NASA, with the tampons.

top 90 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 159 points 1 year ago (29 children)

NASA once asked astronaut Sally Ride if 100 tampons would be enough for her week-long mission in space, but she later clarified that this number was excessive. While the engineers were concerned about potential needs, Ride humorously noted that a much smaller amount would suffice.

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 102 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    Tbh, this is not quite as dumb as it sounds. Tampons weigh nothing and if there's no way to resupply, it's not quite as dumb to take more than you need. What if, for example, there's a series defect on these things and a large portion of them are defective?

    In fact, when they asked her said it's excessive, to which they told her they wanted to be on the safe side, so she said to cut it in half and bring 50pcs (which is still excessive for most periods, but on the safe side).

    In fact, in the same mission they also brought jelly beans, which were entirely irrelevant to the mission, because Reagan insisted on his favourite snack to go to orbit. They were likely heavier than 100 tampons and also much less necessary up there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 57 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    I get the impression they were also preparing for a potential freak discovery where it turns out zero G has an extreme effect on the menstrual cycle, and they suddenly need a lot of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    If you have a sample size of 0 and a backup plan of "crash and burn", it does make sense to be extra careful with the preparation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I prefer my backup plans to include "halt and catch fire"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    "halt" might be difficult in orbit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    How long could the shuttle stay up there if it was deemed unsafe to return?

    They might have been preparing to orbit for long enough to launch a rescue mission.

    100 is probably still to many. I’m suprized they didn’t just buy a box of them, or ask the manufacturers, who surely have the most data on average tampon consumption.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Why ask the manufacturer about the average consumption when you can ask the person in question about the real consumption?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Tbh, the story was reported by Ride on a talk show for laughs. It's not exactly a well-documented incidence.

    Likely, the package they ordered had 100pcs in them (because it's meant for commercial clients) and they asked her something like "We got 100 here, how many do you need?"

    It's of course fun to insinuate that NASA engineers have never been close to women and thus have no idea how tampons work, but it's more likely that this was just played up for laughs at a talk show.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Yeah it’s a lot like the Russian pencil/ vs space pen meme at this point. (Spoiler, Russia ended up using space pens from Fischer too)

    I dislike the engineers have no common sense trope, as it’s another instance of sowing distrust in experts that’s been going on since the late 70s.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Yeah, the story of the space pen is also completely wrong, because Fisher mostly created the space pen for marketing reasons. They didn't create the pen and then end the story there. No, they created the pen because they could sell it to the non-space-faring public, and it was a huge success.

    They are still selling it today, 59 years after its invention in 1966.

    And the development of the space pen didn't take years and didn't cost millions. In fact, NASA only paid a total of $2400 for 400pcs of them. And the main reason they even tasked Fisher with making these was that they were cheaper than the mechanical pencils they first wanted to buy.

    I dislike the engineers have no common sense trope, as it’s another instance of sowing distrust in experts that’s been going on since the late 70s.

    Absolute agreement.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago*

    On NASA defence is not the first time that due problems with vehicles an astronaut have to stay up there for much much much longer than their planed stance.

    At the end I think the astronaut said that 50 would be enough. So the NASA estimate wasn't really that far off. As it's totally normal for a woman to use half or double the tampons than other woman during period.

    But it is a funny story indeed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Still a pretty dumb approach by the NASA guys. Didn't it occur to them to ask a woman - any woman - before coming up with the initial estimate? Like "hey Sally, how many tampons do you normally need during your period? OK we'll triple that for a safety margin." There. Done.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    They did ask her. Sure, they could have asked how many instead, but it probably came in a 100 count well within any significant mass margins, so they just asked if 100 would be enough.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    it probably came in a 100 count

    A 100-count box seems like an absurdly large unit size. Are you doing the very thing that the anecdote is intended to highlight?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Procurement for business/government/military (including and especially NASA), is very different than what you would see on a shelf at your local drug store.

    The drug store can't buy a single box of tampons. They have to get an entire case of boxes of tampons. If each box is say, 20 tampons, and there's more than 5 of those per case, then they're buying at least 100 tampons so they can get a single box of them.

    There's a lot of alternatives they could have looked into, like neighboring government institutions which may already stock them, asking them to supply a smaller quantity than they would have needed to order, or ordering outside of their typical channels and sending the intern down the road to buy a box from the nearest pharmacy... Those things wouldn't really get accounted for in their budgeting though... So they would prefer to order through their normal distribution.

    It's a funny comment to make to Ride, "is 100 enough?" And I'm sure everyone had a good chuckle.

    Regardless they probably didn't see another good option for ordering other than to just buy a case of them and figure out the rest later.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Don't agencies have some kind of de minimis threshold for just running out to the store and buying basic stuff? I thought that's why the DOGE freeze of government credit cards a few months ago was causing labs to cancel experiments and employees paying out of pocket to feed horses and working dogs.

    So the military does have a strict procurement process for rocket fuel, but they generally refuel their civilian vehicles (vans and such) with a government credit card at normal gas stations.

    At least that's how I understand it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    This is for stuff going on a literal space ship. I'm sure procurement was super strict on there.

    Imagine getting some defective stuff (or even worse, stuff contaminated with bacteria or something like that).

    I don't think they'd just let some intern tun over to the local walmart and grab supplies from there for supplies for the space shuttle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I suspect the strictness isn't with the procurement process where a contracting officer defines very specific criteria in compliance with acquisition regulations and submits the process to competitive bids. The strictness is in the mission parameters where NASA's ownership of the thing has already been established, but the NASA employees in a strict hierarchical decisionmaking process need to justify why a thing that NASA already owns should be included in the packing list on a mission.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    In the end, same result. I guess it would be much harder to get a pack of stuff from Walmart onto a mission than something from a certified supplier who has a datasheet and certifications for the item. And having to order 100pcs of a very cheap product even though less would have sufficed isn't a good reason to instead have to certify tampons of unknown origin manually.

    Just launching the space shuttle costed $24mio per flight (in 1977 money), so saving a dollar or two by buying fewer tampons was clearly not a priority.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    It depends. What area is the vehicle operating in, what resources are available in the area, both from internal department, intra department, and external/public....

    There's a lot of factors to consider.

    I won't pretend to know what factors got them to that point, but bluntly, it doesn't really matter. Some set of circumstances created the conditions where such a question needed to be asked.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 71 points 1 year ago (29 children)

    One of my favorite things about Lemmy ~ Star Trek references can occur anywhere, at any given moment.

    I have a personal metric system for rating social networking platforms based on the percentage of Trekkies/Trekkers.

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    But have you searched for "communities containing tenforward" yet? :)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    ..I contribute content to them whilst drinking saurian brandy!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (20 children)

    I just wish I saw more Star Wars references but not that bootleg Disney crap, I like my star wars like I like my bands in the EU.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago* (11 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (9 children)

    wtf is a Star Trek "purist" and why should anyone care about your arbitrary opinion?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I love that your response to what a "star trek purist" is is a defense of bs opinions on the internet

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    It probably means different things for different people, because like every other fandom, it's kinda arbitrary.

    I was kind of purist. I started with TOS, but TNG, DS9, and VOY were right then too. Didn't care as much for Voyager, but it was ok. Skipped Enterprise completely. I have TAS but haven't watched it. Actively disliked the Kelvin movies. I've missed all the new stuff because I don't stream, except Lower Decks, which I find delightful. I'm gonna pick up Picard and SNW soon.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I guess you missed the part where he quoted the exact part of your comment that he was replying to. Or do you just want to ignore that part so you don’t have to defend it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    you mean like they ignored the part of me asking what a "star trek purist" is? maybe you can shed some light on that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    this kind of negativity doesn't help Star Wars, or any fandom.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Yeah I've spoken to enough young people who watched the prequels first that I no longer begrudge them their nostalgia.

    I just don't share it, and that's ok. I'd rather define myself by what I enjoy than what I turn my nose up at.

    Speaking of, have you heard the good word of Andor?? It's the best thing to happen to Star Wars since greebles!!!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    lol i HAVE heard the Good News! XD

    life is just a lot more fun when you enjoy stuff rather than hate stuff.

    the OT, i love it, i grew up on it, it has some really naff bits in it. XD this just IS Star Wars. the cornball stuff was baked in from the beginning.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    no, but i am sick of it. we don't have to be this way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    part of that is calling out negative behaviours. critique is one thing. but there are too many shitbirds today who think it's somehow cool and erudite to yuck other people's yums.

    as you said, a lot of the blame for encouraging and normalizing that behaviour goes to grifters, social media, capitalism. but every person gets to make a choice on what kind of person they want to be today and what energy they want to put out.

    more ppl need to start choosing the good.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Critique of media is so fun! It's the clannish obsession with fighting over the objectively "true" instance of a piece of media that's so tiring.

    Though I agree it's small potatoes, and usually just a proxy for generational or class fielty divisions.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 71 points 1 year ago
    [–] 62 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    It's quite simple really.

    Are you planning on a sensible night with a few tinnies? 4.

    Are you wanting to get wankered but still make sense by lunchtime tomorrow? 14.

    Are you wanting to get utterly trashed and wake up the morning after the morning after? 24.

    Are you part of a suicide cult? Yeah go with 104, sure whatever.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I think it depends on the strength of the beers too. Are we drinking lagers or quads?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It does. I'm in the UK so 90% of the lagers or beers are between 4 and 5%.

    If you get on the Special Brew then going into double figures will probably ruin you the following day. That said, start hooning a couple of slabs of Carling C2 and you'll spend most of your time sobering up pissing in the bog/up the neighbours fence/in your mate's wardrobe in the middle of a dream.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    She didn't say night, she said weekend. There's so many more variables. Maybe they're going to stay in and watch movies until 3AM, maybe they're going around town and not drinking a lot at home, maybe they get really drunk early on, found love, and stayed in for the rest of the weekend?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I just don't feel like a real man if I don't have my 125 daily lagers. I would surmise astronauts are the same. Maybe that's why nothing gets done up there,... they're being rationed !

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    if he likes shit beer, get a 12 pack, good beer, 6 pack

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    I remember watching the X-files sometimes in the noughties and Mulder came up with a deduction; "it must've been two men...nobody drinks two six-packs alone" and I just cracked up.

    12-pack was like a medium for the night, 24 a heavier. Plus bars usually. (Finn here.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    12 pack, sure... but 2 six-packs is different, ain't it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Perhaps the store was out of 12-packs.

    Also at that time, in like early 90's (in the tv show), I don't think 12-pack was that common

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    No. We've had 6 packs, 12 packs, and cases since at least the 70s.

    Source: I bought pretty much every packaging that Old Style was sold in during late 70s and early 80s.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Also, alcoholics are real. My dad used to go through a 24 a day just to maintain. The liquor on top of that was to actually feel intoxicated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yeah tbh, most people didn't finish their beers, so only drank like 80% of a can they were everywhere, and usually people bum one or two.

    And unless we were at some festival, people wouldn't have time to destroy 24 + bar drinks.

    But cruise ships? Three days of innumerable drinks of all sorts.

    I kinda miss that though. The adventure and friends, not drinking that much.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I only upvoted for the Darmok reference and the actual photo still hasn’t loaded to see if the reference is valid.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago* (5 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Oh we got that in Finland btw

    (it was a marketing campaign, not a default size)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Did they cut down to 100 because the 1000 pack from before wasn't selling?

    At least one guy bought it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    I think that's just a rival company supposedly one-upping them, but that's not a "real" pack, it's just a pallet of 24-packs wrapped in a sign saying "1000-pack".

    Cheers though I wasn't aware of this before

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›