Author Topic: Space suits  (Read 11833 times)

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2082
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: Space suits
« Reply #20 on: 09/15/2014 12:51 am »
When I was at SpaceX last month there was a door off the cafeteria that was labeled "Spacesuit Development", but nobody would answer any questions and I certainly wasn't invited through the door for a look around.

Sounds like SpaceX - doing yet another key bit in-house.
I know Orbital Outfitters was doing some work for SpaceX, I'm unsure if that's still on going.
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline spacetech

  • Member
  • Posts: 29
  • San Francisco
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Space suits
« Reply #21 on: 09/15/2014 12:58 am »
The Soyuz 11 crew were dead before entry, as the cabin depressurized when the orbital module was jettisoned. The landing (which, as always in Soyuz), was automatic and nominal.

Dream Chaser has the same abort mode as (latter-day) shuttle: bail out at altitude when in stable flight. It's actually easier in Dream Chaser, as you go out the aft hatch and there's no issue about re-impact with the vehicle as there was on shuttle.

The people developing suits for Dream Chaser and CST-100 have told me that the DC suits are designed for bail-out with individual parachutes, but the CST-100 suits are not. I suspect (not that they're talking) that the SpaceX suits are also not designed for bailout. (I have yet to hear any credible scenario for bailout from a capsule that has a reasonable likelihood of success and that substantially increases the probability of survival.)
I was referring to Soyuz TMA-11 which had a ballistic re-entry. That is a pretty big anomaly on reentry that the crew survived and recovered from their injuries. If the Dragon crew have pressurized suits, and emergency oxygen, as long as the chute deploys (or the thrusters fire to cushion the landing) their survival is high.

Soyuz 11 in 1971 with a depressurization was different. They also could have survived if they had space suits pressurized.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28757
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 8867
  • Likes Given: 5742
Re: Space suits
« Reply #22 on: 09/15/2014 02:48 am »
Quote
Those doing the suits for XCOR argue that space suits are very vehicle-dependent. ACES suit wouldn't really make sense if you're using a Dragon, CST-100, Dreamchaser.

So what makes them vehicle-dependent?   I could see maybe electronics and hose attachments, but seems like you could easily adapt those...or better yet, just get the specs and put the right interface in your craft to begin with.  Seems like the ACES suits would work just fine.   Do you think they are too much because it's a full pressure suit?   Hard to fit 7 astronauts who look like the Michelin man?    :)
I'm not sure about the technical specifics, but another thing is that dealing with a NASA-developed product like the ACES suit would be a nightmare since it is an older suit and finding up-to-date suppliers for all the parts may be difficult.
« Last Edit: 09/15/2014 02:49 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline manboy

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2082
  • Texas, USA, Earth
  • Liked: 127
  • Likes Given: 539
Re: Space suits
« Reply #23 on: 09/15/2014 03:37 am »
Quote
Those doing the suits for XCOR argue that space suits are very vehicle-dependent. ACES suit wouldn't really make sense if you're using a Dragon, CST-100, Dreamchaser.

So what makes them vehicle-dependent?   I could see maybe electronics and hose attachments, but seems like you could easily adapt those...or better yet, just get the specs and put the right interface in your craft to begin with.  Seems like the ACES suits would work just fine.   Do you think they are too much because it's a full pressure suit?   Hard to fit 7 astronauts who look like the Michelin man?    :)
I'm not sure about the technical specifics, but another thing is that dealing with a NASA-developed product like the ACES suit would be a nightmare since it is an older suit and finding up-to-date suppliers for all the parts may be difficult.
They're modifying ACES for Orion (using the leftover suits from the Shuttle program). ACES is also heavily derived from S1034, which is still in use. So either they have a lot of spares or there may be some suppliers still manufacturing parts. If we're really curious then we can just ask David Clark.
« Last Edit: 09/15/2014 03:41 am by manboy »
"Cheese has been sent into space before. But the same cheese has never been sent into space twice." - StephenB

Offline a_langwich

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 211
  • Likes Given: 48
Re: Space suits
« Reply #24 on: 09/15/2014 05:31 am »
The Soyuz 11 crew were dead before entry, as the cabin depressurized when the orbital module was jettisoned. The landing (which, as always in Soyuz), was automatic and nominal.

Dream Chaser has the same abort mode as (latter-day) shuttle: bail out at altitude when in stable flight. It's actually easier in Dream Chaser, as you go out the aft hatch and there's no issue about re-impact with the vehicle as there was on shuttle.

The people developing suits for Dream Chaser and CST-100 have told me that the DC suits are designed for bail-out with individual parachutes, but the CST-100 suits are not. I suspect (not that they're talking) that the SpaceX suits are also not designed for bailout. (I have yet to hear any credible scenario for bailout from a capsule that has a reasonable likelihood of success and that substantially increases the probability of survival.)
I was referring to Soyuz TMA-11 which had a ballistic re-entry. That is a pretty big anomaly on reentry that the crew survived and recovered from their injuries. If the Dragon crew have pressurized suits, and emergency oxygen, as long as the chute deploys (or the thrusters fire to cushion the landing) their survival is high.

Soyuz 11 in 1971 with a depressurization was different. They also could have survived if they had space suits pressurized.

The ballistic re-entry (haven't there been several?  TMA-10, TMA-11, and at least one other earlier, just to ISS) are just high-g reentries.  The suit doesn't make any difference in handling it.

Cabin depressurization is different.  Question is, is a big, bulky, expensive thing like ACES (with a backpack, even!) required, or could you survive with a helmet and oxygen and a partial pressure suit like you would use in a high-performance aircraft?  That would handle toxic fumes, some minor fire situations, without costing a large fraction of the cost of the Dragon capsule.
« Last Edit: 09/15/2014 05:32 am by a_langwich »

Offline spacetech

  • Member
  • Posts: 29
  • San Francisco
  • Liked: 3
  • Likes Given: 6
Re: Space suits
« Reply #25 on: 09/15/2014 06:46 pm »
I was referring to Soyuz TMA-11 which had a ballistic re-entry. That is a pretty big anomaly on reentry that the crew survived and recovered from their injuries. If the Dragon crew have pressurized suits, and emergency oxygen, as long as the chute deploys (or the thrusters fire to cushion the landing) their survival is high.

Soyuz 11 in 1971 with a depressurization was different. They also could have survived if they had space suits pressurized.

The ballistic re-entry (haven't there been several?  TMA-10, TMA-11, and at least one other earlier, just to ISS) are just high-g reentries.  The suit doesn't make any difference in handling it.

Cabin depressurization is different.  Question is, is a big, bulky, expensive thing like ACES (with a backpack, even!) required, or could you survive with a helmet and oxygen and a partial pressure suit like you would use in a high-performance aircraft?  That would handle toxic fumes, some minor fire situations, without costing a large fraction of the cost of the Dragon capsule.
Balistic reentry is about the most extreme condition a capsule would deal with.

Using a partial pressure suit would be incredibly risky/painful above 62,000 ft if the capsule depressurized. At one point they wanted to put operational F-22 pilots in full pressure suits. U-2 pilots have also experienced major issues with decompression sickness with a cabin altitude of 29,000 ft. It's now reduced to 9,000 ft.

The solution is to put cheaper space suits into production and service. Its the low production volumes that make them insanely expensive. They could make them less bulky as well. It just takes research and development.
« Last Edit: 09/15/2014 06:49 pm by spacetech »

Tags: