The Women Who Led Us to the Moon

In 1935, the twenty-year-old National Advisory Committee on Aeronautic (NACA) hired its first human computers. That may sound strange, but the term “human computers” was given to people who possessed the ability to perform manual calculations and mental arithmetic. In the NACA’s case, these calculators were almost exclusively women.

In the early days of American aeronautical research, women were hired to perform the tedious task of transcribing raw research data.

Among the women computers was African-American physicist Katherine Johnson. Having started college at age 15, Johnson had a keen mind for mathematics. She was hired at the NACA’s Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory (now NASA’s Langley Research Center) and became the only woman on the flight research team. As the Space Race ramped up, Johnson was summoned to help calculate a path to the Moon. Using her calculations, the United States made history in July of 1969 with the Apollo 11 lunar landing mission. It’s worth noting that Johnson had previously calculated the trajectory for the 1961 mission of the first American in space, Alan Shepard.

Langley did something unprecedented in 1939. The organization hired its first female engineer, University of Virginia graduate Kitty Joyner. During her decades of work at Langley, Joyner managed supersonic wind tunnels and rose to become a branch head in the Office of Engineering and Technical Services. Below is a photo of Joyner standing in front of a wind tunnel turbine.

These pioneering women helped advance women’s influence in aeronautics research and engineering in general. We remember them.

Glamour Shots but for Space

Remember Glamour Shots? The company is still up and running, but if you were around in the ’80s and ’90s, those two words are likely to invoke imagery of a soft glow, forced smiles, and unnecessary props that ultimately cause you to end up on AwkwardFamilyPhotos.com.

“Get me out of this decade.”

Well, astronauts take glamorous shots as well, but they seem to understand the irony behind them.

The next International Space Station crew, Expedition 45, have just released their crew portrait and it has space geeks sharing it far and wide. Check it out:

In the foreground on the right (purple Light Saber) is Scott Kelly, twin brother of Mark Kelly (also an astronaut), who is gearing up for a one-year mission aboard ISS, the longest ever for any American astronaut.

Here’s Scott Kelly again in the crew portrait for Expedition 26, a tribute to The Beatles’ iconic 1969 Abbey Road album cover.

It’s refreshing to see spacefarers having fun. Between the the extensive training they undergo for 18-24 months, I imagine it’s refreshing for them as well.

For more crew portraits, you can view and download them for free at NASA.gov.

Should Space Money Be Spent on Earth? Answer: It Is!

Last September, India became the third nation behind Russia and the United States to ever successfully send a probe to orbit Mars. Mangalyaan, or Mars Orbiter Mission, was notable because it was relatively cheap at $70 million compared to NASA’s Mars MAVEN orbiter which carries a $671 million price tag. MOM didn’t launch without criticism, however. Many people asked why so much money is being spent on a satellite when we still haven’t solved hunger and poverty on Earth. It wasn’t just Indians who were asking, either.

It’s a valid concern and I share it. It makes sense to ask why we aren’t allocating these resources toward alleviating hunger and poverty. There are several ways to address these concerns.

To start, money that goes into space never really goes into space – every single dollar is spent on Earth. It goes toward jobs, which help keep an economy afloat. It’s not just engineers and scientists who get the benefit of employment – facilities require maintenance and human capital management. All sorts of trades are represented. It’s also worth noting that money allocated to space science is not money that was taken from other programs.

Let’s go to an idea that’s a bit more abstract, but nonetheless quantifiable. Work like this serves to inspire. When younger generations see what is possible, a spark flickers. People who want to work in space science often want it because, as children, they saw adults doing something extraordinary.

There are myriad reasons to support space exploration, but I want to close with this: the work and research people do in space is not just for the benefit of people who are doing it. It serves humanity. Water purification systems are classic examples of a NASA technology spinoff. These systems evolved from NASA research conducted when scientists were trying to figure out how to keep astronauts hydrated and healthy in orbit. What about the way we scan solar system bodies and the rest of our known universe? Some of the processes that had to be invented were later applied to developing brain scanning technology, serving a medicinal purpose that benefits humans on Earth. These technology spinoffs are something to admire.

If the argument against space exploration is that we should be spending money on other things, then that argument should be applied to pretty much everything else. Why produce multi-million dollar movies? Why host expensive sporting tournaments? Again, money spent in space science isn’t money that’s taken from other programs. It all goes toward a noble endeavour: the advancement of humanity.

Ad astra per aspera.

William Shatner saved the day or at least made it better

Social media is an invaluable resource for museums, government agencies, and cultural institutions, providing not just transparency, but a human voice that allows for a familial connection with the public. Connecting with the public can increase interest leading to an increase in visibility and brand loyalty.

Recently, the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum invited 10 of its social media followers to apply for a chance to go behind-the-scenes on a guided tour of its restoration hangar and conservation lab at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia.  The Air & Space communications team graciously invited a couple of us from the NASA History Office to join them. Of course, in addition to the kind gesture, there was a practical reason for NASA to get involved. With the @NASAHistory Twitter account currently at 206,000 followers and the @airandspace account at 81,700, both parties would benefit from the online interactions that would ensue. Fortunately, something awesome did ensue and a certain Star Trek celebrity had a big part of it.

Air & Space are proud owners of the U.S.S. Enterprise studio model from the original Star Trek series of the ‘70s. They currently have it in their conservation lab out of public view, but for one day, those who were bold enough to go where few have gone before were treated to seeing the Starship before their eyes. I took advantage of the opportunity to tweet a photo of it from the @NASAHistory account, making sure to tag @WilliamShatner in it (you know, the guy from the Priceline commercials). I knew he was a very active Twitter user, so odds were good that he would interact with us. And he did. Air & Space saw this as an opportunity and got in the fun. Later that day, the main @Smithsonian account, with over 1 million followers, jumped in and our impressions went through the roof. Here’s how it went down:

All this interaction led to some laughs, but it also led to some serious, quantifiable results. Our original tweet got retweeted 363 times, but that doesn’t even count the manual retweets or retweets of manual retweets. Both NASA and Smithsonian saw an increase in followers and it helped remind the public that there are actual humans behind these accounts (real humans who may have never seen an episode of Star Trek, but humans nonetheless).