MANNED SPACE MISSIONS or HUMAN SPACE MISSIONS?

So, it appears that there’s a bit of leaking going on at Omega. The new Speedmaster 3861 is out in the open. Over at SpeedyWatches.com we won’t be posting any images until it’s officially launched, but I’m sure you’ll be able to find them on your own. If you haven’t already.

For now I want to dive into a change that’s very subtle, yet topic of much discussion in on the forums: what was once FLIGHT-QUALIFIED BY NASA FOR ALL MANNED SPACE MISSIONS is now FLIGHT-QUALIFIED BY NASA FOR ALL HUMAN SPACE MISSIONS. Why is this?

The earlier FLIGHT-QUALIFIED BY NASA FOR ALL MANNED SPACE MISSIONS case-back

I did a bit of research and found out about the NASA style guide, which says the following on this subject;

Gender-Specific Language (e.g., Manned Space Program vs. Human Space Program)
In general, all references to the space program should be non-gender-specific (e.g., human, piloted, unpiloted, robotic, as opposed to manned or unmanned). The exception to the rule is when referring to the Manned Spaceflight Center (also known as the Manned Spacecraft Center), the predecessor of Johnson Space Center in Houston, or to any other historical program name or official title that included “manned” (e.g., Associate Administrator for Manned Spaceflight).

So it appears that Omega’s new HUMAN SPACE MISSION is in fact in accordance with the latest NASA style guide.