|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
On Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 9:33:41 PM UTC-4, JF Mezei wrote:
On 2019-07-30 19:47, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote: Yes, but again, the skills necessary to actually MAKE them may not be available. NASA has people who maintain the current suits, still train new astraunauts in them etc. Surely they have some expereince in house? Ig yuou know of the zipper flaws of the original Apollo suits, surely NASA folks would also know of it? The USAF Museum just put several Apollo suits on display, I saw them last weekend when I visited. https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Vi...pace-suit1969/ https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Vi...lity-unit1971/ All suits onsite -- Mercury Space Suit—1963 Gemini G4C Space Suit—1966 Model A7L Space Suit—1969 Model A7LB Extravehicular Mobility Unit—1971 Space Shuttle Extravehicular Mobility Unit Space Shuttle Advanced Crew Escape Suit 1994-2011 https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Vi...Space-Gallery/ |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
"JF Mezei" wrote in message ...
On 2019-07-30 19:47, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote: Yes, but again, the skills necessary to actually MAKE them may not be available. NASA has people who maintain the current suits, still train new astraunauts in them etc. Surely they have some expereince in house? Some. Ig yuou know of the zipper flaws of the original Apollo suits, surely NASA folks would also know of it? Obviously. But that doesn't mean they know the best way to solve it. There's multiple ways that might be attempted. And yes, of course any new designs will try to learn lessons from previous designs. Not sure why you're expecting otherwise. because i've been told it isn't workable to use old designs. Not using is not the same as not learning lessons from them. Considering they were custom made for each astronaut, yes they were only used once. And since they were required for re-entry, they were returned. I was under the impression the moon suits remained in the LEM and they had other suits for the command module. Did they remove the backpack on the moon suits so they could fit on the couches and plug themselves into the cabin air flexible tubes? Yes, the backpacks were left on the surface of the Moon, mostly to save mass. They also left their bags of crap on the Moon. You'd be better off with less impressions and more facts. What made the Shuttle EVA suits so much heavier than Apollo ones? The hard torso. Did the Apollo suits have equivalent systems ? (the water cooled/heated undergarment for instance)? Or do the Shuttle era suits have more elaborate systems ? The Apollo suits did not have a hard torso. They were rubber with beta cloth and other materials, but were flexible. So they went with a hard torso (in I think 3 sizes, S, M, L) and then soft components for the arms and legs. Why would this end up being heavier? is it just that they didn't work to optimized the mass and used lead instead of titanium for the structure/components? The materials are completely different. And yes, there was less need to optimize for mass and more need to optimize for re-usability. Do the Shuttle EVA suits provide greater autonomy in hours than the Apollo era suits? I think they were about the same. But I think they had better environmental controls given they spent a good part of the time in the darkness while all efforts on the Moon were effectively in bright sunlight. So, new suits will need to be created, regardless. The question is how much of both Apollo and Shuttle suits can be re-used in building those new suits. The other question is whether the lunar suits will be single purpose (with ACES type suits for in flight protection) or whether an all purpose suit will be used. This matters when designing the couches for Orion. Have the couches for Orion been finalized? That might prevent use of Lunar suits inside Orion. I honestly, don't know if NASA has thought that far ahead. My guess, given they're going with Lunar Gateway, is they'd leave some lunar suits there and have separate pressure suits for the Orion portion of the flight. But I don't know. Ideally (but unlikely) higher operating pressure. Wouldn't that require an Atmospheric diving suit ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_diving_suit Is Orion currently designed for 14.7psi flight? I take it it wouldn't be hard to make it 5psi pure O2 like Apollo ? Or is that a big change? It's probably not hard to do (I believe a requirement, like Apollo, is to be able to operate in a vacuum) but we know from experience, that we'd prefer to keep astronauts at normal (or close to it) pressures. I can't find anything right now that says what the atmosphere would be. My guess is for Gateway wither 14.7psi like ISS, or perhaps something lower like 10psi. But even if Gateway is at 14.7psi, my guess is any lander will be able to operate at the same pressure as Gateway and then slowly lower to something like 8-10psi with a mixture of O2 and N2. This will give some of the benefits of a higher pressure atmosphere while reducing times to prep for EVA. But I can't say for sure. But also, as mentioned, if possible, NASA would love to have a space suit that can operate at a much higher pressure (like 8psi). It would reduce a host of issues. But right now, that appears to be unlikely. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net IT Disaster Response - https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/ |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
In article ,
says... On 2019-07-31 07:17, Jeff Findley wrote: Besides, we've made progress in lots of areas over 50+ years so a new suit design would be better. Like, perhaps, this one: I started my line of questions with whether technology had advanced a lot since then or if the tech in shuttle suits was still considered state of the art. Only now is this brought up. Obviously materials have advanced over 50+ years. That should be obvious. And yes, NASA has been toying, at a low level, for decades looking at new suit prototypes. A bit of Google turns up a lot of suits. From their current (shuttle EMU) suit supplier: Z1 - 2012 https://www.nasa.gov/content/the-z-1/ Z2 (advanced prototype) - 2015 https://www.nasa.gov/feature/the-nex...t-technologies List of 13 prototypes over the years (just scroll past the pre-shuttle designs): https://www.popularmechanics.com/spa...t-space-suits/ Note that the above includes lots of different types. The AX series were "hard suits" as opposed to traditional "soft suits". The Z series, again, was from ILC Dover and therefore more of an evolution of their previous designs but incorporating a bit of what we learned from the Russians (i.e. large rear opening for ease of access for donning, doffing, and maintenance). You do know that with a bit of Googling you could have found all of this yourself, right? I'm just not that interested in the particulars of suit design. But, clearly NASA has been toying with the idea of new suits for decades, but hasn't "pulled the trigger" on actually choosing a design (or two) and finishing their development. One would assume that would include actually flying the darned things to ISS and testing them on, you know, actual EVAs. THIS COMPANY SAYS IT HAS A LUNAR SPACE SUIT THAT WILL BE READY FOR NASA?S 2024 MOON MISSION Collins Aerospace has a space outfit you can use Suspect this is just a prototype used for lobbying Washington to get the money to actually develop it. I believe NASA has funding studies over the years, which includes giving money to contractors for prototypes. But yes, money has not been appropriated by Congress to actually turn a prototype into a "real" spacesuit. This is a problem endemic with traditional aerospace suppliers. They'll simply sit on their hands unless they get an actual government contract. But it does appear this company still has the experience and expertise to make such suits, not the lost art that some here claim because everyone is too old. That's not what any of us said. You kept asking how hard it would be to recreate the Apollo suits. That would be *harder* than turning a modern prototype into reality. Don't blame us because you didn't spend 10 seconds doing this: https://lmgtfy.com/?q=NASA+prototype+spacesuit Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
If Moon manned landing missions were resumed, what would be a
realistic schedule? Apollo flew about 3 times per year, and had massive amounts of funding. Given future funding, maybe one per year going forward? One every two years? That would be a lot slower than Apollo, but still having five missions per decade will do a lot of science over time, that would be 10 missions over the next 20 years. Plus doing things not done by Apollo, such as the mission the south polar area, missions to the far side of the Moon, missions to mountainous areas, etc. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
"Scott Kozel" wrote in message
... If Moon manned landing missions were resumed, what would be a realistic schedule? Apollo flew about 3 times per year, and had massive amounts of funding. Given future funding, maybe one per year going forward? One every two years? That would be a lot slower than Apollo, but still having five missions per decade will do a lot of science over time, that would be 10 missions over the next 20 years. Plus doing things not done by Apollo, such as the mission the south polar area, missions to the far side of the Moon, missions to mountainous areas, etc. That's the 2 billion dollar question. Given current (and expected) funding levels and costs, I'd be surprised if they could sustain 1 flight a year. And honestly, if you're building Lunar Boondoggle and all, you really want to fly more than that I'd think. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net IT Disaster Response - https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/ |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
On Friday, August 2, 2019 at 4:52:06 PM UTC-4, JF Mezei wrote:
On 2019-08-02 12:54, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote: That's the 2 billion dollar question. Given current (and expected) funding levels and costs, I'd be surprised if they could sustain 1 flight a year. And honestly, if you're building Lunar Boondoggle and all, you really want to fly more than that I'd think. At a recent event at 1600 Pennsylvania studios, the actor playing the role of president asked about mission to Mars, and while Bidenstine stated Gateway/Moon was needed, astronauts who were present disagreed and told him that bypassing moon was preferable. SLS/Orion will have its flight around the moon and back. Not sure they will even land. Funding will shift to Mars, at which point the whole Gateway/Moon thing will go on backburner and funding redirected to hardware that can go to Mars. Have they figured any realistic way to return astronauts from the surface of Mars back to Earth? |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
"Scott Kozel" wrote in message
... On Friday, August 2, 2019 at 4:52:06 PM UTC-4, JF Mezei wrote: On 2019-08-02 12:54, Greg (Strider) Moore wrote: That's the 2 billion dollar question. Given current (and expected) funding levels and costs, I'd be surprised if they could sustain 1 flight a year. And honestly, if you're building Lunar Boondoggle and all, you really want to fly more than that I'd think. At a recent event at 1600 Pennsylvania studios, the actor playing the role of president asked about mission to Mars, and while Bidenstine stated Gateway/Moon was needed, astronauts who were present disagreed and told him that bypassing moon was preferable. SLS/Orion will have its flight around the moon and back. Not sure they will even land. Funding will shift to Mars, at which point the whole Gateway/Moon thing will go on backburner and funding redirected to hardware that can go to Mars. Have they figured any realistic way to return astronauts from the surface of Mars back to Earth? Hitch a ride from SpaceX. s -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net IT Disaster Response - https://www.amazon.com/Disaster-Resp...dp/1484221834/ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Artemis 3 Mission in 2024
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
U.S. wants boots on the Moon by 2024 | Rocket Man[_2_] | Policy | 18 | April 23rd 19 09:54 PM |
ISS mission extended to 2024 | Greg \(Strider\) Moore | Space Station | 7 | January 13th 14 12:27 PM |
ASTRO: NGC 2024, the Flame Nebula in Orion | George Normandin[_1_] | Astro Pictures | 6 | April 14th 08 04:56 PM |
Bush administration to adopt Artemis Society plan for moon mission... | Dholmes | Policy | 1 | January 13th 04 02:11 PM |