Study finds female body form more efficient for space travel

No surprise since women make better fighter pilots too. They can not only resist G-forces better than men but have greater attention to details when operating complex devices.
 
Gosh darn it! No wonder we never used to let them drive. Pretty soon they are going to be doing everything and us guys are gonna be left with playing golf, eating steak, and drinking beer.

... wait a minute!
 
Men, in extreme cases, will stuff each other's face and become best friends after that. Women will take revenge forever
Concrete evidence or just misogynistic bromance BS?
Real life experience, observed personally and repeatedly


He's just showing him who's the boss of that gym.

Men, in extreme cases, will stuff each other
Enough said.

ROTFL

There's a reason dudes signed up to serve on metal tubes under the sea for six months at a time. ;)
You do realize that women serve on USN ballistic missile subs, see for example https://mybighornbasin.com/uss-wyoming-first-navy-submarine-with-an-all-women-crew/?

Yes, it's a lot smarter than mixed-gender crews like the Columbias are supposed to have. Less chances of crews (literally) fucking around when they're inevitably needed to employ their weapons for the good of the nation.

You're all overlooking the obvious answer of putting a bunch of brains in jars and have them go. No body = minimal resource drain. They can be wired up directly to the computers.

Who needs all those redundant capabilities in all those other organs? Those are just blocking efficiency.

Hello Adeptus Mechanicus calling. They'd like their brain rockets back.

The requirement that the Mercury 7 be test-pilots was a political one and not a NASA one. NASA didn't want to have to deal with test-pilots and their egos.

NASA chose Mercury 7. Don't shift the blame onto nebulous shadowy figures. The history is literally public knowledge.

How do we know this? Because on 1 DEC 58, NACA's Director of Manpower A.O. Gamble, NACA test pilot W.J. North, and Langley's representative for NACA's X-15 project C.J. Donlan met and determined that of all possible candidates, test pilots are best. Why did they do this? Because "it was a political decision"? Because "test pilots and their egos" won? No.

It's because NASA started out as NACA, which was an organization of test pilots and engineers who designed funny airplanes, duh.

Shocking news: organization charged to go to space run and staffed by test pilots suggests only test pilots should go to space.

Its not some nebulous shadowy figure, it is well know that Eisenhower wanted test pilots and directed NASA to only pick from test pilots.

 
Its not some nebulous shadowy figure, it is well know that Eisenhower wanted test pilots and directed NASA to only pick from test pilots.


Eisenhower didn't "direct" anything. Good emperors do not involve themselves in the petty squabbles of their court. Good emperors keep their court guessing their next move instead, mostly so they squabble amongst themselves instead of attacking the emperor, and Eisenhower was a good emperor. Literal Ancient Chinese Wisdom.

It was an internal NACA meeting that decided that:

Glennan and Dryden decided many questions of appointment quite naturally
by aIIowing informal working arrangements to become formal. Glennan's fel-
low Clevelander, Abe Silverstein, Associate Director of NACA's Lewis Flight Pro-
pulsion Laboratory, was appointed Director of Space Flight Development. Sil-
verstein had been the technical director of research at Lewis since 1949 and had
worked closely with Dryden since March and with Glennan since August in plan-
ning the early organization of NASA. 8 As reflected by his title, manned pro-
grams per se were supposed to occupy only about one-third of Silverstein's time.
He brought with him from Cleveland three other scientist-administrators of demon-
strated talents to handle most of his staff work concerning the manned satellite
program, which then was a minor portion of Silverstein's responsibility compared
with his concerns over propulsion development. Newell D. Sanders became
Silverstein's Assistant Director for Advanced Technology. But the primary re-
lations between Washington and the field activities for manned space flight de-
velopment were to be handled by George M. Low, who eventually became chief
of an Office of Manned Space Flight, and Warren J. North, a former NACA test
pilot who at first headed an Office of Manned Satellites, then of Space Flight Pro-
grams. Dryden and Glennan depended heavily upon Silverstein and his aides
for the technical review and supervision of the division of labor among the various
NASA field centers. But the locus of manned space flight preparations remained
with the small group of Langley and Lewis personnel under Gilruth, the group
that had zealously researched, planned, and designed what was to become Project
Mercury.

(...)

Preliminary procedures for pilot selection had been worked out by the
aeromedical consultants attached to the Space Task Group at Langley during
November. Their plan called for a meeting with representatives from industry
and the services to nominate a pool of 150 men from which 36 candidates would
be selected for physical and psychological testing. From this group 12 would be
chosen to go through a nine-month training and qualification program, after
which six finally would be expected to qualify? 1
On the basis of this plan, Donlan from Langley, and North in Washington,
together with Allen O. Gamble, a psychologist on leave from the National Science
Foundation, drafted civil service job specifications for individuals who wished to
apply for the position of "Research Astronaut-Candidate." One of the early
plans outlined very well the original expectations of NASA and STG on the type
of man thought necessary. NASA Project A, announcement No. 1, dated De-
cember 22, 1958, was a draft invitation to apply for the civil service position of
research astronaut-candidate "with minimum starting salary range of $8,330 to
$12,770 (GS-12 to GS-15) depending upon qualifications." This document
called the manned ballistic satellite program "Project Astronaut," and the first
section described the duties of the astronaut:

THIS NEW OCEAN
Although the entire satellite operation will be possible, in the early phases,
without the presence of man, tile ,astronaut will play an important role during
the flight, tie will contribute by monitoring the cabin environment and by
making necessary adjustments. IIe will have continuous displays of his position
and attitude and other instrument readings, and will have the capability of
operating the reaction controls, and of initiating the descent from orbit. IIe
will contribute to tile operation of the communications system. In addition,
the astronaut will make research observations that cannot be made by instru-
ments; these include physiological, astronomical and meteorological
observations.

Only males between 25 and 40 years of age, less than 5 feet 11 inches in
height, and with at least bachelor's degrees were to be considered. Stringent
professional experience or graduate study requirements specified five patterns of
career histories most desirable. Candidates who had either three years of work
in any of the physical, mathematical, biological, or psychological sciences, or
who had three years of technical or engineering work in a research and develop-
ment program or organization might apply. Or anyone with three years of
operation of aircraft, balloons, or submarines, as commander, pilot, navigator,
communications officer, engineer, or comparable technical position, would be
eligible, as would persons who had completed all requirements for the Ph.D.
degree in any appropriate field of science or engineering plus six months of
professional work. In the case of medical doctors, six months of clinical or

research work beyond the license and internship or residency would be required.
Furthermore, the job qualifications required proof that applicants had demon-
strated recently their "(a) willingness to accept hazards comparable to those
encountered in modern research airplane flight; (b) capacity to tolerate rigorous
and severe environmental conditions; and (c) ability to react adequately under
conditions of stress or emergency."

The announcement added :

These three characteristics may have been demonstrated in connection with
certain professional occupations such as test pilot,
crew member of experi-
mental submarine or arctic or antarctic explorer. Or they may have been
demonstrated during wartime combat or military training. Parachute jumping
or mountain climbing or deep sea diving (including SCUBA) whether as occu-
pation or sport, may have provided opportunities for demonstrating these
characteristics, depending upon heights or depths obtained, frequency and
duration, temperature and other environment conditions, and emergency epi-
sodes encountered. Or they may have been demonstrated by experience as an
observer-under-test for extremes of environmental conditions such as accelera-
tion, high or low atmospheric pressure, variation in carbon dioxide and oxygen
concentration, high and low ambient temperatures, etc. Many other examples
could be given. It is possible that the different characteristics may have been
demonstrated by separate types of experience.

Finally, as a last check on ruling out the "lunatics" who might send in crank
applications, this proposed plan for astronaut .selection required that each appli-
cant have the sponsorship of a responsible organization. A nomination form
appended to this announcement would have required multi-point evaluations
of the nominee by some official of the sponsoring institution.

Clearly this astronaut selection plan was sober enough and stringent enough
to ensure an exceptionally high quality applicant, but the plan itself was not
approved and had to be abandoned. President Eisenhower during the 1958
Christmas holidays decided that the pool of military test pilots already in existence
was quite sufficient a source from which to draw.
Since certain clarified aspects
would inevitably be involved, military test pilots could most conveniently satisfy
security considerations.

Although some in NASA regretted the incongruity of allowing volunteers for
the civilian manned space program to be drawn only from the military, the decision
that the services would provide the candidates greatly simplified pilot selection
procedures. A meeting held at NASA Headquarters during the first week of
January brought together W. Randolph Lovelace II, Brigadier General Don D.
Flickinger, Low, North, Gilruth, and several other members of the Space Task
Group.
There the elaborate civil service criteria for selection were boiled down
to a seven-item formula:

1. Age--less than 40.
2. Height--less than 5 feet, 11 inches.
3. Excellent physical condition.
4. Bachelor's degree or equivalent.
5. Graduate of test pilot school.
6. 1500 hours total flying time.
7. Qualified jet pilot.

When these criteria were given to the Pentagon, service record checks revealed
more than 100 men on active duty who appeared to be qualified. The military
services were pleased to cooperate in further screening. NASA was relieved not
to have to issue an open invitation, and STG was pleased to have Headquarters'
aid in the selection.


Contrary to the feeling expressed in some quarters, even among experimental
test pilots
, that the ballistic capsule pilot would be little more than "spam in a
can," most members of STG believed from the beginning that their pilots would
have to do some piloting.
As George Low explained their views to Administrator
Glennan, "These criteria were established because of the strong feeling that the
success of the mission may well depend upon the actions of the pilot; either in his
performance of primary functions or backup functions. A qualified jet test pilot
appeared to be best suited for this task." _ - Exactly how much "piloting," in the
traditional sense, man could do in orbit was precisely the point in issue.

pg. 113 and pp.129-131


Literally all Eisenhower did was say "so people told me you guys are considering astronauts, that we might need to look at submariners and divers, but the Navy and Air Force are telling me they got plenty of pilots who can do the job, so I think we can just be safe with pilots only," and NACA said "yeah fair point," only after months and months of meetings and internal debates.

They chose to shortlist test pilots with military backgrounds to expedite the SF86s, that's it. The rest of the standards were retained lol. The President had, and has, more important stuff to do than to breathe down the necks of the highly competent and well trained administrators of NACA.

All important decisions were internal between A.O. Gamble and his underlings at the Space Task Group.

They approached Eisenhower with their finished reports and asked him to rubber stamp stuff for the Congress. He did so, but only with consultation of his privy council advisors from DOD, mainly the Joint Chiefs. Eisenhower did not "direct" anything, rather, NACA directed him to do something, and after a weekend or a afternoon of consultation, he did exactly that, minus the large selection pool.

All important civil service criteria, with the exception of work history and vocations, were included in the final STG report. Literally the only change was "graduate of test pilot school" was added, instead of a bunch of schools. That's it. The main reason was because these were essentially high performance, manned aircraft, and those are manned by test pilots. A submariner or a diver would not really have the educational bona fides or vocational aptitudes to dead stick a capsule or something, but they might have made a better space walker I suppose.

I'm not sure what a medical doctor or a geologist would do on a space capsule either, but those would be valid candidates in the initial STG offering. Clearly an absurd and somewhat asinine list of requirements, and one that eventually got nailed down to something fairly useful, with about 100 candidates to chew through for a half dozen to a dozen positions.

tl;dr Test pilots were ultimately based on internal NACA discussion and Air Force and Navy experience in the X-15 programs. The initial STG candidate requirements were far too broad to down select with, and while you can argue that the finalized requirements were a bit narrow, they still produced triple digit quantities of candidates across DOD.
 
Last edited:
Women may handle sensory deprivation bettes...I think one enjoyed floating in a tank-jocks wouldn't.
 
So what is your specific experience in all female working environments :D

Today *delivers.*

Anyone who thinks that women are all harmony and gettin' along... have you *met* women? True, they're not *generally* as physically aggressive as men, but they are just as antagonistic... if not more so. Several studies have shown that the highest prevalence of domestic violence is not men battering their women, but within lesbian couples.
 
It seems we're forgetting that it's female Astronauts we're talking about here. Highly skilled, trained, motivated, selected individuals, who then would appear to have the added advantages outlined. Any candidate whose psychological makeup makes her unsuited to teamwork in a confined space for extended periods would no doubt fail selection.
 
Rumor has it that one female astronaut, after a conflict with her friend, drilled a hole in a spaceship...
 

Attachments

  • 000.JPG
    000.JPG
    147.8 KB · Views: 16
Rumor has it that one female astronaut, after a conflict with her friend, drilled a hole in a spaceship...
Oh please, could we already drop this ridiculous story? The ISS have a quite sophisticated vibration-detection system (to detect micrometeorite impacts, to ensure vibration-free environment for experiments) and unauthorised drilling on the docked spacecraft would be noticed.
 
Are
Gosh darn it! No wonder we never used to let them drive. Pretty soon they are going to be doing everything and us guys are gonna be left with playing golf, eating steak, and drinking beer.

... wait a minute!
Are women the new AI? I am lost here. But yet, a male.
 
It seems we're forgetting that it's female Astronauts we're talking about here. Highly skilled, trained, motivated, selected individuals, who then would appear to have the added advantages outlined. Any candidate whose psychological makeup makes her unsuited to teamwork in a confined space for extended periods would no doubt fail selection.
Same would apply to *males.* So the theoretical advantage of females would be that they are smaller... an advantage negated by simply hiring short males. The argument would then be to hire short *females,* leading to a "we cannot allow a shorty-gap" race that would inevitably lead to space missions crewed by midgets. But then the 6'6" Space Vikings come along and rough up the Itty Bitty SpaceShip Committee...

Anyway:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3463364
Do states experience more peace under female leadership? We examine this question in the context of Europe over the 15th-20th centuries. We instrument queenly rule using gender of the first born and whether the previous monarchs had a sister. We find that polities led by queens participated in war more than polities led by kings. Moreover, aggressive participation varied by marital status. Single queens were attacked more than single kings. However, married queens attacked more than married kings. These results suggest that asymmetries in the division of labor positioned married queens to be able to pursue more aggressive war policies.
 
It seems we're forgetting that it's female Astronauts we're talking about here. Highly skilled, trained, motivated, selected individuals, who then would appear to have the added advantages outlined. Any candidate whose psychological makeup makes her unsuited to teamwork in a confined space for extended periods would no doubt fail selection.
Same would apply to *males.* So the theoretical advantage of females would be that they are smaller... an advantage negated by simply hiring short males. The argument would then be to hire short *females,* leading to a "we cannot allow a shorty-gap" race that would inevitably lead to space missions crewed by midgets. But then the 6'6" Space Vikings come along and rough up the Itty Bitty SpaceShip Committee...

Anyway:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3463364
Do states experience more peace under female leadership? We examine this question in the context of Europe over the 15th-20th centuries. We instrument queenly rule using gender of the first born and whether the previous monarchs had a sister. We find that polities led by queens participated in war more than polities led by kings. Moreover, aggressive participation varied by marital status. Single queens were attacked more than single kings. However, married queens attacked more than married kings. These results suggest that asymmetries in the division of labor positioned married queens to be able to pursue more aggressive war policies.

Unless they plan on launching literal queens into space, your argument does not apply.
 
Unless they plan on launching literal queens into space, your argument does not apply.
Yes, it does. Queens are not a special breed of women, any more than Kings are a special breed of men. You might as well argue that "males are more aggressive than females" is invalid because "yeah, but those are criminals, and we're not sending criminals."
 
Not seen on Monty Python.

The Queen in Space!

"Your majesty. Your spacesuit is ready."

Call in the Royal Seamstresses!

Q: Who are they?

"Your majesty. Just a few men from MI-6 and the CIA."

Q: Dismiss them. I don't know these people. My palace guard will be sufficient.

Later...

Q: I've got the radio working. Can someone tell me what all these other buttons are for?
 
Last edited:
Rumor has it that one female astronaut, after a conflict with her friend, drilled a hole in a spaceship...
Oh please, could we already drop this ridiculous story? The ISS have a quite sophisticated vibration-detection system (to detect micrometeorite impacts, to ensure vibration-free environment for experiments) and unauthorised drilling on the docked spacecraft would be noticed.

In a few words: total bullshit invented by the corrupt aparatchiks ruling the russian space program; to exonerate themselves from shoddy work done by grossly underpaid mechanics and engineers.
 
No surprise since women make better fighter pilots too. They can not only resist G-forces better than men but have greater attention to details when operating complex devices.
So were are all the female Formula 1 drivers?
 
OK. I'll say it. Women are better than men because they're women.
 
Some rather sexist opinions on display here.

Differences between the sexes certainly exist, but are largely statistical in nature (men on average are stronger, women on average are more social) and should not be used to judge individuals' suitability for specific tasks. Many women are stronger than I am, and some women will be socially more awkward than me. I excelled in English, which is typically a subject women do better at.

Original article is firmly based on science -

Effects of body size and countermeasure exercise on estimates of life support resources during all-female crewed exploration missions," the team utilized an approach developed to estimate the effects of body "size" on life support requirements in male astronauts. For all parameters at all statures, estimates for females were lower than for comparable male astronauts.

When considering the limited space, energy, weight, and life support systems packed into a spacecraft on a long mission, the study finds that the female form is the most efficient body type for space exploration.

There may be other factors that favour male astronauts, but this study was specifically looking at one area.
I want to second what Paul said here. There continue to be a bunch of sexist, off topic and IMHO downright juvenile comments in this thread. I would like to think we are more mature than this.
 
This is a list of female general racing drivers, not of Formula 1 drivers which is, no doubt, the highest category (and the one with the highest g-forces). To my knowledge there has been only one woman in Formula 1, but she was totally unsuccessful. Same is true for motorbike GP racing, despite lightweight drivers do have a big advantage.

So if women are better in high G-force condition and operating complex machinery, they should be more successful racing drivers than men…
 
This is a list of female general racing drivers, not of Formula 1 drivers which is, no doubt, the highest category (and the one with the highest g-forces). To my knowledge there has been only one woman in Formula 1, but she was totally unsuccessful. Same is true for motorbike GP racing, despite lightweight drivers do have a big advantage.

So if women are better in high G-force condition and operating complex machinery, they should be more successful racing drivers than men…

Which encompass
female Formula 1 drivers

If you looked more closely.
 
So we can agree, that women didn't dominate the Formula 1 or Moto GP racing at all, despite being better suited for high G-forces and operating complex mashines in this enviroment?

How do you explain that?
 
Honestly, if you take a look on the numbers of races vs. the wins, the statistics are not impressive, especially for Danica Patrick (Nascar Cup: 191 races, no wins, Nascar X-finity: 61 races, no wins, Indy car series 161 races and one win, yeah!!). I doubt, that any professional male race driver would have had the opportunity to race so many races without winning.

Sponsors really like female race drivers and show a lot of patience, even if they don’t show a lot of potential.
 
There have been 868 male Formula 1 drivers over the years, 755 of whom have never won a single race (86%), 653 of them (75%) never got a podium position. 11 of these drivers had over 100 starts (7 of these drivers were active since 2000).
Andrea de Cesaris clocked up 214 starts in 14 years and had 1 pole position and still won nothing, but did get on the podium 5 times...

Of 57 drivers who started between 100-199 races, 18 won no races (5 getting no podium positions), 18 won 5-1 races, 8 won 6-10, 10 won 11-25 (the 25 race winner being Nikki Lauda). Only Mansell, Verstappen and Senna got over 30 wins.

Of 20 drivers (ignoring de Cesaris) who started 200-360 races (only 6 drivers have raced more than 300 times), 7 chalked up less than 10 wins - although admittedly they all got 11 or more podium placings. Only 4 got over 30 wins - Alonso, Vettel, Schumacher and Hamilton.

As in all sports the elite get all the medals and accolades. The rest just make up the numbers.
 
No doubt, all Formula 1 drivers need to be able to handle a race car properly and have much more talent than the average Joe. Despite that, there are two categories of drivers, those who get a lot of money for driving Formula 1 cars and those how pay a lot for driving a Formula one car. Among those, who really make money with driving Formula one, none is driving around for years without winning or even scoring. I’m sure, the same is true for Indy, when you start there or in Formula 1 as a rookie, an enormous pressure is on you to be successful and even a famous name like Schumacher doesn’t protect you from being fired when you don’t succeed.
 
There have been 868 male Formula 1 drivers over the years, 755 of whom have never won a single race (86%), 653 of them (75%) never got a podium position. 11 of these drivers had over 100 starts (7 of these drivers were active since 2000).
Andrea de Cesaris clocked up 214 starts in 14 years and had 1 pole position and still won nothing, but did get on the podium 5 times...

Of 57 drivers who started between 100-199 races, 18 won no races (5 getting no podium positions), 18 won 5-1 races, 8 won 6-10, 10 won 11-25 (the 25 race winner being Nikki Lauda). Only Mansell, Verstappen and Senna got over 30 wins.

Of 20 drivers (ignoring de Cesaris) who started 200-360 races (only 6 drivers have raced more than 300 times), 7 chalked up less than 10 wins - although admittedly they all got 11 or more podium placings. Only 4 got over 30 wins - Alonso, Vettel, Schumacher and Hamilton.

As in all sports the elite get all the medals and accolades. The rest just make up the numbers.

This is a treasure trove, btw https://www-statsf1-com.translate.g...sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=fr&_x_tr_pto=nui

Beside that, I'll stay away from this thread from now on...
 
No matter what statistics you look, there is absolutely no evidence that woman are generally superior race drivers than men, the total opposite is true, even if there are some exceptions from the rule. This is totally contradicting the theses, that woman are more efficient in high G-load environment in combination with operating complex machinery. Even if woman would have won 10 % of all Formula 1 races instead of only 0.5 points in total, it would still be contradicting this theses.
 
Last edited:
There is no current evidence to suggest that the female body is better suited for space travel than the male body. Both male and female astronauts have successfully completed missions in space, and there is no scientific consensus that i am aware of that one gender is better suited for space travel.

It is true that there are some physical differences between male and female bodies that could potentially impact space travel. For example, women generally have lower body weight and a lower center of gravity than men, which could be an advantage in microgravity environments. However, there are also other factors to consider, such as bone density, cardiovascular health, and immune function, which could potentially impact both male and female astronauts.
the selection of astronauts for space missions is based on a wide range of criteria, including physical fitness, psychological stability, and cognitive ability, rather than gender. Astronauts must undergo rigorous training and testing to ensure that they are able to handle the physical and psychological demands of space travel, regardless of their gender.
while there are some physical differences between male and female bodies that could potentially impact space travel, there is no current evidence to suggest that one gender is better suited for space travel than the other. The selection of astronauts is based on a wide range of criteria, including physical fitness, psychological stability, and cognitive ability, rather than gender.

also due to todays societal groups and ideas you also have to take into consideration the fact that people will want "inclusivity" so they will probably push it in my opinion. but i try to stay as unbiased as possible
 
Last edited:
Now I got it, I was wondering why Hood was mentioning Andra de Cesaris ...:D
 
Last edited:
Since about 20 posts, I have hardly found any mention of space travel anymore. Principally, this thread should be limited to the average capabilities in relation to space travel of the female body, in comparison to the male body.
So, please back to the original topic !
 
Back
Top Bottom