Breakdown Forces New Look At Mars Mission Sexuality 528
FloatsomNJetsom writes "Popular Mechanics has up an interesting story, discussing what the long-term implications of the Lisa Nowak incident could mean for Mars Mission crew decisions: With a 30-month roundtrip, that isn't the sort of thing you'd want to happen in space. Scientists have been warning about the problems of sex on long-term spaceflight, and experts are divided as to whether you want a crew of older married couples, or asexual unitard-wearing eunuchs. The point the article makes specifically is that NASA's current archetype of highly-driven, task-oriented people might be precisely the wrong type for a Mars expedition. In addition scientists may use genomics or even functional MRI in screening astronauts, in addition to facial-recognition computers to monitor mental health during the mission." Maybe observers could just deploy the brain scanner to keep track of them?
Movie deal (Score:4, Funny)
I think scenario has much better movie possibilities.
Re:Movie deal (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
does anyone else have the feeling that half of Slashdot will be spending most of their weekends writing resume's and cover letters to NASA.
Re: (Score:2)
Robert Heinlein? (Score:5, Informative)
Isn't this how "Stranger in a Strange Land" started out? A trip to mars with infidelity and murder?
Re: (Score:2)
*Chuckle* (Score:5, Funny)
Re:*Chuckle* (Score:5, Funny)
You mis-spelled "inept" (Score:4, Funny)
Monitoring them will not work (Score:5, Interesting)
Just because you monitor them does not give you the capability to fix things if things go bad on Mars.
Of course, you can send groups of people on long journeys. Just take a look at the classic journeys of exploration, where people were at sea, out of site of land, often for many months at a time.
But they had a solution to certain problems that you can't have in a space ship. You can't put discontents on an island in the fashion of Robinson Cruscoe, or set them adrift in a boat like Captain Bligh was.
You need to have a practical body of techniques as a solution to resolving human issues that does not require much in terms of medications. You can run out of medications. You need to be able to debug the mind.
Re:Monitoring them will not work (Score:4, Funny)
They have a solution...
They call it an 'Air Lock'.
Re:Monitoring them will not work (Score:5, Insightful)
I say that whoever is going to go on this mission needs to be a complete introvert who does not need constant human interaction and can while away their time on experiments and reading. A bunch of people with mild Asperger's might fit the mold.
Is that then the future of humanity as we head for the stars? People who aren't the mainstream definition of human who can tolerate the extreme rigors will be the ones on worlds that survive this world. It was true back in the days of wagon pioneers and will be true in the days of space caravans.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Like say, a wow player? Just give them bandwidth and the time would disappear, sort of like suspended animation. The only problem would be co ordinating launch windows with their raiding schedule.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now take into account how many astronauts are willing to take the next leap into being someone who will be trapped in a can for months
I doubt there are many astronauts who would turn down the first trip to mars. Even if they did, you'd have a million more volunteers. Perhaps they could select some submariners instead of fighter jockeys this time?
with two other roommates and CANNOT be voted off the island no matter how berserk they get, and no contact with other humans for months.
Oh, I see your perception of reality has been shaped by watching television shows. Shows like survivor intentionally place entertaining combinations of personalities in the room. Let me say this again: They pick overly emotional, irrational people, and prod them into becoming entertainment t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is: this doesn't describe the people NASA is selecting as astronauts. They have to be incredibly driven: they need PhD's and the ability to pass moderately rigorous physical requirements, and the tenacity to push their lives and other goals aside until they manage to outcompete everyone else who is trying to beco
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
It's this sort of bigotry that caused NASA to reject my "Female Anime Robot Sex-slave" solution out-of-hand.
Re:*Chuckle* (Score:5, Funny)
Submariners (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Submariners (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Submariners (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Submariners (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Submariners (Score:5, Informative)
During the 1977 International Biomedical Expedition to Antarctica, a 12-man adventure lasting 72 days, bickering became such a problem that psychologists accompanying the expedition had to intervene. Antarctic literature is full of stories about teammates who stopped talking to one another or even fought - one concerns a cook with a meat cleaver facing off against an engineer brandishing a fire axe.
So psychologists will have to find new ways to select crews that will not crack in close confinement. Evidence suggests that the best crew may be female: we may be celebrating the first woman on Mars in a few decades.
They tend to be smaller than men, saving on fuel, food, water and oxygen. Most important of all, they tend to be more tolerant of their companions. Annexstad has noted the positive effects of women on long Antarctic missions. In crews with women, he notes, there seems to be less competition, and the crews seem to get along a little better. So women in space crews serve a socialising purpose, as well as their mission function.
But anyways, back to Slashdot's regularly scheduled mysogyny about women needing a man with a "stern hand" to keep them in line, and general sexual fantasies, upon hearing the word "woman".
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
On a more serious note, submariners do not spend the entirety of the time submerged away from civilisation. They probably spend at the absolute most a month outside of human contact at sea. Remember while a nuclear submarine can run damn near indefinitely (until the uranium/plutonium runs out) the food supply cannot last indefinitely. You'll have stop off's at friendly ports to resupply, get r&r etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Submariners (Score:4, Informative)
They probably spend at the absolute most a month outside of human contact at sea.
Not in the U. S. Navy's submarine service. The operating cycle of an Ohio-class ballistic missile sub appears to be 112 days, of which 74 are at sea and 38 days are in-port refit (see http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/rep ort/1999/newssbn.htm [globalsecurity.org]). On that 2 1/2 month deterrent patrol, a Trident boomer won't surface, let alone put into port.
So at least in the boomer service, submarine crews spend a looong time away from anyone but each other.
Re:Submariners (Score:5, Insightful)
Well that's nice speculation.... but wrong. This should have been modded interesting, not informative.
The nuclear missile submarines do 3 months straight submerged -- every single patrol (my personal longest was 87 days) -- and many submarines have done extended tours, though admittedly usually for PR reasons, like the early Nautilus cruises.
In any case, the original suggestion took the words right our of my mouth. We submariners are the closest to representing people with an appropriate personality type for an extended mission in cramped quarters. NASA should definitely do extended observations and psych evaluations of sub crews on patrols and such.
-chris
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yea. right. Prussian Blue on the growler earpiece. Contests to see who can tighten the vice the most on their thumbs. Long multi-watch arguments over anything, the more obscure the better. Ta
Re:Submariners (Score:5, Interesting)
My personal record was 59 days at sea on a SSN, surfacing twice to evacuate personnel for medical reasons. Had we not had these reasons, we would have been under for the whole 59 days.
Now, what you mean by "outside of human contact" changes the answer completely. Did the SSBNs still get regular radio dispatches (or maybe yo can't say
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Only one-way and only text. Families could send so-called family-grams; I think it was 4 or 5 per cruise and a limited number of words -- It might be different now with all the advances in digital transmission of information. News was all in summary sheets the radiomen printed out and left in the mess. I don't think it was any better (in this regard)
Sorry, but no, your crew would suck. (Score:5, Insightful)
First is the most obvious difference between a sub crew and a mars space mission crew. Size. Even small subs have several dozen crew members. This makes for totally different group dynamics then a group of half a dozen people.
Then there is the size of the vessel itself. Subs are HUGE by comparison. I am sure how you could possibly call a boomer cramped. Yes space is at a premium BUT you could go for a run. A short one but it is possible. Space is far more cramped.
Then there is intelligence. While I only know people in the surface navy I can honestly say that they do not strike me as rocket scientists. On the other hand I presume that NASA would prefer to put people on mars with an IQ above room temperature. Lets face it, there is a big difference between the needs of a mars explorer and even the most demanding position on a submarine. This is again due to size. A submarine could carry a doctor with almost no other duties. In space, your would need a doctor who can be a pilot and an engineer all at once. And would have to be a pilot of extra-ordinary capability landing a bleeding edge ship on an unknown planet and an engineer working with cutting edge equipment. A bit different then maintaining a navy sub.
Distance. While subs MAY submerge for months they do not have to. How long does it take a sub to surface from its greatest depth? A sub that stays submerged for 3 months is NOT away from civilations for that amount of time. The distance from the rest of humanity is ONLY the time it takes to surface. The only thing that gets close are those missions were the sub sails under the ice sheets and the ice is too thick to break through.
Simply put, if a crew member gets injured or goes berserk he can be taken of the sub at a moments notice. In space, 3 months would just be the start of the journey. If someone breaks then you cannot even return yet until you arrived at mars and go through the procedure for the return trip.
It is not that submarine crews are bad, but just as the article mentioned, that current space space shuttle crews are perhaps not best suited for long duration exploration.
I recall a story of one astronaut in the days of the moon race who broke something just before he was supposed to be launched playing football. Yeah, very manly and studly. But do you think such a person who does something as stupid as that is suited to sitting cooped up for two years? if he had broken something in space being stupid he would have been a few days away from rescue but more importantly, only a few days worth of effort would have been lost if the mission had failed because of it.
If something goes wrong at the end of the first year of a mars mission that is an entire year down the drain.
Back to your submarine crew, be honest here, how many of them have gotten themselves sick/injured demanding that someone else replace them, they had to be taken off or could not go on a tour?
In space, there is no med-evac.
Re:Sorry, but no, your crew would suck. (Score:4, Insightful)
* Away from human contact: sure you have some points that the situation is very different, but we were talking about the psychology. It doesn't matter how close civilization technically is; an inch is as good as a mile if you can't see, hear, or smell it. Being there, you knew you weren't going to be seeing any of that stuff soon -- barring very unusual circumstances. Thinking "well, if I flip out they can evac me" doesn't exactly soften that psychologically.
* Intelligence and training: Again, I was addressing the psychology aspect, but submariners definitely have a higher intelligence requirement. There is definitely *NO* comparison to 'skimmer' (surface navy
* where every see-pressure valve is, what it's for, and how to isolate it
* where every major electrical system is, what it does, and where to isolate it.
* The location and type of every single fire extinguisher, hose, air mask, etc. (we demonstrate this by taking a blind-folded walk of the sub with the sub-qualification examiners)
* How all major systems work: electrical, hydraulic, pressurized air...
Same basic idea as a space mission, though of course not to the degree necessary for an actual Mars mission, but I'm assuming NASA can be a bit more choosy about the handful picked for that.
My point was only that few if any non-space jobs come as close to the basic parameters of such a mission as that of being the crew of a nuclear submarine. Not that NASA can just grab a few sub crew members and go; rather, I meant that they could get some good data from such crews and the environments.
-chris
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And besides, we know everyone in the Navy is gay. So no real problems there anyway.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Scientists? Like the ones that have done so well on all those extremely long Bio-Sphere missions and such? Oh - wait - they haven't.
I'm not talking about whether people are smart, or capable, or able to do brilliant research. I'm talking about handling the tedious monotony of 2 month long patrols without surfacing. Dealing with crap from supervisors with no possible recourse. Living in quarters so tight that
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Waterproof makeup, presumably... ("You've seen the Kiss Army, now join the Kiss Navy and see the world!")
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Right...because there are absolutely NO gay submariners and even if there were they would be completely immune to the psychological stress of wanting that which you cannot have.
Lets face it, all of these types of extended missions are calculated risks. There is no telling what may or may not happen ultimately, but one thing is certain...humans inherently want that which they do not have
Re:Submariners (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Spaceballs (Score:5, Insightful)
All of it on camera, especially the long seasons spent in zero-g. The syndication rights could fund the entire mission, and the subsequent colonization.
Re: (Score:2)
The idea of an all-male crew, as was suggested by someone in relation to submarines currently, isn't really an option when you're trying to establish semi-permanent colonies. The only real alternative is to properly psychologically profile your candidates, and to keep an
Re: (Score:2)
However the idea of ranking sexual performance, wouldn't that imply status? And if a high-ranking officer was "unable to perform" would that lead to mutiny?
To offset the costs we could have Mission Sponsors like Viagara, Cialis, Male Enhancement products like "Bob" takes, Astroglide, Condom companies, Porn Web Sites (I call dibs on SpacePorn.com), etc.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And the video licensing revenue is substantially smaller.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Simple (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
A couple? I'm working on a full decade!
Older married couples can be a problem as well (Score:3, Interesting)
Just because your crew makeup is all married couples doesn't mean you won't have jealousy and love triangles, possibly fatal ones.
Source: "Stranger in a Strange Land"
Re: (Score:2)
There are sexy missionaries on Mars? (Score:5, Funny)
"Rum, sodomy, and the lash" (Score:5, Insightful)
Can even science effectively moderate and control the human sexual urge? The Royal Navy of days gone by turned a blind eye to most of it, so I gather from unreliable sources I may have read. I believe the words in my subject here are attributed to the answer Winston Churchill gave when asked what made the Royal Navy of old so strong.
Jeez, I can't imagine finding many of my colleagues alluring even after spending 6 months trapped in a submarine with them!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your sources are unreliable (Score:5, Informative)
If Churchill ever said that, he was joking.
"a-sexual unitard-wearing eunuchs"... (Score:2)
Secondly, why are the eunuchs required to wear unitards?....Is this a sci-fi novel reference?....do we need to point the brain scanner at you?
I'm confused
Perhaps you're just referring to an a-sexual voice for the Unix based ship computer?
See how rumors get started?
polar opposite (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
No, the opposite would be goal-oriented people. The task was "I'm gonna hurt that bitch," but the goal was obviously "I'm going to be a 'space cadet' in every meaning of the phrase!" She was too focused on the task to notice the goal.
And "highly-driven" isn't all that great when you're not sure where you're going. "Can't this handbasket move any faster!?"
Re: (Score:2)
But if you put a green house in their ship and overlook the seeds they have in their pocket when boarding....
Stoners might be very well suited for the very long and boring space flight as long they don't do something stupid while high and kill everyone. Not sure they would be so great when they get to Mars and have to do stuff though. They probably would excel at botany.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
2007 : Space Odyssey (Score:2)
Comically Addressed (Score:2)
Ensuring 30 months with no sex? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Crap man ... would you want to play with eight minutes of lag ?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but, there's hella lag from Mars to the WoW servers back here on Earth. They'd certainly never survive on a PvP server.
200 mile high club? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, and for obvious reasons:
a) zero gravity can induce nausea
b) astronauts perspire a LOT
c) in space, you experience lower blood pressure, which means reduced blood flow to you-know-where
And don't forget the lack of privacy as well as zero gravity not really being conducive to passionate (ok, ok) love-making... Unless you take a couple of rubber/elastic bands with you, I guess. But try to explain THAT to your superiors...
Big brother... (Score:2, Funny)
Lisa Nowak Implications (Score:2, Funny)
Male Astronaut : Oh yeah baby
Female Astronaut : Come here and rip my nappy off with your teeth!
Male Astronaut : er, em is that the asteroid impact alarm? I better go check.
One incident in 50 years (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, it seems that this particular astronaut had lots of stress related to being a single parent. I can't help but feel that NASA would not send parents (single or otherwise) of small children on very long missions. Maybe I'm wrong, but it I'd think that this is just begging for psychological issues to bubble up over time.
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Strange difference (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead of hiring asexual astronauts... (Score:2)
There are some ethical issues to be worked out, sure, but it's my understanding that astronauts already submit to a fair amount of tinkering with their minds and bodies.
ISS experience? (Score:2)
Help, not screen (Score:5, Insightful)
NASA's problem is that they're stuck in the old model of "we want to find the VERY BEST candidate" and a "process of elimination." Many corporations long ago realized that you look for good people you can refine to be the best and you keep them. NASA's like an employer that shows a brilliant stock trader the door after an interview because he's a horrendous dresser, instead of hiring him and his supervisor taking him to a tailor some evening.
Guess what? We're all full of faults, and even after decades of refining their screening technique, they didn't detect that this woman could have serious mental issues.
Would You Seek Help If It Meant You'd Never Fly On the Shuttle [sciam.com] covers the matter better than I could, but basically: NASA's reaction to this is more intense screening, when it should be to recognize the commitment made on both sides and help them resolve their personal problems.
My employer has an entire department dedicated to helping employees with "life" problems. It's anonymous; your supervisor or coworkers never find out you even talked to them. Why? Because it's better to have someone for you to talk to and try and help you with little problems, before they become problems that interfere with your work. Had NASA had a similar program, chances are the astronaut in question would have received the mental help/counselling she needed.
Instead, NASA lost a great astronaut and her life has been destroyed.
Re:Help, not screen (Score:5, Interesting)
Her life has been destroyed and several families. The court system isn't fun for anyone....the victim, the criminal, their families. I feel for the kids. It is going to be rough for them with so many changes all at once.
I lost both of my parents. My mother is guilty (murder of her cheating boy friend) and I believe my dad to be innocent since there is no physical evidence & no witnesses (molestation of a 3 year old).
Needless to say discussing my family is not something I usually do and Nowak's kids are going to have a hard time...I mean they are in school right now...imagine being a teenager with your mother on the news for attempted murder nightly! I can't even imagine discussing adult diapers with teenagers!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh I don't know.
Judge Judys court is downright hilarious!
solution (Score:2)
That way they can sex up whenever, nobody is left out, and no babies come back to earth being the first offworlders.
Tom
Way too much is being made of this... (Score:2)
It is reported
Re:Way too much is being made of this... (Score:4, Interesting)
When Science Fiction becomes Science Fact (Score:2)
* a NASA lady
* dressing in disguise and
* trying to revenge upon a NASA love rival
is pure B-Rate Drama worthy of Dan Brown [danbrown.com]
So if that slap-dash story can actually happen, how can any plan counter one of the many *serious* long term Fictional problems??
* Alien [wikipedia.org], Crimson Tide [imdb.com] - Superuser has too much power
* Stark [amazon.co.uk] - Everyone hates it and commits suicide
* Celebrity Big Brother [wikipedia.org] - One group starts picking on another
* Robocop 2 [wikipedia.org] - First prototype
Bio-sphere (Score:2)
There was a Bio-Sphere test a while back which was going to include people as part of the bio-sphere. The experiment failed if I remembered correctly. The simplest way to test for a viable group is create the same living structure here first and lock them in together. If they can not last 30 months together here, then they sure won't make it 30 months just because they are in space. (reality show meets NASA)
I would guess that a common moral/religious belief relative to marriage would be a benefit.
Sex isn't the only thing to fight about (Score:2)
The psych screening process should have catch such tendencies, but the last time the woman in this case was screened (I hope they do check-ups after the first screening) she may have been fine.
However, I wouldn't just get wound up because this case has a sex component (boy, Americans get wound up over
The solution is obvious... (Score:3, Funny)
Oh come on (Score:2)
IOW this is more about PopMech finding an excuse to write snigger-worthy story than about NASA uncovering a new possible problem. Whoop-tee-doo.
Who needs "Astonauts"? (Score:5, Insightful)
NASA's current astronaut office is viewed by many as wrong for just about every mission.
First off their are way to many astronauts. There are over 100, they spend their lives in pursuit of this one goal, and even if they get in to the office they may never fly, or if they do, most fly once. The approaching end of life of the Shuttle is further aggravating a bad situation. Unless you are already scheduled for one of the remaining missions chances are your space faring career is over, unless you are young enough to last the decade until the Moon ramps up if it ever does.
Today's astronauts come across as a politically correct bunch of over achievers with some screws loose in general. These people have to be somewhat nuts to jump through all the hoops they have to jump through, to spend the prime of their lives chasing a one week flight on the Shuttle, and spend years trapped in the horrible NASA bureaucracy as the price they pay.
The best solution we could get is to make space flight really routine, and relagate the current astronaut corp to pilots where they belong. Everyone else should be specialists and experts in the fields you need to colonize the Moon or Mars, with a heavy emphasis on handymen who can repair stuff when it breaks with limited resources, green thumbs who can keep people fed, geologists who can find and tap raw materials, etc.
It would be nice if people could routinely travel in space without being a fracking Astronaut/Cosmonaut in the first place.
As for dealing with the sex issue.... good luck. Its nearly impossible to prevent people losing it one way or another over sex. It is one of those areas where our primal instincts still exist, and are nearly impossible to completely suppress or control.
The diaper lady was not about sex... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The diaper lady was not about sex... (Score:4, Interesting)
You seem to be under the impression that NASA screens for team players. Whatever gave you that idea?
I'll grant there are a number of other minor aspects, but primarilly NASA knows that the people they send up have to be excellent at planning, adaptation, and execution. This woman had a problem, she saw a solution, and she acted on it. It isn't right, certainly, but it isn't shocking either. I'll bet her service record would show she was good at thinking outside the box.
Just *test* the applications for how they'll do. (Score:3, Interesting)
The duration of this test wouldn't be as long as the actual mission, but the antarctic winter is long enough to weed out anyone very edgy, I think.
Note that stations with the ability to get people in and out during the winter, such as McMurdo, should not qualify.
Kim Stanley Robinson (Score:4, Interesting)
In it, the author talks about this very problem. The way in which it's solved is very practical. They isolate the group of mission candidates on Antarctica for long periods of time, and thus weed out/break those who can't hack it. (This is after all the other screening, of course).
Something like that would no doubt work well, but in the book it depended on a long list of people who were qualified and eager to go to Mars and make those sacrifices, as well as a public that was willing to fund and support such a venture.
Re: (Score:2)
think what...? (Score:2, Troll)
Strange, that's exactly what Lisa said when she was arrested...that, and something about not being able to convert yards to meters.
(does it smell like someone needs to have their di-di's changed...REAL soon?_
Re:Maybe... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Maybe... (Score:5, Funny)
I think you just solved NASA's chronic funding shortages! Brilllliant!
A point... (Score:2)