Given that resources are limited by weight restrictions, should the first mars astronauts be little people?

Question

Has NASA looked into this? Seriously... does this make sense? I would think smaller, lighter, less resource-using astronauts should have an advantage over the 6 footers that usually are picked.

Answer 1

I believe this has been bandied about.  To some extent, the question is moot as the spacecraft can be redesigned as needed.  One issue is whether you're looking at a one-off flight or a series of flights.  At some point, you're going to be using humans at the median and better heights and weights.  The design will be better suited for standard human forms and standards.

There's also the PR angle.  While the selected people may be perfectly suited in terms of training and ability, most people would see the use of little people as a stunt.  Look at Jake Garn or some of the people who have gone up into orbit via the Russian space program

Answer 2

It does make sense in the fact that they would use less resources, however there are other significant factors. Beyond the psychology of sticking a team together in space for long periods of time, there are physical considerations. Some considerations are that working in the bulky suits currently used in space, takes a lot of endurance. Sure it sounds nice on paper to have to take several hundred pounds of resources less to Mars, but if that much difference is going to hinder what type of work can be done once we're there, then why not just keep sending robots?

TLDR: 6 footers are probably more physically capable to handle tasks in these conditions. I don't know, maybe NASA will find a little person able to carry around large suits for many hours at a time.

Answer 3

Your question reminds me of a comment I read from an astronaut - I think it was one from the Skylab mission - to the effect that dwarfs might be better suited to micro-gravity because legs are kind of useless there. However I agree with the others that on the surface of Mars you're going to want significant muscle. But I think the most powerful argument against is the idea of standardization of astronaut systems.  

Answer 4

Smaller people would help, since it costs $10,000 per pound to get something into space, but considering the distance to mars and the duration of the trip, it wouldn't help that much.

Smaller people would also mean smaller living spaces and sleeping quarters, which would also help considering the mission will be 1.5 - 2 years long.

In the interest of fairness and having qualified people on the mission, I honestly can't see a 6'4" tall astronaut being disqualified because of his or her height.

Answer 5

AHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!~~

CCCOOOOOLLL!!!

why not yeah???

cant really argue about standard of equipment. i mean theres only every going to be like 10 mars suits made. (no way will the recycle the luna suit... its 1960s stuff).

its a hugely long misssion. VAST distance and time multipliers... size of the humans does count. IT will take probably with current thurst systems 3 years....  that is ALOT of food, p**p and air recycling to do.

i recon it makes sense.

after 3 years in low-G (unless they have a rotating artificial gravity) a normal human will be sooooo stuffed up they could not walk on a martian surface, even with the zeroG exercise every single day.

i recon they secretly looking into this. either that or gonna clone or breed smaller stronger lighter people, or something

this is hilarious tho ahaha