-
EVA Q&A
by
trebloc
on 13 May, 2010 14:27
-
Anyone know when the shortest shuttle EVA was?
-
#1
by
AnalogMan
on 13 May, 2010 14:44
-
April 8, 1984 during STS-41C - duration 2 hours 38 mins.
-
#2
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 15:44
-
April 8, 1984 during STS-41C - duration 2 hours 38 mins.
Is this via Wikipedia? Severe trivia, but the mission report says 2 hrs, 57 mins. (This was the first Solar Max EVA, ended in order to try a rotating grapple after the initial EVA capture attempts failed.)
-
#3
by
AnalogMan
on 13 May, 2010 16:27
-
April 8, 1984 during STS-41C - duration 2 hours 38 mins.
Is this via Wikipedia? Severe trivia, but the mission report says 2 hrs, 57 mins. (This was the first Solar Max EVA, ended in order to try a rotating grapple after the initial EVA capture attempts failed.)
My source was
NASA JSC Oral History Project Walking to Olympus: An EVA Chronologyhttp://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/walking/EVAChron.pdfGuess that'll teach me
-
#4
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 16:37
-
April 8, 1984 during STS-41C - duration 2 hours 38 mins.
Is this via Wikipedia? Severe trivia, but the mission report says 2 hrs, 57 mins. (This was the first Solar Max EVA, ended in order to try a rotating grapple after the initial EVA capture attempts failed.)
My source was NASA JSC Oral History Project Walking to Olympus: An EVA Chronology
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/walking/EVAChron.pdf
Guess that'll teach me
Question is, what was their source? For EVA-1, they have:
STS 41-C Flight Crew Report, (no date);
“Black Sunday. . . Fat Tuesday,” William Gregory, Aviation Week & Space Technology, April 16, 1984, p. 13;
“Orbiter Crew Restores Solar Max,” Craig Covault, Aviation Week & Space Technology, April 16, 1984, pp. 18-20;
“NASA Believes EVAs Valid Despite Recovery Problem,” Aviation Week & Space Technology, April 1984, pp. 21-24;
“Repair Mission Became High Drama,” Space News Roundup, NASA JSC, April 27, 1984, pp. 1-2.
Would be interested to see if the flight crew report has durations or whether there were multiple sources for their number. Not sure if the mission report is authoritative, but not sure these sources are necessarily, either.
-
#5
by
anik
on 13 May, 2010 17:18
-
For Shuttle spacewalks till 1992 NASA has used other official rule for definition of EVA duration than now. EVAs were counted from a switching spacesuits to battery power to a switching spacesuits back to Shuttle power. With using of this official rule, the shortest Shuttle spacewalk has lasted 2 hours 57 minutes (it has begun at 14:18 and ended at 17:15 UTC on April 8th, 1984).
-
#6
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 17:36
-
For Shuttle spacewalks till 1992 NASA has used other official rule for definition of EVA duration than now. EVAs were counted from a switching spacesuits to battery power to a switching spacesuits back to Shuttle power. With using of this official rule, the shortest Shuttle spacewalk has lasted 2 hours 57 minutes (it has begun at 14:18 and ended at 17:15 UTC on April 8th, 1984).
Thanks, anik.
-
#7
by
JayP
on 13 May, 2010 20:05
-
For Shuttle spacewalks till 1992 NASA has used other official rule for definition of EVA duration than now. EVAs were counted from a switching spacesuits to battery power to a switching spacesuits back to Shuttle power. With using of this official rule, the shortest Shuttle spacewalk has lasted 2 hours 57 minutes (it has begun at 14:18 and ended at 17:15 UTC on April 8th, 1984).
Did the STS-80 spacewalk attempt switch to battery power? If so, it would definetly quallify as the shortest EVA under this rule.
-
#8
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 20:24
-
For Shuttle spacewalks till 1992 NASA has used other official rule for definition of EVA duration than now. EVAs were counted from a switching spacesuits to battery power to a switching spacesuits back to Shuttle power. With using of this official rule, the shortest Shuttle spacewalk has lasted 2 hours 57 minutes (it has begun at 14:18 and ended at 17:15 UTC on April 8th, 1984).
Did the STS-80 spacewalk attempt switch to battery power? If so, it would definetly quallify as the shortest EVA under this rule.
Don't believe so; stopped attempting to open the hatch.
-
#9
by
anik
on 13 May, 2010 20:37
-
Did the STS-80 spacewalk attempt switch to battery power?
No, a switching of spacesuits to battery power in that spacewalk was planned after an opening of hatch, which was not performed.
-
#10
by
Robotbeat
on 13 May, 2010 21:35
-
Did the STS-80 spacewalk attempt switch to battery power?
No, a switching of spacesuits to battery power in that spacewalk was planned after an opening of hatch, which was not performed.
Speaking of, what is the average or peak power that the spacesuit batteries provide?
Also, what capacity (Watt-hours)?
-
#11
by
AnalogMan
on 13 May, 2010 22:48
-
Did the STS-80 spacewalk attempt switch to battery power?
No, a switching of spacesuits to battery power in that spacewalk was planned after an opening of hatch, which was not performed.
Speaking of, what is the average or peak power that the spacesuit batteries provide?
Also, what capacity (Watt-hours)?
This is the info I have:
Extra-Vehicular Mobility Unit
• EMU battery operates at 16.8 V
• Capacity = 26.6 A-hr
• Produces ~64 W of power (average)
• Useful power supplied for ~7 hours @ 3.8 A
(These silver-zinc batteries have limited 170-day life once activated, with only 6 on-orbit charge/discharge cycles normally allowed - capacity drops with each cycle.)
-
#12
by
Robotbeat
on 13 May, 2010 22:49
-
Thank you!
-
#13
by
carmelo
on 13 May, 2010 22:56
-
Is true that the real reason because the EVA of STS-5 was cancelled was that William Lenoir was terribly sick,and mission control had fear that he vomit in the helmet killing himself?
-
#14
by
psloss
on 13 May, 2010 23:10
-
Is true that the real reason because the EVA of STS-5 was cancelled was that William Lenoir was terribly sick,and mission control had fear that he vomit in the helmet killing himself?
No, the EVA was canceled due to problems with both suits and anyways Lenoir got better prior to the EVA day.
-
#15
by
MBK004
on 14 May, 2010 00:13
-
Is true that the real reason because the EVA of STS-5 was cancelled was that William Lenoir was terribly sick,and mission control had fear that he vomit in the helmet killing himself?
I think you've confused yourself with the postponement of the EVA on Apollo 9 since Rusty Schweickhart was sick.
-
#16
by
dks13827
on 14 May, 2010 01:41
-
Is true that the real reason because the EVA of STS-5 was cancelled was that William Lenoir was terribly sick,and mission control had fear that he vomit in the helmet killing himself?
I think you've confused yourself with the postponement of the EVA on Apollo 9 since Rusty Schweickhart was sick.
I recall that STS 5 EVA postponement, then the suit problems cancelled the EVA ( they were in the airlock !!). Glad that didnt happen on the moon !!!!
-
#17
by
Aobrien
on 14 May, 2010 02:33
-
Is true that the real reason because the EVA of STS-5 was cancelled was that William Lenoir was terribly sick,and mission control had fear that he vomit in the helmet killing himself?
I think you've confused yourself with the postponement of the EVA on Apollo 9 since Rusty Schweickhart was sick.
I recall that STS 5 EVA postponement, then the suit problems cancelled the EVA ( they were in the airlock !!). Glad that didnt happen on the moon !!!!
Apollo 9 didn't land on the moon. It was an Earth orbital test of the LM
-
#18
by
carmelo
on 14 May, 2010 15:12
-
But ,for the suits of STS-5, what type of problems?
-
#19
by
psloss
on 14 May, 2010 15:20
-
But ,for the suits of STS-5, what type of problems?
From the mission report:
http://web.archive.org/web/19991001202915/http://members.aol.com/WSNTWOYOU/STS5MR.HTMThe major anomaly of the STS-5 flight involved the EMU (extravehicular mobility unit) that were to be worn during the extravehicular activity. The first failure was found in the EV-2 (Allen) suit when faulty fan operation was noted. The fan produced a motorboating noise and then stopped running. Inflight troubleshooting was unsuccessful in restoring proper fan operation. Shortly thereafter, the EV-1 (Lenoir) suit encountered pressure regulation problems. The suit would only pressurize to 3.8 psi instead of the normal 4.3 psia. Here again, normal operation of the suit pressure regulator could not be restored after troubleshooting.
-
#20
by
sivodave
on 09 Jun, 2010 12:02
-
HI all.
I'm looking for any document explaining the contingency EVA necessary for manually closing the payload cargo bay door on the Shuttle. I've tried on the NASA Tech Server Report but nothing for the moment.
Any tip?
thanks in advance
Davide
-
#21
by
AnalogMan
on 09 Jun, 2010 12:31
-
I'm looking for any document explaining the contingency EVA necessary for manually closing the payload cargo bay door on the Shuttle.
Orbiter contingency EVA procedures can be found in Section 14 of the document below. However, for payload bay door closing better info can be found in the checklists in Section 15, specifically pages 15-9 thru 15-11.
EVA Checklist - Generic Rev H PCN-19 (Jan 8, 2010)http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/pdf/438130main_EVA_G_H_19.pdf
-
#22
by
alexw
on 09 Jun, 2010 19:32
-
Orbiter contingency EVA procedures can be found in Section 14 of the document below. However, for payload bay door closing better info can be found in the checklists in Section 15, specifically pages 15-9 thru 15-11.
EVA Checklist - Generic Rev H PCN-19 (Jan 8, 2010)
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/pdf/438130main_EVA_G_H_19.pdf
The dry checklists conceal what must be a very scary scenario.
I especially liked the "96 bolt EVA"!! The steps between removing the last four bolts, opening the (temporary?) clamps, and the EVs declaring themselves clear and initiating the separation burn must be pretty tense.
-Alex
-
#23
by
LostInSpace
on 10 Jun, 2010 18:58
-
Did the STS-80 spacewalk attempt switch to battery power?
No, a switching of spacesuits to battery power in that spacewalk was planned after an opening of hatch, which was not performed.
Speaking of, what is the average or peak power that the spacesuit batteries provide?
Also, what capacity (Watt-hours)?
This is the info I have:
Extra-Vehicular Mobility Unit
• EMU battery operates at 16.8 V
• Capacity = 26.6 A-hr
• Produces ~64 W of power (average)
• Useful power supplied for ~7 hours @ 3.8 A
(These silver-zinc batteries have limited 170-day life once activated, with only 6 on-orbit charge/discharge cycles normally allowed - capacity drops with each cycle.)
The current EMU batteries have a minimum 32.0 A-hr capacity.
-
#24
by
mikes
on 27 May, 2011 13:27
-
Must be something to finish a 7.5 hour EVA and have to hold your arms up for over 10 minutes when you get back in.
That raises some interesting questions. In free-fall, the only forces are the astro's muscles and the tensioning in the suit.
How different is the "neutral" arm position when there's no pressure differential versus outdoors in vacuum?
Do the EMUs have a mechanism for changing the neutral position?
How much force does the astro have to apply for "arms up" once they're indoors?
-
#25
by
JayP
on 27 May, 2011 16:15
-
Does anyone know of any good sources for information about the design and development of the EMU? There is plenty of information aboult the Apollo suits, but not much on how they got from the AL-7B to the EMU.
-
#26
by
brahmanknight
on 03 May, 2013 20:35
-
In an emergency, how quickly can the US EMUs be donned for an EVA?
I remember when the pump module failed a few years back, the crew was already in the midst of preparing for a scheduled EVA
-
#27
by
manboy
on 04 May, 2013 00:06
-
Does anyone know of any good sources for information about the design and development of the EMU? There is plenty of information aboult the Apollo suits, but not much on how they got from the AL-7B to the EMU.
I own both of the below books and they contain plenty of information on the Shuttle EMU development. I own the 2006 edition of 'U.S. Spacesuits' and I do know they got the dates wrong for LES/ACES, I'm unsure if there are any other inaccuracies.
U.S. Space Gear : Outfitting The Astronaut (1994) by Lillian KozloskiU. S. Spacesuits (
2006/
2012) by Kenneth S. Thomas and Harold J. McMann.
-
#28
by
AnalogMan
on 04 May, 2013 00:20
-
Does anyone know of any good sources for information about the design and development of the EMU? There is plenty of information aboult the Apollo suits, but not much on how they got from the AL-7B to the EMU.
This report may be of interest:
ILC Space Suits & Related Products - Report 0000-712731 Rev A - November 28, 2007 171 pages
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/ILC-SpaceSuits-RevA.pdf
-
#29
by
erioladastra
on 10 May, 2013 17:26
-
In an emergency, how quickly can the US EMUs be donned for an EVA?
I remember when the pump module failed a few years back, the crew was already in the midst of preparing for a scheduled EVA
Monitor the EVA 21 thread in the ISS section and we will all find out the answer.
-
#30
by
Kasponaut
on 11 May, 2013 12:41
-
I have search for a long time to find a list of only US spacewalks - not the grand total on wikipedia - but the US total list and/or number of EVAs? Anybody?
Kasper
-
#31
by
anik
on 11 May, 2013 12:45
-
357 official EVAs in the world: 134 EVAs in Russian spacesuits, 222 EVAs in U.S. spacesuits, 1 EVA in Chinese spacesuits.
My list of all EVAs (in Russian): see attachment.
-
#32
by
Kasponaut
on 13 Jul, 2013 14:32
-
357 official EVAs in the world: 134 EVAs in Russian spacesuits, 222 EVAs in U.S. spacesuits, 1 EVA in Chinese spacesuits.
My list of all EVAs (in Russian): see attachment.
Thank you!!!
-
#33
by
carmelo
on 05 Oct, 2013 03:47
-
Theoretically the Russian Sokol suit can performing a short contingecy EVA?
-
#34
by
Danderman
on 05 Oct, 2013 05:34
-
You wouldn't get very far. Sokol requires connection to a ship's ECLSS, or else it will overheat, and CO2 buildup will commence.
-
#35
by
obi-wan
on 09 Oct, 2013 14:42
-
Well, in fairness, you're saying it needs a life support system, which is true for any pressure garment.
A better answer would be: launch and entry suits, such as Sokol and ACES, are intended to keep the crew alive in the event of a pressure failure long enough to do an emergency deorbit. They are designed to provide a minimum level of arm and hand mobility to allow them to actuate flight and vehicle system controls. They are not worn with liquid cooling garments, so you would overheat quickly in EVA. If it were a life and death, desperation need to go EVA and that's all you had, they would probably give it a try, but only if every other option had first been exhausted.
-
#36
by
Jim
on 09 Oct, 2013 16:27
-
Well, in fairness, you're saying it needs a life support system, which is true for any pressure garment.
A better answer would be: launch and entry suits, such as Sokol and ACES, are intended to keep the crew alive in the event of a pressure failure long enough to do an emergency deorbit. They are designed to provide a minimum level of arm and hand mobility to allow them to actuate flight and vehicle system controls. They are not worn with liquid cooling garments, so you would overheat quickly in EVA. If it were a life and death, desperation need to go EVA and that's all you had, they would probably give it a try, but only if every other option had first been exhausted.
No, they don't even have umbilicals to allow them to leave the cabin, much less a life support system
-
#37
by
temoana
on 25 Nov, 2013 15:25
-
Good afternoon everyone !
I am a french student, actually making a presentation about the space suit.
Fortunatly, I found this website, and I thought of posting my question here.
I'd like to know if you guys have some more informations about the space suit such as :
-How will we be able to breathe when using it ?
-How will the pressure system work ?
-What are the differences between the PLSS and the OPS in the pressure suit ?
It may seems pretty easy for some of you but I'd be very happy if I get the answers.
I am interested in every pieces of information concerning the space suit
I also need technical details please !
Thank you in advance
-
#38
by
manboy
on 27 Nov, 2013 03:24
-
Good afternoon everyone !
I am a french student, actually making a presentation about the space suit.
Fortunatly, I found this website, and I thought of posting my question here.
I'd like to know if you guys have some more informations about the space suit such as :
-How will we be able to breathe when using it ?
-How will the pressure system work ?
-What are the differences between the PLSS and the OPS in the pressure suit ?
It may seems pretty easy for some of you but I'd be very happy if I get the answers.
I am interested in every pieces of information concerning the space suit
I also need technical details please !
Thank you in advance
Which space suit?
-
#39
by
temoana
on 16 Dec, 2013 14:13
-
Hello everybody,
I am actually looking for some information on the space suits:
As I am studying the breathing system, I would be glad to have some more knowledge on this.
I know there are different space suits depending on the country, however I don't know if the breathing system is different. If so, I would be happy to know these differences.
Every pieces of advice you got will really help me.
I also need details such as formulas:
(for example : 2(LiOH, H2O) + CO2 ---> LiCo3 + 3H2O)
Any websites about this are welcomed.
What in your opinion could make this breathing system better?
Do you have any ideas on the possible future improvements?
Still concerning the space suit equipments, I needed some information about the pressure system.
First of all, I don’t really know if it works the same way for the different space suits.
The pressure in the space suit is lower than on Earth, is there a consequence on the human using it?
How does it work, how is it possible to lower the pressure in the space suit?
If you have any more information about pressure, such as pressure in space compared to pressure on Earth, or just interesting websites … that will be really helpful
Thanks !
(Please forgive the mistakes I made as English isn't my first language)
-
#40
by
Danderman
on 17 Dec, 2013 05:50
-
-
#41
by
AJA
on 21 Dec, 2013 12:58
-
1. Watching this current (Ammonia PM R&R) EVA... I'm wondering...
Why don't they have velcro pads on the outside of their suits... say..on the quadricep area... with corresponding velcro pads near the carabiners/tether hooks? It'll keep all those tools and parts from floating around in front of them...
Or do they already have it?
2. Do they have borescopes on the station? Or even an endoscope? It would've come in handy for something like this. They could peer into the PM and with some fibre-optics, go up to the FCV, and see what the problem was? Especially because the PM's not coming back down anytime soon..
It might be useful in a lot of other EVA cases too.
-
#42
by
manboy
on 18 Jan, 2014 21:45
-
Hello everybody,
I am actually looking for some information on the space suits:
As I am studying the breathing system, I would be glad to have some more knowledge on this.
I know there are different space suits depending on the country, however I don't know if the breathing system is different. If so, I would be happy to know these differences.
Every pieces of advice you got will really help me.
I also need details such as formulas:
(for example : 2(LiOH, H2O) + CO2 ---> LiCo3 + 3H2O)
Any websites about this are welcomed.
What in your opinion could make this breathing system better?
Do you have any ideas on the possible future improvements?
Still concerning the space suit equipments, I needed some information about the pressure system.
First of all, I don’t really know if it works the same way for the different space suits.
The pressure in the space suit is lower than on Earth, is there a consequence on the human using it?
How does it work, how is it possible to lower the pressure in the space suit?
If you have any more information about pressure, such as pressure in space compared to pressure on Earth, or just interesting websites … that will be really helpful
Thanks !
(Please forgive the mistakes I made as English isn't my first language)
Almost all spacesuits have been either American or Russian, in the early 2000s the Chinese started making suits but theirs are heavily derived from Russia's. The pressure at sea-level is 14.7 psi (1,013 hPa) and the air there consists primarily of a mix of Nitrogen (78%), Oxygen (21%) and Argon (1%). Spacesuits typically contain a pure oxygen environment and operate between 3.5 psi to 5.8 psi (241 hPa to 400 hPa). Modern Extra-vehicular activities (EVA), also called spacewalks, typically last a duration of about eight hours.
Beyond that my knowledge on the subject is limited but I think I can point you towards some useful resources (which are unfortunately only available in English).
BooksU.S. Space Gear : Outfitting The Astronaut (English), 1993Russian Spacesuits (English), 2003U.S. Spacesuits (English), 2006Dressing For Altitude (English), 2012DocumentsDiscuses some planned advancesAlso search for "PLSS" on NTRS and you'll find some relevant info
-
#43
by
FinnishArmy
on 26 Jun, 2015 21:06
-
Hey! Are the people allowed to just take Space Walks for "fun"?
-
#44
by
nadreck
on 26 Jun, 2015 21:19
-
Hey! Are the people allowed to just take Space Walks for "fun"?
No more than they are allowed to launch a spacecraft just for fun. In fact, if you think about it, it is launching a spacecraft. However, they aren't expressly forbidden from having fun when they take Space Walks.
EVA's are very much planned and scheduled, even if it was an emergency response to a problem a team would have put together a plan.
-
#45
by
the_other_Doug
on 27 Jun, 2015 00:34
-
An EVA exposes the extravehicular crewperson to quite a bit higher risk than the crew sitting inside the ISS experience. You don't just go outside for fun.
All of manned spaceflight is risky, and what they do is based on a risk vs. reward calculation. The reward to be gained from a given EVA has to be worth the extra risk of putting people out into little human-shaped spacecraft and trusting that no flecks of paint from some old satellite will strike them at several thousand kph in a vulnerable spot (like in the helmet), no leak of the cooling system will threaten to drown them, no vertiginous spacewalker will puke into his helmet and choking to death, no sudden failure of a wrist wring will expose them to vacuum suddenly... etc., etc.
It's not something to be done for kicks. Especially since, unlike some damnfool risking his life by jumping out of an airplane, or climbing up into an abandoned grain silo (like someone did last night here in Minneapolis, killing himself), etc., losing an EVA crewman on ISS has a much more far-reaching impact. It would reflect on the entire manned space flight effort around the world, and could conceivably cause the abandonment of the ISS.
It's not safe out there -- not safe enough to do it just for fun.
-
#46
by
Bob Shaw
on 27 Jun, 2015 01:00
-
What's the betting that the Russians will allow one of their guests to take a wholly recreational spacewalk, if paid to do so?
Having said that, however, most of their 'guests' would be likely to spend their time working during such an EVA, though perhaps not on engineering tasks. And some of the tasks performed by professional astronauts during EVAs have not been exactly, er, professional - look at some of the Russian EVA stunts.
Look back too at the early US EVAs on MIR, and ask what the NASA guys actually did. Taping off controls in the airlock implies a tourist status to me!
And as for a certain Lunar golfer...
-
#47
by
nadreck
on 27 Jun, 2015 01:04
-
What's the betting that the Russians will allow one of their guests to take a wholly recreational spacewalk, if paid to do so?
Having said that, however, most of their 'guests' would be likely to spend their time working during such an EVA, though perhaps not on engineering tasks. And some of the tasks performed by professional astronauts during EVAs have not been exactly, er, professional - look at some of the Russian EVA stunts.
Look back too at the early US EVAs on MIR, and ask what the NASA guys actually did. Taping off controls in the airlock implies a tourist status to me!
And as for a certain Lunar golfer...
Not the same thing, and it would still be planned, probably within an inch of its life. Loosing the tourist is just bad press, doesn't risk the mission. However, the fair price to add on this optional adventure extra to your $60M ISS package is probably another $10M for the suit and the extra training. BTW if I were the guest I would WANT to do some grunt work on the EVA (as well as some lollygagging)
-
#48
by
Bob Shaw
on 27 Jun, 2015 01:13
-
Actually, the Russian attitude towards EVA planning is: 'We trained you, here are the tools, do it' - unlike the step-by-step NASA style. It is entirely within reason that they would say 'We trained you, go float, take pictures, don't interfere'. The Russian way, eventually, is the right way, but even in the meantime would cope easily with a tourist.
-
#49
by
AnalogMan
on 27 Jun, 2015 10:35
-
-
#50
by
mtakala24
on 27 Jun, 2015 17:09
-
Not to mention that there are limited resources onboard the space station. An EVA consumes CO2 scrubbing consumables (well, some can be regenerated), and high pressure oxygen from tanks. Those are very, very expensive to launch.
I once saw a chart showing that for every 1 hour of EVA time, there has been 100 hours of training time with the crew. Plus additional training for skill-based emergency tasks for the contingency "must fix" EVAs.
BTW, I wonder what the FinnishArmy -nick background story is... if any
-
#51
by
Phillip Clark
on 27 Jun, 2015 17:31
-
And some of the tasks performed by professional astronauts during EVAs have not been exactly, er, professional - look at some of the Russian EVA stunts.
Which "stunts" are you thinking of?
-
#52
by
the_other_Doug
on 27 Jun, 2015 18:33
-
And some of the tasks performed by professional astronauts during EVAs have not been exactly, er, professional - look at some of the Russian EVA stunts.
Which "stunts" are you thinking of?
I'd be thinking of Romanov and Grechko nearly floating out of Salyut 6's airlock and away from the station -- untethered. Or whatever undisclosed accident left Mir's airlock outer hatch in a state where it would only hold pressure with the help of a handy C-clamp.
Those come to mind quickly. I'm sure there are others.
-
#53
by
Bob Shaw
on 09 Aug, 2015 00:58
-
And some of the tasks performed by professional astronauts during EVAs have not been exactly, er, professional - look at some of the Russian EVA stunts.
Which "stunts" are you thinking of?
Golf.
-
#54
by
kevin-rf
on 10 Aug, 2015 12:31
-
Or whatever undisclosed accident left Mir's airlock outer hatch in a state where it would only hold pressure with the help of a handy C-clamp.
I thought that was them forgetting to seat/insert the O ring in the hatch when they put it back in place. Or maybe I am thinking of a different incident.
-
#55
by
Nicolas PILLET
on 10 Aug, 2015 17:13
-
I'd be thinking of Romanov and Grechko nearly floating out of Salyut 6's airlock and away from the station -- untethered.
They were both tethered. There are many myths about this spacewalk...
-
#56
by
Nicolas PILLET
on 10 Aug, 2015 17:14
-
And some of the tasks performed by professional astronauts during EVAs have not been exactly, er, professional - look at some of the Russian EVA stunts.
Which "stunts" are you thinking of?
Golf.
Of course, US astronaut never played golf during an extra-vehicular activity...
