Trump official to Katy Perry and Bezos’ fiancée: “You cannot identify as an astronaut”
Trump official to Katy Perry and Bezos’ fiancée: “You cannot identify as an astronaut”
While I'm disgusted by this whole pr stunt by Katy Petty, an astronaut is literally just a person trained to travel in a spacecraft beyond the earths atmosphere. pr Merriam Webster. So is she an astronaut? Assuming the spacecraft actually left the earths atmosphere, then yes. She can identify herself as an astronaut. Doesn't make her anywhere near as cool an astronaut as the people who work and do research in space, but that's not necessarily part of the definition.
No. They weren't "trained to travel in a spacecraft". It was fully automated. They were just passengers on an 11 minute flight.
Seriously, if that makes them astronauts...then everyone who's been on an airplane, is a pilot.
Yuri Gagarin's flight was entirely automated. He went a bit higher and made a full orbit, but I'm pretty sure everyone agrees he's an astronaut.
He was a cosmonaut, so jot that down.
… the best kind of correct…
Sure, but he was the very first person to ever fly in space so that definitely counts for something. Additionally, he could control the spacecraft if there was an emergency.
And he was trained to do so.
"If my Grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike" --Gino D'Acampo
You know that wasn't why she was known as the village bike, right?
The first 'astronauts' were "spam in a can." Yuri Garagin didn't have any controls in his craft, nor did the first few American astronauts. An 'astronaut' is anyone who has gone more than 60 miles up. And yes, if you have been in an airplane you can call yourself a 'flier.'
Wait. Are we seriously saying that Katy Perry and Gayle King are on par with Yuri Gagarin now? This just gets funnier by the minute.
What's the actual difference? Any history book will confirm that Gagarin had as much control of his craft as Katy Perry or Enos the chimp did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_X-15
The pilots of the X-15 flew into space and landed their craft.
The difference is, Gagarin was actually capable of piloting the craft.
No, he wasn't, because there were no controls for him to use.
Of course there were. They just weren't sure what the effects of being in space were going to be on his mind and body. They had no idea if he would lose his mind in free-fall, or if he'd suffer a stroke from the g-forces required to reach orbit, or just simply pass out. So the first flight was set to autopilot. It was as much a live human experiment, as it was a test of their equipment. But he definitely had the code to unlock the controls if he needed to.
Bottom line is, he had been a pilot for most of his life, and was fully trained to operate that craft with or without the safety protocols in place. The training that all those early astronauts/cosmonauts went through was insane. The levels of physical and mental competence they expected from them, was more than any standard training given to regular pilots.
It's not like they just grabbed some celebrity off a stage and let them experience free-fall for 11 minutes, so they could plug their upcoming concert tour.
TIL.
None of that changes the fact that the original definition of 'astronaut' was anyone who traveled into space [60 miles up] as a pilot or passenger.
Did they travel in a spacecraft, and did they recieve the necessary training to do so?
Not all astronauts pilot the spacecraft, and most going to eg. the ISS don't actually do anything while going to the station. That trip is also just an automated flight, controlled by the onboard computer.
It's more akin to, "if that makes them astronauts, then people who have traveled on an airplane, has recieved the training to travel in an airplane."
I've recently listened to a podcast with the german astronaut Matthias Maurer where he discusses this question - What exactly makes you an astronaut?
He stated that there are several definitions, mostly based around altitude but if you want the European Space Agency to call you an astronaut you also have to fly around the earth in space at least once. So by ESA definition, Katy Perry would not be an astronaut.
I've now seen 3 completely contradictory definitions of what an astronaut it. 1 by ESA, 1 by the FAA, and 1 by a dictionary. Clearly no one actually knows what an astronaut is exactly, and what the exact minimum requirements are for an astronaut to be called an astronaut. What everyone seem to at least agree on is that part of what makes an astronaut, is in some capacity to visit space.
I don't take that to mean "no one actually knows what an astronaut actually is" because phrasing it like that floats in the sensationalism territory between click bait headlines and Trump ramblings. What I do take that to mean is that the term is evolving, both from a linguistics standpoint as well as a technological/societal standpoint.
What's a phone? The average user here probably at least considers a device that makes telephone calls, but consider what's actually sold as a phone today and what non-phone devices can communicate in phone-like fashion. The primary usage of my cellular smartphone is far from making phone calls - it's a handheld computer with information, entertainment, and utility functions. If you argue that it can make phone calls and is therefore still a phone, then so is a modern car. If you expand to strictly internet channels such as FaceTime, zoom, or teams, then that'd include computers as phones. If someone says they're going to buy a new phone tomorrow, we're all picturing a smartphone.
There is no functional difference with the evolution of astronaut definitions. The accessibility is constantly improving. The purpose is expanding. The accessibility is still incredibly limited, on the global scale, so the original term still bears weight.
This is why Latin is used for sciences. The language is dead and no longer evolving. The rate of change is drastically slower, primarily driven by expanding definitions with discoveries rather than changing scientific properties entirely.
I wouldn't call myself an astronaut after such a trip. I'd want to, I'd love to, I'd make jokes about being a spaceman, but I wouldn't classify myself anywhere near the likes of anyone with a Shuttle or Apollo patch. I'd put it near U2 pilots and tourists
"The last FAA guidelines under the Commercial Space Astronaut Wings Program were clear: Crewmembers who travel into space must have 'demonstrated activities during flight that were essential to public safety, or contributed to human space flight safety,'" Duffy wrote. "The crew who flew to space this week on an automated flight by Blue Origin were brave and glam, but you cannot identify as an astronaut. They do not meet the FAA astronaut criteria."
Edit: I don't really care if Bezos, Shatner, Perry and Billionaire sidepiece can't call themselves astronauts. Why would anyone want that for them? I don't even think Shatner has called himself that.
If someone from the Trump administration says the sky is blue you should look outside to confirm
This is a pretty striking statement.
For starters the Federal Aviation Administration, an agency within the US Department of Transportation Duffy leads, has previously said it will take no part in determining whether people who fly on suborbital flights are astronauts. The agency makes this clear on its human spaceflight page, stating: "The FAA no longer designates anyone as an ‘astronaut.’ In addition, the FAA does not define where space begins."
To step back just a little bit, the FAA created a commercial "Astronaut Wings" program back in 2004 to recognize the two pilots of SpaceShipOne, Mike Melvill and Brian Binnie, who flew the vehicle above 50 statute miles (80 km). After that time, the program recognized private citizens who flew on Virgin Galactic's Unity spacecraft, Blue Origin's New Shepard, and SpaceX's orbital Crew Dragon vehicle. You flew, and you got astronaut wings.
Then, in December 2021, the agency stopped issuing wings. "With the advent of the commercial space tourism era, starting in 2022, the Federal Aviation Administration will now recognize individuals who reach space on its website instead of issuing Commercial Space Astronaut Wings," the agency said. "Any individual who is on an FAA-licensed or permitted launch and reaches 50 statute miles above the surface of the Earth will be listed on the site."
Sanchez, Perry, and the others are recognized on this site today.
I've now seen 3 completely contradictory definitions of what an astronaut it. 1 by ESA, 1 by the FAA, and 1 by a dictionary. Clearly no one actually knows what an astronaut is exactly, and what the exact minimum requirements are for an astronaut to be called an astronaut. What everyone seem to at least agree on is that part of what makes an astronaut, is in some capacity to visit space.
Yeah, there was no training, they aren't trained to go into space. I don't see how astronaut could possibly be an appropriate title. They're payload mass in a sounding rocket.
