are not appropriate. Propulsion systems are applicable to both lift-off and descent so what is the difference? Some of the sublevels listed are overlapping. For instance, I would argue that electromagnetic launchers are really a form of propulsion. So I would argue for a reexamination of the sublevels at a minimum.

In terms of judges, I really see this as not being too much of a problem. I know I could get at least 5 people right now in the U.S. to be judges who have a wide ranger of expertise. As long as the judges can do their work remotely I think we should be ok. As an organization we have to think about all issues, but also prioritize those that need the most work. I think some of the most important issues deal not with the topic, since we want to keep it broad, but some of the fundamentals of the structure: format of final paper, timelines, judging criteria, etc. I think this competition also has to be open for both robotic and human transportation.

I think we have to recall the overall, technical reason for this competition (there are others but I am just talking about the technical). I think the main technical objective of the competition is to come up with innovative ideas for how to get to point A in the solar system to point B in the solar system faster, better, or cheaper – bottom line. Do I care how you do it (whether it is a new material, new trajectory, or new rocket engine) - no. We are looking to inspire innovation and interest, and should not make it too narrow as to exclude that – as long as it is in the spirit of space transportation.

A.C.

so guy what is the conlusion of this long discussion ?

who will be judge? of our compition
how many paper will include in this ?
which prize will b given to participants?
which is the format of paper ?
who will disside all this thing?
who will sponser us?

we must planing for this comp.
be hurry plz other wise it will very difficult to manage it.

still some people are not participating in this type of discussion so i request u all that plz invite thame for give their views

Folks,

I am putting together a final organization document on this subject that I should put out there in a few days that hopefully takes a first cut at most of these issues. I have been in touch with some senior people on our initial thoughts and have received some positive feedback. I hope the document can act as the main process document in terms of the rules, etc. I do not think we need to reinvent the wheel for this competition but take lessons learned from other competitions, which I have been thinking about. All the issues that have been issued are valid. Please look for this document in the next few days to 1 week.

Karanjeet and I are working on completing this document. Once we have this master document then we can work on getting the details worked out.

My plan would be that this competition starts next year, publicity starts in November - February, initial submissions in March/April and results one month later.

A.C.

hi...and...namashkar.
becaus of exams and training i m comming after a long time for discussions.So, sorry..for this.

Lets move to the topic.

As far as the publicity is concern we should do two things

1. publicity for getting sponsership:Here we have to do certain contects.So,first we should decide that ,this can be done by sending(via post or any other media) our vision,plans and benefits to scocity by organizing this type of competetion.
or
we should make a team of regional members and they will contect as a team to different agencies (example: say X no. of our representives will contect the regional agancies and organizations for sponserships in terms of money,prize to winner, add in newspaper.
2. publicity for participations.

for this we should
1. decied the rules of competition.
2. by posters in schools and collages.(again this will be done by the team of some regional members).
3. by visiting school and collages and doing campaigning in collage.
4. by giving add in leading newspapers.

friends i m writing this things but if i m missing something and telling somthing which is wrong or not feasible plz correct me.

becasue be want to do the best.

friends..
we should decide the exciting prizes,because this will help us to get more prticipants

we should make some catalogue or posters for publicity.

we should make rules which will include:

formate of paper
eligibilty for participation
team structure
time given to each team for presentation
time for questioning

and one another thing :

the formate for ragistration form .for this we should things
1. online ragisrations.
2. a form which should be downloadable , which the participant team will send us via courier or post before decided dates.

plz give your suggestions and correct me if i m wrong.

by.....happy landings..

I agree with AC, when we were designing this competition a few years ago, we opted to ask experienced people from the various disciplines to act as judges of the competition. These may include university lecturers, people in industry and academics. This would give credibility to the competition, especially if you are asking big company's to sponsor the competiiton.

As for a poster, I think that flier that was uploaded was too complicated. Needs to be quite simple and with all the relevant information. Remember someone seeing it for the first time will want all the relevant information. Universities would also just want to print it out and pin it up on the university noticeboards and it must catch peoples attention. See vijayshah.net/SGC where you can download a flier we created earlier...I'll try and upload it on the file server if I get a chance (to find it!) ;).

Also I've uploaded some other documents we created.

1) contacts list compiled,
2) sponsorship presentation (compiled by christina stratton)
3) a microsoft word document of the competition,

of course this is of the competition we had set out to complete a couple of years ago and is by no means what you have to follow. But I'm sure it would help with guidance and information.

Folks,

Here is a draft of the overview document in regards to the competition. I have included what I think are the relevant sections. I have an estimated budget, rules, timelines, judges list, etc.

This is an initial attempt to capture all the relevant aspects of the competition in an initial draft.

I will also post this document, in Word and PDF format in the File Share section. I will also post the MS Project Schedule there as well.

Please review and provide comments.

A.C.

Here's how I did it for a similar operating environment. In March, I submitted a placeholder abstract to IAC for the moon rover design competition at the SEDS conference in India. The paper I submit to IAC in a week or two will be a summary of the contest scenario and submitted abstracts (since the abstract deadline to SEDSIC only ends today). The presentation I give at IAC will be a summary of the top 5 papers selected, with emphasis given to the scholarship-winning paper. All of the papers and abstracts will be made available at IAC on CDs or an address will be given to where they are posted online (depending on the quality of my connection in India -- I prefer to post them online).

Hope this helps...

The IAC has a placeholder abstract option? That sounds perfect!

Thanks for the support, guarang! :-) I'd do it but I'm not sure if the competition leads want to do that themselves or would like for me to.

Also, I think that it would be best to do that after everything is ironed out at SGC.

in India i have organize many symposiums we often ask to participant for there abstracts.we ask theme that they can send us abstract and if possible then there paper so we can select the paper and give feed back to the participants.

so i think we should give them both facilities if paper is ready than they can submit there papers also.

we must flexible on this topic than and than we get more entry in our competition.