• NASA Selects 2013 Astronaut Candidate Class.
    21 replies, posted
[QUOTE]After an extensive year-and-a-half search, NASA has a new group of potential astronauts who will help the agency push the boundaries of exploration and travel to new destinations in the solar system. Eight candidates have been selected to be NASA's newest astronaut trainees. Source: [URL]http://www.nasa.gov/astronauts/2013astroclass.html[/URL][/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Josh A. Cassada, 39 Victor J. Glover, 37 Tyler N. Hague (Nick), 37 Christina M. Hammock, 34 Nicole Aunapu Mann, 35 Anne C. McClain, 34 Jessica U. Meir, 35 Andrew R. Morgan, 37 More details on the candidates are in the source.[/QUOTE]
I'm not on the list :(
only 3/4 are mil nice.
someday that will be me
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41070266]only 3/4 are mil nice.[/QUOTE] how is having a military background bad? they're picked for a reason you know.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41070266]only 3/4 are mil nice.[/QUOTE] Do you know how hard it is to select people for this? Military seems the best route. They're disciplined, they're built, healthy, and they can follow directions. If you were even [I]considered[/I] to be on the list, it'd be an honor.
[QUOTE=areolop;41071159]Do you know how hard it is to select people for this? Military seems the best route. They're disciplined, they're built, healthy, and they can follow directions. If you were even [I]considered[/I] to be on the list, it'd be an honor.[/QUOTE] not to mention the extensive flight training for air force pilots
no but you guys don't get it I'm really good at kerbal space program
[QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;41070542]how is having a military background bad? they're picked for a reason you know.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=areolop;41071159]Do you know how hard it is to select people for this? Military seems the best route. They're disciplined, they're built, healthy, and they can follow directions. If you were even [I]considered[/I] to be on the list, it'd be an honor.[/QUOTE] diversity in backgrounds is a good thing, and most people from a military background won't be as good at science tasks as people who have spent their lives researching science as opposed to learning to fly aircraft. In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures. I'd like to see the astronaut program become more diverse [B]now that systems have become more automated, safe, and reliable[/B] and we can afford to send celebrities and shit into space, so extensive flight training isn't as important. [B]Being able to put people apart from test pilots on space missions is a sign of a maturing space program that's more safe [/B]and allows for more research to be done.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41071632]diversity in backgrounds is a good thing, and most people from a military background won't be as good at science tasks as people who have spent their lives researching science as opposed to learning to fly aircraft. In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures. I'd like to see the astronaut program become more diverse [B]now that systems have become more automated, safe, and reliable[/B] and we can afford to send celebrities and shit into space, so extensive flight training isn't as important. [B]Being able to put people apart from test pilots on space missions is a sign of a maturing space program that's more safe [/B]and allows for more research to be done.[/QUOTE] This isn't Aperture Science you nitwit, this is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41071632]diversity in backgrounds is a good thing, and most people from a military background won't be as good at science tasks as people who have spent their lives researching science as opposed to learning to fly aircraft. In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures. I'd like to see the astronaut program become more diverse [B]now that systems have become more automated, safe, and reliable[/B] and we can afford to send celebrities and shit into space, so extensive flight training isn't as important. [B]Being able to put people apart from test pilots on space missions is a sign of a maturing space program that's more safe [/B]and allows for more research to be done.[/QUOTE] It's not like they're picking dumbass military grunts, they're obviously picking people at the very top of the barrel. Graduates from places like the US Naval Academy and the USAFA are held in very high regard when it comes to science degrees; sometimes they'll even pay for graduate programs for particularly gifted cadets. These people are well-educated, well-trained, disciplined, and experienced. In my opinion, they are the best people for the job 9 times out of 10.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41071632]diversity in backgrounds is a good thing, and most people from a military background won't be as good at science tasks as people who have spent their lives researching science as opposed to learning to fly aircraft. In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures. I'd like to see the astronaut program become more diverse [B]now that systems have become more automated, safe, and reliable[/B] and we can afford to send celebrities and shit into space, so extensive flight training isn't as important. [B]Being able to put people apart from test pilots on space missions is a sign of a maturing space program that's more safe [/B]and allows for more research to be done.[/QUOTE] Yes, lets put dumbfuck joe the plumber from rural montana in space. This isnt some random marine or anything going in, these are some of the smartest people in the branches to go into space. And how would you know what a matured space program is? Am I missing something here? Seems that we cant even get to mars, so I guess we're still a baby
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41071632]diversity in backgrounds is a good thing, and most people from a military background won't be as good at science tasks as people who have spent their lives researching science as opposed to learning to fly aircraft. In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures. I'd like to see the astronaut program become more diverse [B]now that systems have become more automated, safe, and reliable[/B] and we can afford to send celebrities and shit into space, so extensive flight training isn't as important. [B]Being able to put people apart from test pilots on space missions is a sign of a maturing space program that's more safe [/B]and allows for more research to be done.[/QUOTE] Because being in the military means you can't have a good education?
0.000001% chance of ever being sent to space applies to everyone.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;41071547]no but you guys don't get it I'm really good at kerbal space program[/QUOTE] I got a rover on Laythe without mechjeb i am pro
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41071632]diversity in backgrounds is a good thing, and most people from a military background won't be as good at science tasks as people who have spent their lives researching science as opposed to learning to fly aircraft. In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures. I'd like to see the astronaut program become more diverse [B]now that systems have become more automated, safe, and reliable[/B] and we can afford to send celebrities and shit into space, so extensive flight training isn't as important. [B]Being able to put people apart from test pilots on space missions is a sign of a maturing space program that's more safe [/B]and allows for more research to be done.[/QUOTE] maybe you should google these people, cause they're not some dumb grunts, they're college educated people that likes science
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41071632]diversity in backgrounds is a good thing, [b]and most people from a military background won't be as good at science tasks as people[/b] who have spent their lives researching science as opposed to learning to fly aircraft. In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures. I'd like to see the astronaut program become more diverse [B]now that systems have become more automated, safe, and reliable[/B] and we can afford to send celebrities and shit into space, so extensive flight training isn't as important. [B]Being able to put people apart from test pilots on space missions is a sign of a maturing space program that's more safe [/B]and allows for more research to be done.[/QUOTE] You're fucking joking. Guess who has been spearheading scientific development? The Military. Where did the computer, GPS, the fucking pen came from? The Military. Most of these candidates are in their late 30's more than likely they are officers; majors or above in their respective branches. You don't climb up the ladder like in fucking COD by killing a bunch of dumbasses, they earned their BA's to earn a commission as a lieutenant, they earned a MA to earn a commission as a captain and they can go further into either earning another MA, or a PhD for their commission as a Major. Get that perception of how every individual in the military is a beef-necked stud that only knows how to lift things up and put them back down for a job. So my fucking ass that military backgrounds aren't compatible with science.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;41071632]In the early astronaut program extensive flight training was necessary because of the complex nature of the spacecraft and procedures.[/QUOTE] And it still does. The Space Shuttle required as much, if not more, flying skills than any capsule before it (as it was pretty much a rocket lifted spaceplane). And pilot training is about more than just flying skills, it's about thinking under pressure, withstanding powerful G-forces, making quick decisions in life-threatening situations. Scientists are good, but military people are good as well. Yes, less test pilots means a safer space program that allows for more research to be done, but we're not there yet. Also what the others above me said.
[QUOTE=OvB;41070263]I'm not on the list :([/QUOTE] bro i told you if it all goes semi-according to plan you can go to Europa in your lifetime :3
[QUOTE=areolop;41072304]Yes, lets put dumbfuck joe the plumber from rural montana in space. This isnt some random marine or anything going in, these are some of the smartest people in the branches to go into space. And how would you know what a matured space program is? Am I missing something here? Seems that we cant even get to mars, so I guess we're still a baby[/QUOTE] I said the space program is maturing in the sense that not every person going up has to be familiar with every aspect of the spacecraft and it's operation. NASA was making a big deal when they were (supposed) to be able to put a schoolteacher in space [quote][B]NASA hoped that sending a teacher into space would increase public interest in the Space Shuttle program, and also demonstrate the reliability of space flight at a time when the agency was under continuous pressure to find financial support[/B].[/quote] [QUOTE=CabooseRvB;41072473] Guess who has been spearheading scientific development? The Military. Where did the computer, GPS, the fucking pen came from? The Military. Most of these candidates are in their late 30's more than likely they are officers; majors or above in their respective branches. [/QUOTE] guess who worked on those developments? civilian researchers under military contracts and development houses (RAND Corp, etc). This is why places like MIT SSP exist. While scientists with a mil background undoubtedly did compose some proportion of the research teams, a lot of important developments come from civilian minds.[B] Kelly Johnson was never in the military and designed some of the greatest planes ever to serve the USAF. [/B] [QUOTE=CabooseRvB;41072473] You don't climb up the ladder like in fucking COD by killing a bunch of dumbasses, they earned their BA's to earn a commission as a lieutenant, they earned a MA to earn a commission as a captain and they can go further into either earning another MA, or a PhD for their commission as a Major. Get that perception of how every individual in the military is a beef-necked stud that only knows how to lift things up and put them back down for a job.[/QUOTE] I'm perfectly familiar with this, but a person has only a certain number of years to live in their life.[B] Going through pilot school, getting qualified, and serving as a test pilot requires a fucktonne of time that could otherwise be spent doing research in an important space-related field, hence why I think we should send up more civilian scientists in the future, because they will always be ahead in scientific aspects, ceteris paribus.[/B] I'm not saying military people are any dumber, just their qualifications take a lot of time that could otherwise be spent doing research. [QUOTE=LarparNar;41072532] Yes, less test pilots means a safer space program that allows for more research to be done, but we're not there yet. [/QUOTE] well I would like to hope we are, I don't see why people are seeing less test pilots are a bad thing. If we aren't there yet, it's fine with me. [QUOTE=CabooseRvB;41072473] So my fucking ass that military backgrounds aren't compatible with science.[/QUOTE] never said this, people with military backgrounds are definitely capable of doing science. I have nothing but respect for the astronauts chosen and people in the military, it's just I think that we should strive to put more civilian scientists in space for the reasons I stated earlier peace.
I don't think civilian scientists are a bad idea, though. It's just that military-experienced personnel tend to be a safer bet. They're experienced in their field of study, disciplined, and probably have a good head on their shoulders when it comes to thinking quickly. Even though we first ventured into space in the 50's, it's still a very, very new frontier that we still don't completely understand. I don't blame NASA for choosing primarily people who they know are experienced in both leadership and the sciences. I'm not saying civilian scientists shouldn't be sent- I'm just saying that oftentimes ex-military men and women tend to be more fit for the job.
[QUOTE=Wealth + Taste;41074352]I don't think civilian scientists are a bad idea, though. It's just that military-experienced personnel tend to be a safer bet. They're experienced in their field of study, disciplined, and probably have a good head on their shoulders when it comes to thinking quickly. Even though we first ventured into space in the 50's, it's still a very, very new frontier that we still don't completely understand. I don't blame NASA for choosing primarily people who they know are experienced in both leadership and the sciences. I'm not saying civilian scientists shouldn't be sent- I'm just saying that oftentimes ex-military men and women tend to be more fit for the job.[/QUOTE] well I also agree, but I think we should strive for fewer ex-mil as our program continues to develop, as we understand space better and equipment becomes safer (regular scientists are probably as disciplined, often times they'll spend weekends and holidays at the lab as opposed to at home with their family), so quick thinking is less important. that's why I posted my original post, it implies we're getting better at exploring space so rock hard military resolve and discipline are less important, and we can have people with better other qualities at the expense of discipline, etc.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.