Skylon

SpaceX Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, sevenperforce said:

I am pretty sure it has hose attachment.

I would be very surprised if it didn't, tbh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wjolcz said:

I would be very surprised if it didn't, tbh

see @Rakaydos's earlier comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rakaydos said:

I post an answer and get 3 mentions in like 2 minutes.

Sowwy. Partly my fault lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Also to everyone else- bear in mind that not every circumstance can cripple the craft's air and require the crew to stay suit only. For example- the environmental controls could fail, and the materials of the cabin could start melting- fuel could be leaking into the cockpit. Issues which could be fixed within the confines of the spacecraft but may necessitate hours before they can fix, purge, and repressurize the spacecraft. 

In such a case, any craft would just abort and land. For reference, the Russian SOKOL launch suits are only rated for two hours in a vacuum. That’s about how much they’d need to deorbit and land. 

21 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Do you have anything to prove me wrong?

You made a baseless accusation, burden of proof is on you, dude. I will say that with past trouble, like the parachute issues and the Dragon explosion, SpaceX has been nothing but open and fully cooperative with NASA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

see @Rakaydos's earlier comment

I did. It's just that I never saw photos with the attachment in the frame. Unless these are the real suits and the black spots are the attachment points:

wJcDgmb.png

That's actually a pretty good place for a hose attachment point IMO. Makes sense if you think about a situation when there's sudden depressurisation and the suit stiffens suddenly. Bending your arm to attach the hose to your chest area in these conditions is probably harder than stretching your arm down in a 'pocket reach'-like motion.

6 minutes ago, Rakaydos said:

Ohhhh, so that's why I never saw it! It has a cover!

Edited by Wjolcz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

I will say that with past trouble, like the parachute issues and the Dragon explosion, SpaceX has been nothing but open and fully cooperative with NASA. 

As far as we know. I mean, if they did keep something secret, would you know it?

It's about 99% off-topic, but let me tell you a short story about a flight I was on.

This was one of the very few times I have sat in an airliner cockpit during takeoff. I was in the second observer jumpseat. Anyway, as we were climbing out, master cautions started going off. Pressure was falling below the normal limits. The pilots were preparing to abort the flight and return to the airport. Then the co-pilot said, "Oh," and reached up to the ECS panel. He flipped the ECS packs from "off" to "on" and then air started blowing into the cabin.

That was a very embarrassed co-pilot, who had failed to properly follow the entire checklist. No harm done, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

As far as we know. I mean, if they did keep something secret, would you know it?

Is there any evidence that they have? 

OTOH, there’s an established line of evidence that they have not

My tinfoil hat is wrapped up with last night’s meatloaf, I’m afraid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Boeing suit is based on the ACES suit- which is flight proven. 

Which means precisely zip until it's passed its own qualification testing. Basing one design on another flight proven design is no guarantee of anything - see SLS vs STS or, to be even handed about this, Falcon 9 vs Falcon Heavy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, KSK said:

Which means precisely zip until it's passed its own qualification testing. Basing one design on another flight proven design is no guarantee of anything - see SLS vs STS or, to be even handed about this, Falcon 9 vs Falcon Heavy.

It's still better than a clean sheet design with nothing ever seeing manned flight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

It's still better than a clean sheet design with nothing ever seeing manned flight.

Not necessarily. A clean sheet design can still benefit from lessons learned on previous designs. I would be astonished if either Boeing or SpaceX designed their suits in a vacuum. So to speak. 

Besides, without wishing to get unduly grim about this, were the Launch Entry Suit or ACES suit ever flight-tested in an in-flight emergency for which they were designed? The two obvious incidents don't count in this context - no spacesuit is going to help the crew survive a catastrophic loss of vehicle.

Genuinely happy to be pointed at the right answer here but otherwise I would contend that having astronauts wear the suit inside a sealed spacecraft under optimal or close to optimal conditions isn't going to tell you much more than ground testing could.

Edited by KSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Secrecy usually hides absence, rather than presence.

Edited by kerbiloid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Do we even know if that was a full suit on either flight? What confirmation beyond Musk claims do we have? 

Also a flight on a mannequin to deep space is NOT a test. That’s exposure data perhaps- but NOT a test. There’s no biological data, no testing if it was damaged, if there’s a leak, if the suit is leaking toxic chemicals to the decomposition of the materials from radiation of space. Even the D2 flight is lacking. 

Boeing suit is based on the ACES suit- which is flight proven. And isn’t experimenting with internal life support only.

Also- any suit becomes an EVA suit when there’s a pressurization failure. If the environmental controls fail and the capsule begins to rapidly heat or cool- if there’s a failure in production and the spacecraft fails to shield the crew from deep space radiation. Yes it is for emergencies but emergencies means it needs to survive the same conditions other IVA only space suits (such as ACES) must survive in. They didn’t wear those suits on the shuttle because they were comfortable- but because it kept them alive if the vehicle experienced any of those problems.

And a vacuum test and a mannequin in space is leagues away from being a proven ready space suit. Space isn’t just a vacuum. There are many other threats and dangerous the suit must endure to keep its occupant alive- even if only in a spacecraft and not on EVA.

SpaceX suit don't have an internal life support. None of the capsule suits are except perhaps an small air bottle for a few minutes so you can plug it up. 
Nor does any of the suits have an environmental control system like an EVA suit. 
Might be heated but cooling require an water loop.

One benefit with the spacex and Boeing suit might be that they balloon less as they are more thigh fitting.  

The spaceman in the roaster was an publicity stunt although they might measured how suit behaved in space exposed to the sun. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, magnemoe said:

SpaceX suit don't have an internal life support.

Then how should they pass to ISS from a perforated ship? They should only land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Then how should they pass to ISS from a perforated ship? They should only land.

Depends, I think most all situations would be to deorbit immediately as @mikegarrison said. If they were literally about to dock, I could see them docking, transferring quickly, then dogging the hatch so they could take their time on a solution (EVA, opening and patching, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not like they haven't had a leaky capsule on the station already. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only reason SpaceX suit looks so sleek, is because it is being worn by a ~20 year old model. This is what they actually look like, when Astros are wearing them:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Only reason SpaceX suit looks so sleek, is because it is being worn by a ~20 year old model. This is what they actually look like, when Astros are wearing them:

 

Still not that bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Only reason SpaceX suit looks so sleek, is because it is being worn by a ~20 year old model. This is what they actually look like, when Astros are wearing them:

I can still wear clothes from when I was 20-something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

ok. but my point is that the SpX suit doesnt actually look so sleek and futuristic.

But it does. There is currently no suit that is more sleek and futuristic than SpaceX one. And it’s not the best camera angle on that photo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Blue is my favorite color.

 

(That's as relevant as most of the rest of this discussion.)

Edited by mikegarrison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.