Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Breakdown Forces New Look At Mars Mission Sexuality

Posted by Zonk on Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:56 AM
from the acting-like-adults-at-nasa dept.
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?
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Brain Scanner Can Read People's Intentions 338 comments
Vainglorious Coward writes "Reality continues to catch up with Nineteen Eighty-Four with the announcement of the development of a brain scanner that can read a person's intentions. 'It's like shining a torch around, looking for writing on a wall,' said the leader of the project, Professor John-Dylan Haynes . Demonstrating his own mastery of doublethink, Haynes continued 'We see the danger that this might become compulsory one day, but we have to be aware that if we prohibit it, we are also denying people who aren't going to commit any crime the possibility of proving their innocence.'"
[+] First Details of Manned Mars Mission From NASA 329 comments
OriginalArlen writes "The BBC has a first look at NASA's initial concepts for a manned Mars mission, currently penciled in for 2031. The main vehicle would be assembled on orbit over three or four launches of the planned Ares V heavy lift rocket. New abilities to repair, replace, and even produce replacement parts will be needed to provide enough self-sufficiency for a 30 months mission, including 16 months on the surface. The presentation was apparently delivered at a meeting of the Lunar Exploration Management Group, although there's nothing on their site yet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • *Chuckle* (Score:5, Funny)

    by MyLongNickName (822545) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:00AM (#17947942) Journal
    Let's have Slashdot solve a problem revolving around human sexual relationships. I can't think of three words more "anti-slashdot" than that ;)
    • by Xzzy (111297) <.sether. .at. .tru7h.org.> on Friday February 09 2007, @11:20AM (#17948290) Homepage
      Based on the article ('socially adept introverts' and 'high toleration for lack of achievement'), I'd think Slashdot is an excellent screening tool for finding people suitable for a Mars mission.
    • by Alien54 (180860) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:28AM (#17948428) Journal
      This has all of the makings of several classic sci-fi movies

      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.
  • Submariners (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Zebadias (861722) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:00AM (#17947956)
    They only need to look as far as the crew on a submarine to see what makeup can last a year. AFIK they are all male crew.
    • Re:Submariners (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Chmcginn (201645) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:09AM (#17948108) Journal
      Very true. But I'm pretty sure there's plenty of people who's cry sexism from here to Jupiter if NASA suggested an all-male crew for that stated reason.
      • Re:Submariners (Score:5, Insightful)

        by orcrist (16312) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:43AM (#17948622)
        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.

        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:Submariners (Score:5, Interesting)

          by frdmfghtr (603968) on Friday February 09 2007, @12:20PM (#17949270)

          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.


          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 :) ) We still had regular radio contact with the outside world so technically we weren't outside of human contact, even though we didn't touch land for two months.
  • Spaceballs (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:01AM (#17947960) Homepage Journal
    No, what we want is pansexual swingers in a nonstop orgy . People who will have sex without conflating it with love, possession, jealousy, status or other issues. To prevent inferiority conflicts with mission rank, sexual performance should be evaluated along with other mission skills.

    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.
  • Simple (Score:5, Funny)

    by markov_chain (202465) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:01AM (#17947964) Homepage
    Recruit the astronauts from among the slashdot readers. They won't have a problem going a couple of years without sex. You can't miss what you don't know!

  • by Timesprout (579035) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:02AM (#17947978)
    Why was I not informed of this earlier? Suddenly I feel the need to go and preach to the heathen martians.
  • by Vollernurd (232458) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:03AM (#17948006) Homepage
    This is an interesting one. In centuries past when boat crews of men would find themself at sea for many months without female company many strange behaviours emerged. Homosexual acts between otherwise "heterosexual" red-bloodeed Jack Tars became quite normal.

    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!
    • by Flying pig (925874) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:45AM (#17948656)
      Read N A M Roper, the leading historian of the Royal Navy. Rum, sodomy and the lash basically arrived when the Navy ceased to be run by professionals and was taken over by the aristocracy (who saw the opportunities for prize money for younger sons.) The aristocracy tried to run the Navy like the Army. The old all-professional Navy wasn't particularly averse to women on board, but disliked homosexuality because it might complicate working relationships, which had to stay good for people to stay alive. Given the relatively short voyages of those days, the opportunities for nookie were many. Even when blockading towns - perhaps especially when blockading towns - there were plenty of ladies of negotiable affection (or even laundrywomen) who were prepared to risk themselves in small boats for pecuniary advantage.

      If Churchill ever said that, he was joking.

  • by Gary W. Longsine (124661) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:04AM (#17948010) Homepage Journal

    "NASA's current archetype of highly-driven, task-oriented people might be precisely the wrong type for a Mars expedition"
    OK, the opposite of this would be laid-back herb-toking free-love hippies. While it's true that such folk will be disinclined to kill each other in a jealous rage, but they are also not likely to be inclined to get into a tin can with no weed for three years and walk around on Mars collecting rocks they won't even get to keep or sell on EBay.
  • by blankoboy (719577) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:06AM (#17948044)
    Just pile some PC's onboard preloaded with WOW. This will 100% ensure that no sex will take place. Other side effects include 0 mission objectives accomplished though. They would land at their destination and never get out of the ship. =)
  • Strange difference (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bytesex (112972) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:19AM (#17948280) Homepage
    I find the difference in treatment by the media and the executive of this incident (vs. others I can think of) very perculiar: not that they're not all over her, but because she's an astronaut, papers respectfully note that the family has asked us to 'withhold judgement'. NASA keeps her 'in seclusion'. The judge granted bail. If driving 1000 miles with equipment to kidnap and kill had happened to any other person in any other profession, they would have locked her up and throw away the key - but not here. She's part of a sacred league after all.
  • Help, not screen (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SuperBanana (662181) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:25AM (#17948378)

    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)

      by sckeener (137243) <[gro.sreneeksaxet] [ta] [gnilrets]> on Friday February 09 2007, @12:04PM (#17949014)
      Instead, NASA lost a great astronaut and her life has been destroyed.

      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!
  • by demachina (71715) on Friday February 09 2007, @11:59AM (#17948924)
    "NASA's current archetype of highly-driven, task-oriented people might be precisely the wrong type for a Mars expedition"

    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.
  • by dtjohnson (102237) on Friday February 09 2007, @12:11PM (#17949128)
    The diaper-wearing long-haul killer was unbelievably selfish and self-centered...to the point of being infantile. Someone with that kind of psychopathic personality should have never made it into the NASA manned spaceflight program, where people have to depend on each other. Someone who would drive 900 miles in diapers to kill someone to satisfy some selfish itch is not going to make any sacrifices for the good of the mission or her fellow space travelers.