totm nov 2023 SpaceX Discussion Thread

[tater]

SpaceX suits are not for eva. Nor is the Boeing suit.

 

 

[kerbiloid]

22 minutes ago, tater said:

SpaceX suits are not for eva. Nor is the Boeing suit.

Exactly, they are emergency ones, in case if the ship gets unpressurized. A compromise between  safety and reliability.

Upd.

Spoiler

... or if the spaceship is convertible.

Edited August 12, 2019 by kerbiloid

[Wjolcz]

31 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Sudden depressurization is always a possibility (you plan for what could happen for its better to be prepared for something that’s unlikely than to risk the lives of the crew because “it won’t fail”) and it’s very rough- the ACES suit balloons up very rapidly- how does the SpaceX suit handle this. How does it affect the occupant. 

So, apparently this is not good enough of a test:

Was the Boeing suit tested in these conditions? It probably didn't have any air inside by this point, but can't they put it in a vacuum oven, or something? Didn't NASA build one of those?

Besides, I'd imagine that since SpaceX was required to launch the same rocket a couple of times (the Shuttle flew its first flight with crew onboard) before getting man-rated, I'd imagine NASA having the same policy when it comes to suits.

27 minutes ago, cubinator said:

Indeed. When questioned about it, Musk has said that it can keep you safe in a vacuum chamber. That is a long ways from keeping you safe in space's extreme temperature environment.

Once you are outside and can't get back in how the suit behaves doesn't matter much. The spacecraft you're flying is literally your lifeboat.

I'm not defending SpaceX, btw. They do have some major kinks to work out first, but I struggle to ignore a crusade when I'm seeing one.

Edited August 12, 2019 by Wjolcz

[ZooNamedGames]

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.

[CatastrophicFailure]

11 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

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

Why are you so certain SpaceX has not been exercising due diligence in the development of this suit? It seems you’re assuming in the negative for its own sake. Starman was not a spacesuit test. Musk was very clear on this, there were no sensors, it wasn’t pressurized, testing the suit was never the intention. Meanwhile, back here on earth, testing has been progressing for several years now. The suit is made under contract by the David Clarke company— they’ve been building such suits for decades, including the space shuttle “IVA” suits. 

Fun fact on those, as long as we’re criticizing space suits without understanding, the space shuttles ACES suits were not full pressure suits. IIRC the boots were not in the pressure envelope, maybe some other things as well. 

The SpaceX suit is NOT an EVA suit or anything close to it, it’s sole purpose is to keep the crew breathing until they can execute an emergency landing, which could be in less than an hour if something went really, really bad. With all such launch/entry suits, the requirement is the same. It’s assuming the crippled spacecraft or portable life support will continue to provide thermal management, etc, for the short time during which the suits are needed to maintain pressure. 

Have a look at that article I linked upthread, or browse the Wikipedia entries on space suits, it explains a lot of this. 

Edited August 12, 2019 by CatastrophicFailure

[NSEP]

1 hour ago, ZooNamedGames said:

I’d like to see the testing on them. Two flights into space on mannequins don’t make a good space suit. The ability to keep me alive when the capsule pressure fails or there’s some significant emergency that necessitates the suit on. 

Sudden depressurization is always a possibility (you plan for what could happen for its better to be prepared for something that’s unlikely than to risk the lives of the crew because “it won’t fail”) and it’s very rough- the ACES suit balloons up very rapidly- how does the SpaceX suit handle this. How does it affect the occupant. 

Lastly it irks me to no end that it has no way to intake air. It looks slicker but sometimes you have to wait multiple days to get to the ISS (let’s not even humor Musk’s intent to go to the moon in those things- unless he can engineer a whole new space suit in less than 2 years after the first manned flight of D2 and his supposed #DearMoon flight of BFR/Super Heavy).

I kind of agree and i think that the Boeing suit is definitely the most comfortable of them all (especially after seeing Tim Dodd dance in the suit). SpaceX's spacesuit looks extremely cool and all, but it also looks very tight. But its important to note that we are judging the suits based on pictures alone. Im pretty sure none of us ever wore a SpaceX spacesuit, so we don't know how good it is. this article from a while back interviewing Sunita Williams says that the SpaceX suit is comfortable and easy to move around in, so thats a good sign.

Im also pretty sure that they did quite alot of testing for quite a while behind the scenes. It would honestly be quite concerning and surprising if they had a seriously flawed spacesuit this late in the program.

[ZooNamedGames]

1 minute ago, NSEP said:

I kind of agree and i think that the Boeing suit is definitely the most comfortable of them all (especially after seeing Tim Dodd dance in the suit). SpaceX's spacesuit looks extremely cool and all, but it also looks very tight. But its important to note that we are judging the suits based on pictures alone. Im pretty sure none of us ever wore a SpaceX spacesuit, so we don't know how good it is. this article from a while back interviewing Sunita Williams says that the SpaceX suit is comfortable and easy to move around in, so thats a good sign.

Im also pretty sure that they did quite alot of testing for quite a while behind the scenes. It would honestly be quite concerning and surprising if they had a seriously flawed spacesuit this late in the program.

if it was severely flawed, SpaceX wouldn't come forward about it. Claim a delay with the "integration of CCP" and stay quiet while you focus on the saying they built a poor space suit does not garner any trust or faith in their developments which is essential since outside investors such as NASA and DearMoon is likely the major driving force for SX right now. 

[Wjolcz]

1 minute ago, ZooNamedGames said:

If it was severely flawed, SpaceX wouldn't come forward about it.

Nor would NASA want to work with them and keep pumping money into something they don't have any control over.

[CatastrophicFailure]

4 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

if it was severely flawed, SpaceX wouldn't come forward about it. Claim a delay with the "integration of CCP" and stay quiet while you focus on the saying they built a poor space suit does not garner any trust or faith in their developments which is essential since outside investors such as NASA and DearMoon is likely the major driving force for SX right now. 

See, now this is just pure, unsubstantiated SpaceX hate. Do you have anything to back that up? Or is it just, “it’s SpaceX, OF COURSE they’re lying!”

[ZooNamedGames]

2 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:

Nor would NASA want to work with them and keep pumping money into something they don't have any control over.

As long as they worked towards a functional design- NASA has no reason to break existing agreements or overtly publicize bad developments- they know trash talking SpaceX too much damages their trust and can cripple them as a company. If SX was arrogant than perhaps they would, but as long as SX is cooperative and working towards fixing the design before flying it- they have no reason to make their issues public

[ZooNamedGames]

1 minute ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

See, now this is just pure, unsubstantiated SpaceX hate. Do you have anything to back that up? Or is it just, “it’s SpaceX, OF COURSE they’re lying!”

Do you have anything to prove me wrong?

[mikegarrison]

Thinking about it, there are tradeoffs with having connections for external air. If you need external air, then obviously those connections are critical. However, they are also potential sources of failure.

[ZooNamedGames]

Just now, mikegarrison said:

Thinking about it, there are tradeoffs with having connections for external air. If you need external air, then obviously those connections are critical. However, they are also potential sources of failure.

Issue is if it takes multiple days to get to the ISS (as it does), then how are you storing that much air? How does it get replenished?

[mikegarrison]

Just now, ZooNamedGames said:

Issue is if it takes multiple days to get to the ISS (as it does), then how are you storing that much air? How does it get replenished?

If you lose cabin pressurization, you don't go to the ISS. What are you going to do, dock a leaky spaceship to the ISS? All you would do is let all the ISS's air out too.

No, obviously you abort from orbit.

[tater]

2 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Do you have anything to prove me wrong?

Positive claims require evidence.

Any such claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[ZooNamedGames]

Just now, mikegarrison said:

If you lose cabin pressurization, you don't go to the ISS. What are you going to do, dock a leaky spaceship to the ISS? All you would do is let all the ISS's air out too.

No, obviously you abort from orbit.

I was referring to the suit. 

[Wjolcz]

5 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

As long as they worked towards a functional design- NASA has no reason to break existing agreements or overtly publicize bad developments- they know trash talking SpaceX too much damages their trust and can cripple them as a company. If SX was arrogant than perhaps they would, but as long as SX is cooperative and working towards fixing the design before flying it- they have no reason to make their issues public

What is worse? Trashtalking a company out of the business or losing astronauts to their and your [NASA's] incompetent quality/safety check team?

4 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Issue is if it takes multiple days to get to the ISS (as it does), then how are you storing that much air? How does it get replenished?

??? I'm really not sure I understand this one. How does Soyuz and/or any other crewed spacecraft deal with this issue? 

Edited August 12, 2019 by Wjolcz

[mikegarrison]

Just now, ZooNamedGames said:

I was referring to the suit. 

If you have cabin pressurization you don't need suit air. Just open the visor.

If you don't have cabin pressurization, you are aborting.

[tater]

1 minute ago, ZooNamedGames said:

I was referring to the suit. 

The suit only needs to hold pressure long enough to get to ISS, or abort from orbit.

If the spacecraft was compromised to require suits and they were not closer to ISS than reentering, they’d abort.

[StrandedonEarth]

4 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Issue is if it takes multiple days to get to the ISS (as it does), then how are you storing that much air? How does it get replenished?

In that case, the logical thing is to abort to ground, but I suppose it depends on the condition of the craft. Aborting to station has its own complications. 

[Rakaydos]

12 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Issue is if it takes multiple days to get to the ISS (as it does), then how are you storing that much air? How does it get replenished?

The SpaceX suit has an air feed line under a patch at their right thigh. if the capsue loses pressure, they get their helmet and gloves on first, then, plug directly into the capsule's air reserves.

Edited August 12, 2019 by Rakaydos

[mikegarrison]

I do hope (and trust) that Space X is not developing these life support systems without drawing on the many decades of experience that the aerospace industry has developed regarding pressure suits -- how they work, when they are needed, what the failure modes are, how to keep them supplied with air, etc. etc. I'm sure they aren't just handing these things to some five-yr-olds and saying, "make a cool spacesuit, kids!"

[ZooNamedGames]

1 minute ago, Rakaydos said:

The SpaceX suit has an air feed line under a patch at their thigh. if the capsue loses pressure, they get their helmet and gloves on first, then, plug directly into the capsule's air reserves.

that makes sense. Thank you. 

[sevenperforce]

1 hour ago, ZooNamedGames said:

I’d like to see the testing on them. Two flights into space on mannequins don’t make a good space suit. The ability to keep me alive when the capsule pressure fails or there’s some significant emergency that necessitates the suit on. 

Sudden depressurization is always a possibility (you plan for what could happen for its better to be prepared for something that’s unlikely than to risk the lives of the crew because “it won’t fail”) and it’s very rough- the ACES suit balloons up very rapidly- how does the SpaceX suit handle this. How does it affect the occupant. 

I'm sure they have done this. I know they've tested it up to double vacuum and I'm sure they did sudden/rapid depressurization in conjunction with that. In a lab, they can slam it with high doses of radiation, heat/cold cycles, whatever you need.

1 hour ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Lastly it irks me to no end that it has no way to intake air.

I am pretty sure it has hose attachment.

[ZooNamedGames]

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. 

1 minute ago, sevenperforce said:

I'm sure they have done this. I know they've tested it up to double vacuum and I'm sure they did sudden/rapid depressurization in conjunction with that. In a lab, they can slam it with high doses of radiation, heat/cold cycles, whatever you need.

I am pretty sure it has hose attachment.

@Rakaydos just mentioned there is one at the thigh. 

Edited August 12, 2019 by ZooNamedGames