Slashdot Mirror
Do You Have the Right Stuff To Be an Astronaut?
Hugh Pickens writes "Do you have what it takes to become an astronaut? NASA, the world's leader in space and aeronautics, is now hiring outstanding scientists, engineers, and other talented professionals until January 27, 2012 for full time, permanent employment to carry forward the great discovery process that its mission demands. 'Creativity. Ambition. Teamwork. A sense of daring. And a probing mind.' To qualify, you'll need at least a bachelor's degree in science, engineering or mathematics. Certain degrees are immediate disqualifiers, including nursing, social sciences, aviation, exercise physiology, technology, and some psychology degrees, too. The job listing mandates '1,000 hours pilot-in-command time in jet aircraft' unless you have three years of 'related, progressively responsible, professional experience' like being an astronaut somewhere else maybe? 'Since astronauts will be expected to fly on Russia's Soyuz spacecraft, they must fit Russia's physical requirements for cosmonauts. That means no one under 5 foot 2 inches or over 6 foot 3 inches.' Applicants brought in for interviews will be measured to make sure they meet the job application's 'anthropometric requirements.' You'll need to pass a drug test, a comprehensive background check, a swimming test, and have 20/20 vision in each eye and it almost goes without saying that candidates will need to be in 'incredible shape.' Applicants must pass NASA's long-duration space flight physical, which evaluates individuals based on 'physical, physiological, psychological, and social' stressors, like one's ability to work in small, confined spaces for hours on end. And of course...'Frequent travel may be required.'"
I'm not sure if I'm a good astronaut, but I'm hell of a good guy to design space shuttles. I've been playing Kerbal Space Program lately so I know this stuff. If someone is a good astronaut contact me!
Just finished a box of Kraft Dinner and I'm sitting here reading Slashdot... go ahead and mark a 'no' down for me.
Too bad they only hire the best of the best. Even if they'd send 1.000 people into space, it'd still wouldn't be enough to have any statistically significant chance of being accepted.
In Capitalist US, the commerce controls the Government.
Really? How do your 'astronots' get into space again these days? Oh....yeah. Hope that stings.
NASA, the world's leader in space and aeronautics
Say what?
In case you haven't noticed, NASA is the FORMER leader in space and aeronautics. Space access is now a Russian and European affair, and the Chinese are getting in the game. But the US dropped the ball: NASA is just an administration dedicated to sink money down the drain these days...
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Discrimination! I'm in the "best of the best", but at 6'7" excluded by this requirement. Dwarves may have legislation banning unreasonable discrimination against them, but us giants are people too!
Small print at the bottom of the job advertisement -
'Astronaut must show ability to hold out right-hand with thumb up, and know enough Russian to 'ask for a lift.'
You'd just about have to be genetically engineered to make those requirements.
20/20 vision? Incredible shape? This is slashdot, that means none of us qualify.
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
"Career-driven individuals wanted for out of this world opportunity. Stock options in lieu of salary, this is not a pyramid scheme"
Weren't NASA headhunters once? Did they not have a bottomless pit for a budget? Now they have to appeal to the Geek community for talent that's otherwise wasted in gainful productive employment?
Incidentally, I won't be applying, since I don't fit the physical profile (I'm 6 foot 8). Guess I'll have to wait until space travel (or at least LEO) is in financial reach of the Everyman.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
* The excessively flatulent need not apply.
20/20 vision? Like Daniel Burbank, Steve Frick, or Don Pettit
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
But I know flat out that I would never make the cut.
Over the past year, I have grown sideways considerably.
I also have rather pronounced astigmatism, and a mitralvalve prolapse, on top of carpel tunnel and occult gangaleon cysts in my wrists.
I would NEVER get passed the physical.
That said, I would have no trouble with the psychological aspects. I actually *like* confined spaces, as long as the airflow is good. Working with others could be a problem, but the hiring reqs would ensure that stupid people are disqualified, so that would be ok. If I have to explain what the words "heuristic" and "obfuscate" mean, I won't be able to work effectively with the team. Effective communication is essential for that. If they are competent, have more than a 500 word vocabulary, and are professional it is all good.
Eventually though, NASA and ESA are going to have to send ordinary people up, if they ever intend to do any kind of space based manufacturing, or permanent space based habitats. People aren't going to like jumping through insane hurdles, just to be a space janitor. Best just to hire a regular janitor that meets some core competencies so he doesn't blow himself out an airlock or get water into an instrument panel.
While being fit is important for space vocations, I suspect most of the fitness requirements center around looking sexy for TV. The hiring guidelines for astronauts in the US and Russia were created during the biggest PR penis waving contest of the last century, and being sexy for cameras was very important for political reasons. I suspect there is a very large amount of beaurocratic inertia on those guidelines, and that many of the physical fitness reqs are not actually necessary for the job, but have been retained because being too picky is less troublesome than getting new guidelines through regulatory approval.
"Certain degrees are immediate disqualifiers".... TFA says that those degrees aren't qualifiers, not that they are disqualifiers. I'm sure if you had a degree in nursing AND a degree in a qualifying field, you wouldn't be disqualified...
Short answer: no.
Longer answer:
A) are you a military pilot with thousands of hours in high-performance jets? If not, forget anything resembling a "pilot" seat.
B) do you regularly publish world-class scientific papers, travel the world on exotic geology expeditions, and run highly successful educational programs all across the world? Or, any three or four similar accomplishments, before age 25... If not, you're not competitive in the "outstanding scientist" category.
C) are you a talented engineer or other professional? If so, you're more valuable on the ground than in front of the world television spotlight.
Sorry to be cynical, when I was 6 years old (1973) "astronaut" was a valid answer to the "what do you want to be when you grow up?" question. In 1973, space travel seemed like it was "going places," but, so far, it hasn't. You would have been much more realistic if you aspired to be a NFL quarterback or highly recognized movie star starting at age 6 in 1973.
Let's hope things are better than they seem for the future of space travel, now nearly 40 years later.
I have enough stuff for two astronauts.
All that, and they still allow you in if you believe in god.
That's a bit ambiguous. Would that impress the ladies or strike fear in the hearts of Chinese food buffet owners everywhere?
What the graph title means by "2000 Constant $" is that the figures are adjusted for inflation.
no, it's just a moronic summary. those degrees don't qualify, but neither do they disqualify you. the reason for requiring a math/eng/sci degree is because you'd be doing systems maintenance; this is for a specific job track, not just generic "astronaut". it's a reasonable requirement imho.
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
This is racism! Else I would qualify... Besides, who better to keep em head cool when need is be. Peace out, brothers. - signed, Santax, nephew of Sanka, famous from the Jamaican bobslee team. -
Really? How do your 'astronots' get into space again these days? Oh....yeah. Hope that stings.
Come on, which company doesn't outsources these days?
I worked in the MCC at JSC in the 1990s. Part of my job was installing software on the laptops taken into space and training every astronaut on the use of the software I was responsible for. That was until I pissed off the wrong astronaut and was replaced for the training aspects. Type-A is an understatement.
For the most part they seem like regular people, except that they are driven to succeed beyond a level that is healthy for most people. Their job is a competition every second of every day with their coworkers. They are extremely focused and can't get bogged down with less focused people holding them back.
Forget that the machines they get into are very dangerous.
You will die - dangerous.
Before I worked in the MCC, I wrote GN&C software for the space shuttles. About a year ago a paper was published concerning the software errors across every mission that were known at the end of the program. It is amazing how many critical flaws were in the software that were unknown. In 1990, we didn't think there were any remaining critical (loss of life and/or vehicle) software errors remaining. Turns out we were very wrong. VERY WRONG. I don't recall the exact number know in that software but it was well over 100. These were life ending bugs.
The astronaut life isn't for me or most of you. Look into your heart and you know that's true. If you haven't been driven all your life, have multiple masters and at least 1 PhD and you've been training for a marathon, then forget it.
From the Tom Wolfe book, the world needs "heroes" like this, like it needs a hole in the head:
"More fighter pilots died in automobiles than in airplanes. Fortunately, there was always some kindly soul up the chain to certify the papers `line of duty,' so that the widow could get a better break on the insurance. That was okay and only proper because somehow the system itself had long ago said Skol! and Quite right! to the military cycle of Flying & Drinking and Drinking & Driving, as if there were no other way. Every young fighter jock knew the feeling of getting two or three hours' sleep and then waking up at 5:30 a.m. and having a few cups of coffee, a few cigarettes, and then carting his poor quivering liver out to the field for another day of flying. There were those who arrived not merely hungover but still drunk, slapping oxygen tank cones over their faces and trying to burn the alcohol out of their systems, and then going up, remarking later: `I don't advise it, you understand, but it can be done. (Provided you have the right stuff, you miserable pudknocker).'" The Right Stuff (1979)
Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
The only problem is the U.S. Consumer Price Index (CPI) which was probably used to adjust those dollars for inflation has been a complete sham since the 80's.
Due to the rampant inflation in the 70's they gutted it to keep the cost of government spending on things indexed to inflation like Social Security from exploding and bankrupting the government.
The core CPI doesn't even food or energy prices which are the two most volatile and most important things people buy every day and the cost of both have been skyrocketing. It does factor in electronics and lots of crap from China which have not been increasing.
Anecdotally I'm almost positive real prices have gone up 20-30% since the 2008 crash mostly due to the Federal Reserve and Treasury creating trillions of dollars out of thin air with the stroke of a key on their computers and dramatically devaluing the dollar.
So if NASA spending has stayed constant in inflation adjusted dollars chances are their money goes no where near as far now as it did in the 1960's.
NASA also has a real talent at squandering money to no good end, like it did on ISS, Shuttle, Ares 1 and pretty much every new launcher they've attemped since Apollo. The next one will be no different. NASA actually sent a team to SpaceX to try to figure out how they've done so much R&D with so little money while NASA does so little with so much by comparison.
@de_machina
NASA still has 57 astronauts on the active list. They used to have over 100, and they probably need less than 25 at this point.
(NASA needs to revise their web site. It still talks about flying the Space Shuttle.)