Wmartin%OFFICE-3@sri-unix.UUCP (01/04/84)
From: Wmartin@OFFICE-3 (Will Martin) Can someone explain the purpose of a minimum height requirement for "Mission Specialist Astronaut Candidates" (as included in SPACE Digest V4 #76)? I can understand MAXIMUM height requirements for any shuttle crew or passengers, as they can't make special design changes to accomodate a few extra-tall people. I can also understand minimum height requirements for "Pilot Astronaut Candidates" (which are 4" higher than the other minimum, by the way) -- the pilot must be able to sit in a standard seat and see out the window, I guess. But what on earth (or off it) is wrong with having very short (and therefore lightweight) astronauts as mission specialists? They could get into nooks and crannies where full-size adults couldn't fit. The spacesuits are all custom-made for each astronaut anyhow, right? So that doesn't matter. I would think there would be definite advantages in reduced life-support requirements and the versatility of the individual astronaut's abilities to having at least a few smaller-sized people in the program. Also, doesn't the 60" minimum height discriminate against the number of women that could be chosen? (I speak not for myself in this, as I am 74" myself [and too far gone in many other ways to qualify...]. Just curious...) Will Martin -------
REM%MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP (01/06/84)
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM @ MIT-MC> [Why the minimum height requirement for mission specialist?] <Totally hack answer> Well, there's a lot of heavy equipment in the ship, and if a somthing heavy should break loose and fall on the captain it'd be nice if the specialist could lend a hand at lifting it off him so he wouldn't be pinned there and eventually crushed to death. A frail little person wouldn't be strong enough. <Credit to one of the stupidest things in Startrek, artificial gravity that can't be turned off during combat and other emergencies.> I agree, it's a rather silly rule, and does tend to discriminate against women and oriental people as well as midgits and other unusually short people. <Opinion of REM>
brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) (01/07/84)
It interests me that all astronaut requirements ask for people in the peak of physical health. Now, while there is nothing wrong with good health, I think they should deliberately send up people with average health. (I am not referring to the astronauts but rather to the mission specialists) All these space-sickness experiments being performed right now are going on with prime physical specimens. We need to find out what the effects of space are on out-of-shape people, too. Thus people should not be rejected from the mission specialist program just because they don't run twenty miles a day. -- Brad Templeton - Waterloo, Ontario (519) 886-7304
kcarroll@utzoo.UUCP (Kieran A. Carroll) (01/09/84)
I believe that NASA is making (or has made) the shift from tailor-made space suits to standard-sized ones. This would set upper and lower limits on the heights of the astronaut-candidates. It also sets limits on their other dimensions; I saw Dr. Ride being interviewed on TV, in connenction with the last shuttle launch, I think. She said that when coming up with standard-sized space suits, they were classified as to their height, as were the astronauts. To their surprise, they found that a (say) 68-inch high female astronaut wouldn't fit into a 58-inch high suit, which had been designed with a (say) 95th percentile american MALE in mind (ie. 95% of the 68-inch high american males would fit the suit (or it them)). The shoulders were too wide, and the chest and hips too narrow, of course. I'm not sure exactly what NASA has done about this problem since; either they've designed suits especially for the fems, or made the men's suits adjustable. Who says the sexes are equal? -Kieran A. Carroll ...decvax!utzoo!kcarroll
kcarroll@utzoo.UUCP (Kieran A. Carroll) (01/09/84)
I really ought to proofread my submissions. In my spacesuit anecdote, I meant to have two 68-inch measurements, rather than a 68 and a 58. Ah, mal. -Kieran A. Carroll ...decvax!utzoo!kcarroll
ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan) (01/09/84)
Actually, they(NASA) have discovered that it would be better if astronauts had higher blood pressure than is usually considered healthy on earth. Something to do with the strain of liftoff and re-entry.
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (01/11/84)
I would guess that the minimum height limit is simply a question of
excluding the farther ranges of human physical variation so that
equipment can be designed for a reasonable range of people. Yes, it
is necessary to consider short people as well as tall people when
building well-designed equipment. Length of reach is a significant
issue when designing control panels. There is a limit to how small a
person can sit comfortably in a shuttle seat (especially at 3 G) and
how small a person can be restrained effectively by the standard
shoulder harness. Persons with overly small hands will find some
multi-button-and-knob joystick-type controls difficult to handle.
There are all sorts of pieces of equipment for the shuttle that make
loose assumptions about the range of size of the users.
--
Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henryal@ames-lm.UUCP (Al Globus) (01/16/84)
NASA typically designs equipment to the 5% female and 95% male sizes. All sorts of stuff assumes people within these measurements. It's OK for payload specialist to be outside the envelope since they only operate their own payloads. Mission specialist are required to operate shuttle systems, e.g., arm, suits, manned manuvering unit, etc. Unfortunately for odd sized people, nly operate their sponsors equipment. Unfortunately for shorties, extremely CAREFUL about all aspects of manned space flight. Sometimes the caution seems over much, but they have been extremely successful so I'm inclined to agree with them.