Re: Molded Couches for U S Space Capsules?

[Kent Betts]

"F Fernandez" > wrote in message
om...
> I know that the Russian Soyuz Space capsules require that the couches
> in the descent module must be custom fit to the cosmonauts. Does
> anyone know if this also holds true for the american capsules - the
> Gemini ejection seats and the Apollo couches?

Well, I dunno. I can see why the Soyuz couches *are* custom fitted. The Soyuz
landing was intended to be survivable in the event of the failure of the
terminal retrofire cushioning rockets. Coming down on parachute alone delivers
a strong acceleration....call it a jolt....to the occupants. While on the
topic, the current Soyuz redesign has added new sophistication to these braking
rockets. The old design had six motors that fired at a fixed thrust when
proximate to the ground. The new design has four of the old rockets and two new
ones that have variable thrust. Practice makes perfect.

[John Fongheiser]

"F Fernandez" > wrote in message
om...
> I know that the Russian Soyuz Space capsules require that the couches
> in the descent module must be custom fit to the cosmonauts. Does
> anyone know if this also holds true for the american capsules - the
> Gemini ejection seats and the Apollo couches?
>
> Thanks.

The Gemini ejection seat backrest and pelvic block were custom molded to the
astronauts.

Have a look here:

http://space1.com/Spacecraft_Data/Handbook_Illustrations/Gemini/gemini.html

--
John Fongheiser
President, Historic Space Systems
http://www.space1.com
Exhibits that Launch Imaginations (tm)

[Henry Spencer]

In article >,
James Anatidae > wrote:
>> The Apollo couches were a far cry from the systems used in preceding US
>> manned spacecraft.
>>
>I guess that's what happens when you go with the lowest bidder.

Hardly -- it's what happens when you understand the problem better, and
when your system provides a more forgiving environment. (Mercury had very
high accelerations in certain cases, e.g. suborbital reentry, and Gemini
ejection conditions were very close to the limits of human tolerance.)

By the way, NASA generally does not buy from the lowest bidder, because
it's rare that two bidders have such similar proposals that cost is the
deciding factor.
--
MOST launched 1015 EDT 30 June, separated 1046, | Henry Spencer
first ground-station pass 1651, all nominal! |

[OM]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 21:13:54 GMT, (Henry Spencer)
wrote:

>By the way, NASA generally does not buy from the lowest bidder, because
>it's rare that two bidders have such similar proposals that cost is the
>deciding factor.

....Witness the mainframe procurement procedures during NASA's early
years.

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

[Kevin Willoughby]

OM said:
> ...Witness the mainframe procurement procedures during NASA's early
> years.

Okay, I'll admit my ignorance: what "mainframe procurement procedures"?
--
Kevin Willoughby

Imagine that, a FROG ON-OFF switch, hardly the work
for test pilots. -- Mike Collins

[Derek Lyons]

(Henry Spencer) wrote:

>In article >,
>James Anatidae > wrote:
>>> The Apollo couches were a far cry from the systems used in preceding US
>>> manned spacecraft.
>>>
>>I guess that's what happens when you go with the lowest bidder.
>
>Hardly -- it's what happens when you understand the problem better, and
>when your system provides a more forgiving environment. (Mercury had very
>high accelerations in certain cases, e.g. suborbital reentry, and Gemini
>ejection conditions were very close to the limits of human tolerance.)
>
>By the way, NASA generally does not buy from the lowest bidder, because
>it's rare that two bidders have such similar proposals that cost is the
>deciding factor.

It's not uncommon for the rest of the government to go with the bidder
for the same reasons. Often the bids are sorted by technical merits
and the cheapest of the best is chosen. The lowest bidder on truly
wins when it comes to commodity items.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.

[LooseChanj]

On or about Tue, 19 Aug 2003 18:37:41 -0600, OM <om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research _facility.org> made the sensational claim that:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 21:13:54 GMT, (Henry Spencer)
> wrote:
>
>>By the way, NASA generally does not buy from the lowest bidder, because
>>it's rare that two bidders have such similar proposals that cost is the
>>deciding factor.
>
> ...Witness the mainframe procurement procedures during NASA's early
> years.

Exhibit B: ODIN
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | This space is for rent
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | Inquire within if you
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | Would like your ad here