Your Chance to be an Astronaut 302
codewarrior78411 writes "NASA posted a hiring notice for new astronauts Tuesday, on usajobs.com, seeking for the first time in almost 30 years men and women to fly aboard spacecraft other than the shuttle. The agency is seeking 10 to 15 new faces for three to six-month missions aboard the international space station." Requirements include 'Must be a U.S. citizen between 5-foot-2 and 6-foot-3 in height (to squeeze into Russia's three-passenger Soyuz capsule)' 'At least a bachelor's degree in engineering, a biological or physical science, or mathematics' 'three years of relevant professional experience' and most interestingly 'Vision correctable to 20/20. For the first time, the space agency will consider applicants who have undergone successful refractive eye surgery.'
Re:Damn it! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:One-way or two-way missions? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Damn it! (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, that should mean that under US tax law, the amount people would pay to be an astronaut counts as imputed income on top of the 60k salary, and therefore should be taxed, but whatever.
(Btw, I think someone commented a while ago that NASA used to have a warning that said something like, "If you want to be an astronaut for the money, don't bother. If you just want a lot of money, go work for a NASA contractor.")
Re:One-way or two-way missions? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Damn it! (Score:4, Interesting)
Though my guess is that they're less looking for `Top Gun' types of guys and more for the brainy scientist guys -- but guys who are physically fit too. And so relevant professional experience would probably mean doing brainy scientist sorts of things. I imagine the military still has a lot of people like this ...
Though in general, if you want a job, apply -- even if you don't fit all their qualifications exactly. I doubt this is any different -- though I imagine that they won't be hiring many people who merely have bachelors degrees. I'd expect them to pick PhDs instead. Especially if I'm right about the sort of people they want.
Re:One-way or two-way missions? (Score:3, Interesting)
On those terms, no. If on the other hand you were to say: "and you take a suicide pill N months after landing if your food supplies run out." I'd do it. In a heartbeat. (Ok, I'd evaluate the mission first to see if that "if" is reasonable).
Trying to establish a permanent colony on Mars would be worth it, I think. Being part of the pioneering group, facing challenges, working on something important and influential. Hell Yes, I'd try it. Going just so some government can claim that "they" were the first to put a man on mars, no.
Having to take a suicide pill if all of our agricultural work fails, it should be a small risk compared to a micrometeorite strike, solar flare, orbital insertion failure, or once in mars, structural failure of the shelter, medical problems with regolith/mars dust, etc. I wouldn't like to depend on continued shipments from earth either
The hardest part would be the lag. No beer and no internet make Eponymous something something...
Finally! (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm really glad to see that teaching experience is being considered "real" job experience for once. Looking at all the minimum qualifications, with 7 years of K-12 teaching, I qualify. I'm going to apply. Who knows, I might get lucky. Wish me luck!
Re:(this joke will appear a thousand times) (Score:2, Interesting)
'Infantile fixation on putting people into space'
Re:One-way or two-way missions? (Score:3, Interesting)
Considering that only a small fraction of humans live in central eastern Africa or wherever humans originated, leaving home to seek new lands with little hope of return is a historically common event. Of course, nobody yet has set out for a barren world many millions of miles away, but many have faced daunting journeys and long odds.