4 ms·

Also disability in a different environment may be far less of an issue. For example, in microgravity a person missing one or both legs would not have issues wi

Also disability in a different environment may be far less of an issue. For example, in microgravity a person missing one or both legs would not have issues with mobility.

luckylion 4y ago
That's an interesting thought. They'd also be lighter and would require less space, so you could build smaller space crafts, making them lighter as well. Is there something making it difficult to send up amputees or why aren't we doing that already?
ben_w 4y ago
Been wondering for a while now why the ISS EVA suits have flexible legs. Or indeed why they're not mostly-rigid oversized boxes with only the arm parts being flexible, such that astronauts can pull their arms inside in the event of e.g. a loose eyelash. As I'm guessing, is this because after Apollo the next mission was designed around the Apollo suits, and then the next suits designed and that mission, etc?
rbanffy 4y ago
Wasn't there an advantage for color blind people in air rescue because of different perceptions of color enabled them to better see what most other humans would miss?
amarant 4y ago
You'd have issues with stability though. Looking at some images of astronauts inside the ISS I can see that almost all of the pictures where they're performing a task inside the station, they tuck their feet under holding bars to keep from drifting away from what they're doing. I imagine that would be quite complicated if you didn't have any legs, and it would probably be hard to keep from swaying side-to-side of you only have one leg. I'm sure there are other complications too, microgravity is a much more hostile environment than you might think!
TeMPOraL 4y ago
You're right, of course, but I think the objective counter for now is that space missions are still a bit too much on the "piloting experimental craft" side. While in a different environment, a disability could be less of an issue, or even an advantage, current missions still plan for contingencies in multiple environments (of which we have at least three - on the ground, in microgravity / free-fall, under high thrust). If there was an advantage to disability across all possible environments, it wouldn't be called a disability in the first place. Ultimately it all boils down to cost. There's a lot of things that could be designed around (I imagine missing one or both legs would be one of the easier cases) - but that is costly, and if it increases variety by e.g. introducing new kinds of equipment or training protocols, that increases risks of failure (both hardware or human error), again increasing costs. Etc. These things will get easier and cheaper once we ramp up the amount of space missions - the vicious cycle I'm hinting at can eventually turn into a virtuous one.

Also disability in a different environment may be far less of an issue. For example, in microgravity a person missing one or both legs would not have issues with mobility.

luckylion 4y ago

That's an interesting thought. They'd also be lighter and would require less space, so you could build smaller space crafts, making them lighter as well. Is there something making it difficult to send up amputees or why aren't we doing that already?

ben_w 4y ago

Been wondering for a while now why the ISS EVA suits have flexible legs. Or indeed why they're not mostly-rigid oversized boxes with only the arm parts being flexible, such that astronauts can pull their arms inside in the event of e.g. a loose eyelash. As I'm guessing, is this because after Apollo the next mission was designed around the Apollo suits, and then the next suits designed and that mission, etc?

rbanffy 4y ago

Wasn't there an advantage for color blind people in air rescue because of different perceptions of color enabled them to better see what most other humans would miss?

amarant 4y ago

You'd have issues with stability though. Looking at some images of astronauts inside the ISS I can see that almost all of the pictures where they're performing a task inside the station, they tuck their feet under holding bars to keep from drifting away from what they're doing. I imagine that would be quite complicated if you didn't have any legs, and it would probably be hard to keep from swaying side-to-side of you only have one leg. I'm sure there are other complications too, microgravity is a much more hostile environment than you might think!

TeMPOraL 4y ago

You're right, of course, but I think the objective counter for now is that space missions are still a bit too much on the "piloting experimental craft" side. While in a different environment, a disability could be less of an issue, or even an advantage, current missions still plan for contingencies in multiple environments (of which we have at least three - on the ground, in microgravity / free-fall, under high thrust). If there was an advantage to disability across all possible environments, it wouldn't be called a disability in the first place. Ultimately it all boils down to cost. There's a lot of things that could be designed around (I imagine missing one or both legs would be one of the easier cases) - but that is costly, and if it increases variety by e.g. introducing new kinds of equipment or training protocols, that increases risks of failure (both hardware or human error), again increasing costs. Etc. These things will get easier and cheaper once we ramp up the amount of space missions - the vicious cycle I'm hinting at can eventually turn into a virtuous one.