Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ioncloud9 t1_j0yqw9l wrote

You are going to have to pick at least 1 woman, 1 PoC, probably a Canadian.

4

H-K_47 t1_j0ytu6p wrote

A Canadian is already reserved for the A2 flyby, so probably none on A3 or A4. Maybe A5 though.

6

MajorRocketScience t1_j11dk3t wrote

Yeah it’ll likely be ESA for Artemis 3 and 5 and JAXA on Artemis 4 for what I’ve heard, with the ESA astronaut on 5 being first non-American on the moon

3

Sweetbeans2001 t1_j0z2en8 wrote

By outright announcing that a woman and a PoC would be picked, they’ve made it crystal clear that these astronaut qualities were most important. I think diversity is great, but making a big deal about it has made the selection process political.

2

zenith654 t1_j0z51ad wrote

During Apollo it was also an explicitly political choice to exclude these groups completely, so I think I’m fine with it. If they’re an astronaut they’re already incredibly competent.

9

ioncloud9 t1_j0z9jt3 wrote

I mean, there are plenty of examples of astronauts doing crazy shit. Like the one that drove from Texas to Florida in adult diapers for a love triangle thing.

7

bookers555 t1_j1246ch wrote

NASA relies on government funding so they need to jerk politicians in whatever they ask if they want funds, and diversity is all the current rage in US politics.

So you just tell them yes to whatever they say, take the billions and run before they start asking for specifics regarding the technology that's going to be used, it's already enough that they demanded the SLS to reuse old Space Shuttle tech just to prevent their buddies from losing their jobs.

−1

sardoodledom_autism t1_j13ru9h wrote

Doesn’t this undermine the entire astronaut program? You send the 3 best candidates. If it’s 3 guys, great. If its 3 poc, even better.

−1

ioncloud9 t1_j13sz2n wrote

No because your pool of astronauts are all qualified for the job, otherwise they wouldnt be astronauts. Their mission assignments might be based on a particular specialty they have, or previous performance on a mission.

It is also an inherently political decision. Seeing as they are all very close in abilities, picking one over the other isnt going to make or break your mission, so you have the flexibility to make whatever picks that satisfy all of your mission objectives including political objectives.

I dont really have a problem with that. I do have a problem with only putting 2 astronauts on the surface for the first mission instead of 4, and continuing to use a compact sedan to get the astronauts to the moon only for them to land in an apartment building.

5