7 ms·

Job Opening: "Frequent travel may be required"

mmaunder 15y ago
"Since all crewmembers will be expected to fly aboard the Soyuz vehicle and perform Extravehicular Activities (space walks), applicants must meet the anthropometric requirements for both the Soyuz vehicle and the extravehicular activity mobility unit (space suit). Applicants brought in for interview will be evaluated to ensure they meet the anthropometric requirements." ...or you will be charged for two seats.
- georgemcbay 15y ago
  At $50 million a seat, that starts to add up.
- commieneko 15y ago
  It kind of pisses me off that the US is having to buy seats on Soyuz launches. Of course I grew up reading Tom Corbett and watched the first moon landing on a 12 inch black and white TV...
  - dennisgorelik 15y ago
    Apparently seats on US-made launches are more expensive. Does it bother you buying "Made in China" stuff?
    - commieneko 15y ago
      My problem isn't that the seats are Russian, it's that we've let our space program wither away to nothing. I don't mind competition in space industry, what I mind is that our government, and industry, leaders simply can't be bothered.
      - w1ntermute 15y ago
        > it's that we've let our space program wither away to nothing Maintaining a space program is a very expensive proposition, and given the enormous amont of debt the government possesses, I'd say it was a wise decision to shut the whole thing down.
        nitrogen 15y ago
        Unfortunately, the space program is a trivial amount compared to what's actually consuming the budget: defense and welfare. Since the risk of this thread devolving into a federal budget debate expands exponentially with every post, I propose leaving the subject for another time and place.
        commieneko 15y ago
        Non having a working space program will likely be an even more expensive proposition. Theres nothing wrong, in my opinion, with governments being involved in high speculative, but highly valuable infrastructure development.
      - dennisgorelik 15y ago
        Competition implies that less efficient providers are losing customers. US government is making wise move by cutting expenses that way.
  - jobu 15y ago
    I think it's fantastic for two reasons. First, it keeps the lights on for the Russian space industry (more players makes for a more interesting field). Second, I believe the next big achievements in space will likely be done by private industry. This sets a bar for the cost to get people into space. Whenever some company can safely match the price of $50mil per person we will start having some real competition.
    - commieneko 15y ago
      I've been waiting for this to happen for over 30 years. No one will be happier than I will if/when a real space industry develops. But just like I think it is foolish for the US to outsource its manufacturing industry, it is doubly foolish to outsource our space program. I'd almost sooner outsource our military... (opps!!!) (Side note, there's a big difference between space industry and space science research. The needs of physicists/astronomers are different than the needs of engineers, even if there is some overlap. Both need to be supported and encouraged. And both need both private and government funding.)
    - bfe 15y ago
      SpaceX is a few bells and whistles away from a human-rated Crew Configuration of the Dragon spacecraft with seating for seven. Their initial contract for unpiloted cargo flights of Falcon 9 / Dragon to ISS charges an average of $133 million per flight. At the same rate, they could sell passenger seats for only $19 million. That's just a back of the envelope calculation with a gazillion assumptions, but useful for making projections for the next few years.
  - VladRussian 15y ago
    >It kind of pisses me off that the US is having to buy seats on Soyuz launches. it is normal for any high tech endeavor to outsource mundane/janitorial work. Russia and US mastered this non-reuseable type of space flight decades ago. It would not make any sense for NASA to go back and implement the same system now. What would be great is if NASA used the time and money to implement a more advanced and efficient system - Shuttle was a great endeavor and its lessons need to be implemented into the new systems. And by the way, for example, while Russia ferries NASA atrounauts, Russia, or anybody else except NASA, has no ability to [successfully] send an actual Mars probe or create JWST (which impact on science and overall enlightment of the human race would possibly be bigger than even Hubble's one). So stop being pissed off and start writing the code for the mirrors alignment:)
    - wlievens 15y ago
      In my view there is nothing mundane about lifting people safely to orbit. For lifting cargo you might have a good point.
numlocked 15y ago
It's incredible how relatively sparse the application itself is. No essays, no short answers, no letters of recommendation. No prose of any kind. Simply a resume, references, an academic transcript, and a small list of "additional skills". The astronaut website talks repeatedly about focusing on candidates with high levels of academic achievement, and I guess they aren't kidding. With this application, for better or worse, that's about all they have to go on in this screening round.
artmageddon 15y ago
I'm surprised that they will accept a graduation degree in lieu of 1,000+ hours of pilot-in-command time in a jet aircraft. I'm a private pilot of single-engine propeller airplanes and getting my degree in CS is certainly no substitute! I'm applying tonight.
- numlocked 15y ago
  They have 2 paths to qualify - piloting astronauts and non-piloting. So it's not a substitute, per se.
  - philwelch 15y ago
    That's an interesting throwback to the days when all astronauts were test pilots, but it's kind of stupid nowadays, for reasons Robert Zubrin points out in his Mars Direct plan. It's simply easier to train a qualified engineer or scientist to be a pilot than it is to train a qualified pilot to be an engineer or scientist--and on any mission that's at all interesting, it's silly to waste space on an astronaut who isn't an engineer or a scientist.
- _delirium 15y ago
  I believe it qualifies you for a different job; NASA traditionally splits people into the roles that require a pilot background (Pilot, Mission Commander, etc.), and those that require scientific credentials (Mission Specialist).
- nobody31415926 15y ago
  Flight up = pro-programmed Soyuz module. Flying = ISS is in an orbit, very little aerobatic ability Flight down = Soyuz module pre-programmed to hit target But NASA will swap a graduate degree in something scientific for having buzzed around pretending to shoot people in a F16/18. Perhaps they could extend this to other parts of their operation? HST staff = extensive peer-reviewed published papers, or experience with a 105mm howitzer.
- metachris 15y ago
  I read it that they are looking for jet experience specifically. Doubt that propeller machine experience is a substitute. Good luck though, I hope you make it into the interview round!
chris_gogreen 15y ago
"Frequent travel may be required" is not all that strange considering this is for an astronaut...
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  It is a form of humor on the part of the HN submitter. Though for the life of me I can't recall what type. It's not irony. Gross understatement?
  - nandemo 15y ago
    Not even that, since most astronauts don't really travel to space frequently. It would have to be "involves somewhat longish trips" to be a proper understatement. Since the ad is for astronaut candidates, the frequent travel is presumably of the boring, Earth-bound type.
    - sliverstorm 15y ago
      Wry humor becomes much less funny when you insist on analyzing it and adhering to the so-called "facts"...
      - nandemo 15y ago
        You're right, of course. But I only jumped in after you started it. :-)
snorkel 15y ago
"Astronaut Candidates will be required to pass a swimming test during the first month of training." Does the back float count?
sv123 15y ago
Does anybody know how competitive something like this is? Do they get thousands or tens of thousands of applicants? I want to set my expectations accordingly.
- listrophy 15y ago
  I have a rejection letter from the last round. IIRC, the letter said the number applicants was either 2k or 20k. Sorry for the huge range, but it was ~4 years ago. I believe they accepted 12 into the program.
  - hugh3 15y ago
    Kinda makes me wonder why they don't tighten up the application criteria. Bachelor's degree in something vaguely sciencey plus three years experience? Compare that to the actual CVs of the nine folks they selected (out of 3500) last time: http://www.nasa.gov/astronauts/ascans2009.html http://www.nasa.gov/astronauts/ascans2009.html
    - listrophy 15y ago
      For some perspective of where I was: bachelors degrees in "Computer Science" and "Engineering Mechanics & Astronautics." And 4 years of aerospace engineering experience. I just barely made it past the official requirements, but I'm pretty sure they wanted someone older/more experienced. I'm also not in amazing shape, but I was Good Enough(tm). Apparently it wasn't enough to warrant an interview. shrug
mkramlich 15y ago
I'm glad it didn't require 20 years of Java experience.
grandalf 15y ago
One of the few jobs I'm too tall for.
commieneko 15y ago
Doesn't pay as much as I would have thought. (But the bennies are out of this world.)
coderdude 15y ago
>>SALARY RANGE: $64,724.00 to $141,715.00 / Per Year Space Shuttle Endeavour cost about $1.7 billion, each Space Shuttle flight cost $450 million, $480.1 million has been awarded through the COTS program - and they would pay an astronaut $65k/year. I'm guessing they feel that the rare opportunity to be in space is enough pay for you. ;) I'd still do it if I qualified for it. PS: I wish people would stop with the lazy and "funny" comments. It's like wading through crap.
- vilius 15y ago
  in a sense, it is still a competitive salary
- redthrowaway 15y ago
  >PS: I wish people would stop with the lazy and "funny" comments. It's like wading through crap. Indeed. I think the submission being a light/fluff piece brings out commenters who otherwise would stay away. That's not a complaint about the submission, however. It's both informative and, on a deep and nerdly level, really cool.
- bbrizzi 15y ago
  I find this low too but the job title is "Astronaut Candidate". This probably does not guarantee that you'll actually go to space. If you manage to go through all the training and get on a real space mission, the salary will probably be higher.
  - tomkarlo 15y ago
    Why would they pay more? It's not like you're going to quit after getting selected for flight just because you want a $10K raise.
- ww520 15y ago
  It depends where you live. In the NASA launch area, it goes a long way.
- rdtsc 15y ago
  A lot of astronauts didn't actually fly anywhere. A lot of them have spent decades training and waiting. So it doesn't even guarantee you'll fly anywhere (well except Baikonur or Moscow for training).
ew 15y ago
Oh darn, I'm too tall. At least I've got a good excuse for cough not being an astronaut cough
shareme 15y ago
Can you hear me Major Tom..
wavephorm 15y ago
It's probably easier to start a photo-sharing social media network, sell it to Facebook, and use the proceeds to buy a Virgin Galactic ticket, than to get this job.
gcv 15y ago
I wonder if a computer science degree counts as education in a branch of mathematics (which qualifies), or in "technology" (which does not).
- philwelch 15y ago
  "Basic Education Requirement: A bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major study in engineering, physical science, mathematics, life sciences, computer science, or other field of science."
  - MichaelGagnon 15y ago
    "The following degree fields are not considered qualifying: --Degrees in Technology (Engineering Technology, Aviation Technology, Medical Technology, etc.) "

"Since all crewmembers will be expected to fly aboard the Soyuz vehicle and perform Extravehicular Activities (space walks), applicants must meet the anthropometric requirements for both the Soyuz vehicle and the extravehicular activity mobility unit (space suit). Applicants brought in for interview will be evaluated to ensure they meet the anthropometric requirements." ...or you will be charged for two seats.

georgemcbay 15y ago
At $50 million a seat, that starts to add up.
commieneko 15y ago
It kind of pisses me off that the US is having to buy seats on Soyuz launches. Of course I grew up reading Tom Corbett and watched the first moon landing on a 12 inch black and white TV...
- dennisgorelik 15y ago
  Apparently seats on US-made launches are more expensive. Does it bother you buying "Made in China" stuff?
  - commieneko 15y ago
    My problem isn't that the seats are Russian, it's that we've let our space program wither away to nothing. I don't mind competition in space industry, what I mind is that our government, and industry, leaders simply can't be bothered.
    - w1ntermute 15y ago
      > it's that we've let our space program wither away to nothing Maintaining a space program is a very expensive proposition, and given the enormous amont of debt the government possesses, I'd say it was a wise decision to shut the whole thing down.
      - nitrogen 15y ago
        Unfortunately, the space program is a trivial amount compared to what's actually consuming the budget: defense and welfare. Since the risk of this thread devolving into a federal budget debate expands exponentially with every post, I propose leaving the subject for another time and place.
      - commieneko 15y ago
        Non having a working space program will likely be an even more expensive proposition. Theres nothing wrong, in my opinion, with governments being involved in high speculative, but highly valuable infrastructure development.
    - dennisgorelik 15y ago
      Competition implies that less efficient providers are losing customers. US government is making wise move by cutting expenses that way.
- jobu 15y ago
  I think it's fantastic for two reasons. First, it keeps the lights on for the Russian space industry (more players makes for a more interesting field). Second, I believe the next big achievements in space will likely be done by private industry. This sets a bar for the cost to get people into space. Whenever some company can safely match the price of $50mil per person we will start having some real competition.
  - commieneko 15y ago
    I've been waiting for this to happen for over 30 years. No one will be happier than I will if/when a real space industry develops. But just like I think it is foolish for the US to outsource its manufacturing industry, it is doubly foolish to outsource our space program. I'd almost sooner outsource our military... (opps!!!) (Side note, there's a big difference between space industry and space science research. The needs of physicists/astronomers are different than the needs of engineers, even if there is some overlap. Both need to be supported and encouraged. And both need both private and government funding.)
  - bfe 15y ago
    SpaceX is a few bells and whistles away from a human-rated Crew Configuration of the Dragon spacecraft with seating for seven. Their initial contract for unpiloted cargo flights of Falcon 9 / Dragon to ISS charges an average of $133 million per flight. At the same rate, they could sell passenger seats for only $19 million. That's just a back of the envelope calculation with a gazillion assumptions, but useful for making projections for the next few years.
- VladRussian 15y ago
  >It kind of pisses me off that the US is having to buy seats on Soyuz launches. it is normal for any high tech endeavor to outsource mundane/janitorial work. Russia and US mastered this non-reuseable type of space flight decades ago. It would not make any sense for NASA to go back and implement the same system now. What would be great is if NASA used the time and money to implement a more advanced and efficient system - Shuttle was a great endeavor and its lessons need to be implemented into the new systems. And by the way, for example, while Russia ferries NASA atrounauts, Russia, or anybody else except NASA, has no ability to [successfully] send an actual Mars probe or create JWST (which impact on science and overall enlightment of the human race would possibly be bigger than even Hubble's one). So stop being pissed off and start writing the code for the mirrors alignment:)
  - wlievens 15y ago
    In my view there is nothing mundane about lifting people safely to orbit. For lifting cargo you might have a good point.

numlocked 15y ago

It's incredible how relatively sparse the application itself is. No essays, no short answers, no letters of recommendation. No prose of any kind. Simply a resume, references, an academic transcript, and a small list of "additional skills". The astronaut website talks repeatedly about focusing on candidates with high levels of academic achievement, and I guess they aren't kidding. With this application, for better or worse, that's about all they have to go on in this screening round.

artmageddon 15y ago

I'm surprised that they will accept a graduation degree in lieu of 1,000+ hours of pilot-in-command time in a jet aircraft. I'm a private pilot of single-engine propeller airplanes and getting my degree in CS is certainly no substitute! I'm applying tonight.

numlocked 15y ago
They have 2 paths to qualify - piloting astronauts and non-piloting. So it's not a substitute, per se.
- philwelch 15y ago
  That's an interesting throwback to the days when all astronauts were test pilots, but it's kind of stupid nowadays, for reasons Robert Zubrin points out in his Mars Direct plan. It's simply easier to train a qualified engineer or scientist to be a pilot than it is to train a qualified pilot to be an engineer or scientist--and on any mission that's at all interesting, it's silly to waste space on an astronaut who isn't an engineer or a scientist.
_delirium 15y ago
I believe it qualifies you for a different job; NASA traditionally splits people into the roles that require a pilot background (Pilot, Mission Commander, etc.), and those that require scientific credentials (Mission Specialist).
nobody31415926 15y ago
Flight up = pro-programmed Soyuz module. Flying = ISS is in an orbit, very little aerobatic ability Flight down = Soyuz module pre-programmed to hit target But NASA will swap a graduate degree in something scientific for having buzzed around pretending to shoot people in a F16/18. Perhaps they could extend this to other parts of their operation? HST staff = extensive peer-reviewed published papers, or experience with a 105mm howitzer.
metachris 15y ago
I read it that they are looking for jet experience specifically. Doubt that propeller machine experience is a substitute. Good luck though, I hope you make it into the interview round!

chris_gogreen 15y ago

"Frequent travel may be required" is not all that strange considering this is for an astronaut...

sliverstorm 15y ago
It is a form of humor on the part of the HN submitter. Though for the life of me I can't recall what type. It's not irony. Gross understatement?
- nandemo 15y ago
  Not even that, since most astronauts don't really travel to space frequently. It would have to be "involves somewhat longish trips" to be a proper understatement. Since the ad is for astronaut candidates, the frequent travel is presumably of the boring, Earth-bound type.
  - sliverstorm 15y ago
    Wry humor becomes much less funny when you insist on analyzing it and adhering to the so-called "facts"...
    - nandemo 15y ago
      You're right, of course. But I only jumped in after you started it. :-)

snorkel 15y ago

"Astronaut Candidates will be required to pass a swimming test during the first month of training." Does the back float count?

sv123 15y ago

Does anybody know how competitive something like this is? Do they get thousands or tens of thousands of applicants? I want to set my expectations accordingly.

listrophy 15y ago
I have a rejection letter from the last round. IIRC, the letter said the number applicants was either 2k or 20k. Sorry for the huge range, but it was ~4 years ago. I believe they accepted 12 into the program.
- hugh3 15y ago
  Kinda makes me wonder why they don't tighten up the application criteria. Bachelor's degree in something vaguely sciencey plus three years experience? Compare that to the actual CVs of the nine folks they selected (out of 3500) last time: http://www.nasa.gov/astronauts/ascans2009.html http://www.nasa.gov/astronauts/ascans2009.html
  - listrophy 15y ago
    For some perspective of where I was: bachelors degrees in "Computer Science" and "Engineering Mechanics & Astronautics." And 4 years of aerospace engineering experience. I just barely made it past the official requirements, but I'm pretty sure they wanted someone older/more experienced. I'm also not in amazing shape, but I was Good Enough(tm). Apparently it wasn't enough to warrant an interview. shrug

mkramlich 15y ago

I'm glad it didn't require 20 years of Java experience.

grandalf 15y ago

One of the few jobs I'm too tall for.

commieneko 15y ago

Doesn't pay as much as I would have thought. (But the bennies are out of this world.)

coderdude 15y ago

>>SALARY RANGE: $64,724.00 to $141,715.00 / Per Year Space Shuttle Endeavour cost about $1.7 billion, each Space Shuttle flight cost $450 million, $480.1 million has been awarded through the COTS program - and they would pay an astronaut $65k/year. I'm guessing they feel that the rare opportunity to be in space is enough pay for you. ;) I'd still do it if I qualified for it. PS: I wish people would stop with the lazy and "funny" comments. It's like wading through crap.

vilius 15y ago
in a sense, it is still a competitive salary
redthrowaway 15y ago
>PS: I wish people would stop with the lazy and "funny" comments. It's like wading through crap. Indeed. I think the submission being a light/fluff piece brings out commenters who otherwise would stay away. That's not a complaint about the submission, however. It's both informative and, on a deep and nerdly level, really cool.
bbrizzi 15y ago
I find this low too but the job title is "Astronaut Candidate". This probably does not guarantee that you'll actually go to space. If you manage to go through all the training and get on a real space mission, the salary will probably be higher.
- tomkarlo 15y ago
  Why would they pay more? It's not like you're going to quit after getting selected for flight just because you want a $10K raise.
ww520 15y ago
It depends where you live. In the NASA launch area, it goes a long way.
rdtsc 15y ago
A lot of astronauts didn't actually fly anywhere. A lot of them have spent decades training and waiting. So it doesn't even guarantee you'll fly anywhere (well except Baikonur or Moscow for training).

ew 15y ago

Oh darn, I'm too tall. At least I've got a good excuse for cough not being an astronaut cough

shareme 15y ago

Can you hear me Major Tom..

wavephorm 15y ago

It's probably easier to start a photo-sharing social media network, sell it to Facebook, and use the proceeds to buy a Virgin Galactic ticket, than to get this job.

gcv 15y ago

I wonder if a computer science degree counts as education in a branch of mathematics (which qualifies), or in "technology" (which does not).

philwelch 15y ago
"Basic Education Requirement: A bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university with major study in engineering, physical science, mathematics, life sciences, computer science, or other field of science."
- MichaelGagnon 15y ago
  "The following degree fields are not considered qualifying: --Degrees in Technology (Engineering Technology, Aviation Technology, Medical Technology, etc.) "