Forecasting Crew Anthropometry for Shuttle and Space Station

1988 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-39
Author(s):  
John Roebuck ◽  
Kim Smith ◽  
Louis Raggio
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Space Shuttle ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
Body Dimensions ◽  
International Space ◽  
Emergency Rescue ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Actual Space ◽  
Year 2000

Habitation module and Crew Emergency Rescue Vehicle (CERV) designs for the International Space Station to be built by the United States are expected to accommodate a wide range of persons, according to body dimensions predicted for the year 2000. This prediction was aided by the opportunity, which arose in 1985, to check actual Space Shuttle male crew anthropometry, particularly stature, against predictions made circa 1973 and by recently acquired Japanese data. Revised hypotheses discussed herein have been accepted by an Anthropometry Working Group as the bases for developing anthropometry requirements that appear in the Man-Systems Integration Standard (NASA-STD-3000), published in 1987. Pleas are made for further research in civilian anthropometry and wider use of anthropometric forecasting.

scholarly journals The Return of Manned Missions

2019 ◽  
Vol 141 (07) ◽  
pp. 48-53
Author(s):  
Chitra Sethi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Space Station ◽  
Space Shuttle ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
Space Program ◽  
Private Companies ◽  
International Space ◽  
Space Suits ◽  
And Training

The United States space program has been without a launch vehicle for human spaceflight since 2011. That was when the space shuttle Atlantis returned on its final flight. Since then, NASA has relied on the Russian Soyuz spacecraft to take its astronauts to the International Space Station. However, if all goes to plan this could soon change, as two private companies are working with NASA to launch the first astronauts into orbit. The companies, SpaceX and Boeing, are building crew capsules and rockets, designing space suits, and training astronauts to fly these new vehicles into space.

A Framework for Multinational Medical Support for the International Space Station: A Model for Exploration

2021 ◽  
Vol 92 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-134
Author(s):  
Charles R. Doarn ◽  
James D. Polk ◽  
Anatoli Grigoriev ◽  
Jean-Marc Comtois ◽  
Kazuhito Shimada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Space Station ◽  
European Space Agency ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medical System ◽  
Medical Support ◽  
International Space ◽  
Space Agency ◽  
Medical Certification

INTRODUCTION: In the 1990s, Canada, member states of the European Space Agency, Japan, the Russian Federation, and the United States entered into an international agreement Concerning Cooperation on the Civil International Space Station. Among the many unique infrastructure challenges, partners were to develop a comprehensive international medical system and related processes to enable crew medical certification and medical support for all phases of missions, in a framework to support a multilateral space program of unprecedented size, scope, and degree of integration. During the Shuttle/Mir Program, physicians and specialized experts from the United States and Russia studied prototype systems and developed and operated collaborative mechanisms. The 1998 NASA Memoranda of Understanding with each of the other four partners established the Multilateral Medial Policy Board, the Multilateral Space Medicine Board, and the Multilateral Medical Operations Panel as medical authority bodies to ensure International Space Station (ISS) crew health and performance. Since 1998, the medical system of the ISS Program has ensured health and excellent performance of the international crewsan essential prerequisite for the construction and operation of the ISSand prevented mission-impacting medical events and adverse health outcomes. As the ISS is completing its second decade of crewed operation, it is prudent to appraise its established medical framework for its utility moving forward in new space exploration initiatives. Not only the ISS Program participants, but other nations and space agencies as well, concomitant with commercial endeavors in human spaceflight, can benefit from this evidence for future human exploration programs.Doarn CR, Polk JD, Grigoriev A, Comtois J-M, Shimada K, Weerts G, Dervay JP, Taddeo TA, Sargsyan A. A framework for multinational medical support for the International Space Station: a model for exploration. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2021; 92(2):129134.

scholarly journals Extending Humanity’s Reach: A Public-Private Framework for Space Exploration

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 75-98
Author(s):  
Jack B. Chaben
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Space Shuttle ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Space Race ◽  
The Cold War

The Cold War initiated not only rapid weaponization campaigns within the United States and the Soviet Union, but launched a space race between the ideological opponents. The Soviet Union claimed an early victory by becoming the first nation to launch a satellite into space. Despite the United States' rough start, the country triumphed during its Apollo Program to become the leader in space. Treaties and international norms emerged throughout this time to prevent these technologically raging nations from weaponizing the expansive environment of outer space, but the resulting protections against national ownership of space limited incentives for future deep space travel. As the U.S. Space Shuttle program came to an end in 2011, the United States forfeit its capabilities to transport humans to the International Space Station. This apparent abandonment of outer space, however, began to reveal the seminal role of the commercial space industry and its revolutionary technologies. This article traces the transition from the Cold War-era space race to today’s robust public-private expansion into space. It highlights the foundational importance of international cooperation to protect the interests of private companies, and presents a model of cooperative succession between space agencies and companies to send humans to Mars.

SpaceX will defy global launchers business model

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Business Model ◽  
Air Force ◽  
Department Of Defense ◽  
United States Air Force ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Regulations ◽  
Content Type ◽  
International Space

Subject Outlook for satellite launchers. Significance SpaceX's successful mission to supply the International Space Station this month has put the expansion of its launch business back on track after a failure last June. In addition, United Launch Alliance (ULA), SpaceX's main competitor for US Department of Defense (DoD) and NASA business, faces an investigation to determine whether contracts it was awarded conformed to Federal regulations, while the competition between ULA and SpaceX to work with the United States Air Force (USAF) is turning into a bitter tussle. Impacts The challenge posed by SpaceX threatens wider disruption in the global launcher business. Launch prices will fall over the next five years as more cheap and reusable rockets become available. In the United States, dependence on the Russian-supplied RD-180 rocket motor for the Atlas 5 will undermine ULA's position.

Summary of Recent Research Accomplishment Onboard the International Space Station—Within the United States Orbital Segment

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 311-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenol Jules ◽  
Eric Istasse ◽  
Hilde Stenuit ◽  
Keiji Murakami ◽  
Izumi Yoshizaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Space Station ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Space ◽  
Research Accomplishment

The Politics of Precaution

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Vogel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Animal Feed ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
Scientific Certainty ◽  
European Public ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Regulatory Controls ◽  
Milk Hormones

This book examines the politics of consumer and environmental risk regulation in the United States and Europe over the last five decades, explaining why America and Europe have often regulated a wide range of similar risks differently. It finds that between 1960 and 1990, American health, safety, and environmental regulations were more stringent, risk averse, comprehensive, and innovative than those adopted in Europe. But since around 1990 global regulatory leadership has shifted to Europe. What explains this striking reversal? This book takes an in-depth, comparative look at European and American policies toward a range of consumer and environmental risks, including vehicle air pollution, ozone depletion, climate change, beef and milk hormones, genetically modified agriculture, antibiotics in animal feed, pesticides, cosmetic safety, and hazardous substances in electronic products. The book traces how concerns over such risks—and pressure on political leaders to do something about them—have risen among the European public but declined among Americans. The book explores how policymakers in Europe have grown supportive of more stringent regulations while those in the United States have become sharply polarized along partisan lines. And as European policymakers have grown more willing to regulate risks on precautionary grounds, increasingly skeptical American policymakers have called for higher levels of scientific certainty before imposing additional regulatory controls on business.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document