Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
NASA Moon Space Transportation Technology

NASA's Space-Suit Drama Could Delay Our Trip To the Moon (thedailybeast.com) 160

Posted by BeauHD from the postponed-until-further-notice dept.
Zorro quotes a report from The Daily Beast: After years of planning, NASA is finally launching a new effort to send astronauts back to the moon and then onward to Mars. But one important piece of technology is missing: a new space suit. Fifty-three years after astronaut Ed White stepped outside his Gemini 4 capsule on the first-ever spacewalk for an American, NASA is stuck using decades-old suits that critics say are too old, too bulky, too rigid, and too few in number for America's new era of space exploration.

Astronauts could need as many as three different kinds of space suits for a single mission. NASA has plenty of flight-suit options, but its extravehicular activity or EVA suits are old and dwindling in number. And the agency doesn't have any suits specifically for surface missions. Time is running out to make up the space suit shortfalls. NASA plans to launch Exploration Mission 1, the first test of Orion and its heavy rocket, as early as 2020. The Lunar Gateway station could be ready for use five or six years later. Despite these looming deadlines, NASA "remains years away from having a flight-ready space suit... suitable for use on future exploration missions," the agency's inspector general warned in a 2017 audit.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA's Space-Suit Drama Could Delay Our Trip To the Moon More

NASA's Space-Suit Drama Could Delay Our Trip To the Moon

Comments Filter:

  • There is nothing in near space. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    The people pushing manned space are morons and tourist mongers. There is nowhere to go and no reason to send human petri dishes. This is beyond retarded. People who don't understand the scales involved romanticize the idea.

    If "mankind" is going to go far places and do things, robots are going there first to lay the groundwork. Anything else is just space-force stable genius shit, with Virgin Galactic trying to sell you quarter-million dollar roller coaster rides.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I get a chuckle out of seeing people like you flip the hell out over this. Why dont you get mad about the gov wasting money on the millions of other dumb things they do.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Sounds to me like you are just trying to be edgy because Space is popular again. There are real benefits to boots on ground in exploration. Astronauts work much fast, can carry out a much broader range of experiments and are more versatile than robotic probes. They can also repair and overcome technical issues that would doom a billion dollar probe. Solar panels can be cleaned, rovers can be unstuck etc etc. The amount of data brought back from Apollo was immense and they performed experiments that simply c

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Tablizer ( 95088 )

        There are real benefits to boots on ground in exploration. Astronauts work much fast, can carry out a much broader range of experiments and are more versatile than robotic probes.

        I'm skeptical because:

        1. Robots can take their sweet time. They can study a rock formation for weeks or months if need be. No hurry is necessary.

        2. Expert geologists can study photos and scans of a site for many days before picking sub-targets. You don't need quick assessments.

        3. Robots are far cheaper. Send redundant bots if yo

        • If you want to maximize raw science per dollar, you need to set up a self-sustaining colony. Sure, it will be expensive at first, but after that you get all the science you want for peanuts.

          It also has the side-benefit of making mankind a multiplanetary species. So that's nice.

  • Does NASA need their own spacesuits? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by spth ( 5126797 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @05:16AM (#57039890)

    If what NASA currently has isn't good enough, how about buying from the Europeans, Russians or Chinese? They should have suitable suits for extravehicular activity.

    Delaying the mission seems worse than having to partially rely on foreign technology.

    Suits for surface missions might be a problem, as no one has done such missions recently. But a cooperation with the Chinese who are planning their own mission to the moon might work.

    • Re:Does NASA need their own spacesuits? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by spth ( 5126797 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @05:19AM (#57039896)
      The article claims that the Russian Orlan EVA suits are similarly outdated to the NASA ones, and that Russian Sokol suits are sometimes used by NASA astronauts. But it makes no mention of European or Chinese suits.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        The article claims that the Russian Orlan EVA suits are similarly outdated to the NASA ones, and that Russian Sokol suits are sometimes used by NASA astronauts. But it makes no mention of European or Chinese suits.

        I don't know what the Europeans have, but the Chinese suits are Russian derivatives, so equally dated designs. There's a nice YouTube video by Chris Hadfield showing them - the fun part of it is having to tie up the umbilical nice and tight and stuffing it in the chest area. Gives new meaning to p

    • They are too busy deciding which color.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by thesupraman ( 179040 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @05:20AM (#57039900)

      Apparently they do, I well remember a few years ago they did a big media splash about a 'design project' wanting public input, mostly on what colour and fashion style they should be.

      Perhaps if they had spent just a little more time designing an actual space suit, and less time on PR/Public Image, then they may have one.

      Here we go, 2014 (a random story pre, and the results post)..
      https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/179157-nasa-shows-off-next-generation-z-2-spacesuits-makes-us-question-its-fashion-sense
      https://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-s-next-prototype-spacesuit-has-a-brand-new-look-and-it-s-all-thanks-to-you

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jimbo ( 1370 )

        While in hindsight many of us agree that maybe they should've put more resources into suit design earlier I would not suggest their PR people should start really designing suits, maybe apart from a bit of fashion style. You could argue they should fire PR people and use the money on suits but PR is important for several reasons.

        All in all I don't think the design story from PR dept in any way took resources from or delayed the work done on suits by the real R&D dept.

      • Or maybe if Nasa's foremost mission hadn't been "Muslim outreach"?

        https://www.politifact.com/tex... [politifact.com]

        "Bolden next lists the "three things" he says Obama charged him to do, including, "perhaps foremost," engaging much more with dominantly Muslim nations and getting "more people who can contribute to the things that we do,"

        Note that politifact rates it as half true...mainly because he is confirmed to have SAID it, but later walked back "that's not really what I meant".

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Tablizer ( 95088 )

        a few years ago they did a big media splash about a 'design project' wanting public input, mostly on what colour and fashion style...if they had spent just a little more time designing an actual space suit, and less time on PR/Public Image...

        Shhhh, Dude, you are ruining a good thing. [pinimg.com]

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      A joint development project aiming for universal suits with the economy of scale to push up the quality and reduce costs would be a way to establish and strengthen international collaboration on space travel. No missile systems there to worry about, after all.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by DNS-and-BIND ( 461968 )
      Are you joking? Not Invented Here syndrome. In fact, wasn't it NASA (or one of its prime contractors) that *invented* NIH syndrome?

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
        The really humorous thing about this is if it was contracted to SpaceX, you'd likely end up with 1 suit with 2 sets of add-ons. So you only have to test 1 time and all use cases are met.

        • But it would be outperformed by a bag with some oxygen tanks.

          Actually that isn't entirely out of the realm of possibility. In Andy Weir's Artemis there was a space suit called the "hamster ball", it allowed tourists to walk around on the moon relatively untrained. Not useful if you want to do any actual work, however.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )

            In Andy Weir's Artemis there was a space suit called the "hamster ball", it allowed tourists to walk around on the moon relatively untrained. Not useful if you want to do any actual work, however.

            It would be most humorous to view an untrained average tourist attempting to walk on the moon in 1/6th gravity, no matter what enabled them to do so. The reels would make AFV's current offerings look like amateur hour. Not to mention finally removing the baby/kid video as the automatic winner.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      how about buying from the Europeans

      Yeah, right. Fitting Americans into European cut suits.

    • Actually AFAIK the Russian Orlan spacesuit is still better than what NASA currently uses since it's faster to put on. But at least the most recent US space suits now also have a hard torso like the Orlan which makes them easier to manufacture. But these are EVA suits. Where NASA has a major disadvantage right now in flight suits but both SpaceX and Boeing have contracted private companies to design new generation flight suits for their capsules. So NASA does not need to do one damn thing there since that's

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by antdude ( 79039 )

      We, humans, really need to work together to go to space and other destinations.

  • 'Our' trip to the moon?

    What, are all of Slashdot going to schlep up to the lunar surface? Have we been selected by some secret process?

    Don't get me wrong, if you are offering a ticket, I'd be happy to squeeze it in to my busy schedule.

    But if not, why would some NASA employees going to the moon (and good luck to them) be the same as going ourselves?

    • 'Our' trip to the moon?

      What, are all of Slashdot going to schlep up to the lunar surface?

      Yes.

    • 'Our' trip to the moon? What, are all of Slashdot going to schlep up to the lunar surface? Have we been selected by some secret process?

      Only the passengers on Ark A and Ark C have been notified. As as telephone sanitizer, you'll be on Ark B, and will be notified shortly.

      Don't get me wrong, if you are offering a ticket, I'd be happy to squeeze it in to my busy schedule.

      Well, please find time in your busy schedule to start packing . . . your Ark B will be leaving first!

      Your skills are desperately need so resolve some diversity issues related to the invention of fire.

    • I *was* going, but then there was a space suit problem, so I couldn't. Thanks, Obama.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

        I *was* going, but then there was a space suit problem, so I couldn't. Thanks, Obama.

        I thought if I liked my spacesuit I could keep my spacesuit.

      • I really doubt that Obama had anything to do with your spacesuit problem. As far as I can see, SLS is a pork-barrel jobs prgram for Congress, and sucks down too much of NASA's funding for them to do other things they'd like to. And they realize this, but have to get along with Congress.

        And it probably should not take a Billion dollars for private enterprise to make a space suit. I bet you could start an SME to do it.

  • Getting Dumber? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Come on. How long did it take to design and fabricate the Apollo moon suits?

    Coincidentally, down in the "Related Links" I see: "We're All Getting Dumber, Says Science".

  • TFS fails to mention... (Score:5, Informative)

    by ElizabethGreene ( 1185405 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @07:24AM (#57040316)

    TFS fails to mention that we've spent a giant pile of money on next generation EVA suits already, and what's missing is... A mission to build the suits for.

    NASA has no manned Mars mission scheduled, no manned Moon mission scheduled, and no capability to put men in orbit. Through that lens saying spacesuits are going to delay our moon trip is 9% dumb.

    Our next major manned spaceflight objective beyond ISS is an orbit around the moon and the "Deep space gateway", another space station that will hoover up the majority of NASA's budget for a generation.

  • just buy SpaceX's (Score:4, Insightful)

    by trybywrench ( 584843 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @08:08AM (#57040516)
    Just buy SpaceX's suits, or pay them to develop one if the existing ones don't meet the requirements. I bet it would cost 1/1000 of NASA's existing budget projections.

    • SpaceX's suit is an "IVA" suit for in the spacecraft, not made for movement in vacuum. The EVA suits are orders of magnitude more difficult to design. I'm sure SpaceX will come up with an elegant design for a fraction of the cost of what NASA needs, but they don't have it yet AFAIK.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Considering that their design approach got them the world's most advanced rocket for around $400 million (NASA's estimation on their dev cost) and in a fraction of the time its taken NASA to build the SLS which is entirely built out of reused parts, I think you are right. There are clear issues with the way NASA manages their hardware projects. I am of the opinion that they need to get out of the rocket game and maybe even the spaceship game completely and buy other people's designs. They should focus on th

        • When NASA tries to design things, they get told which States, and sometimes specific companies they have to go with to source the part.
          This is a the whim of the government and the many backdoor deals to get various pieces of legislation passed. You support my bill, I'll make sure that part of NASA's X project will be made in your election district.
          This causes all sorts of budget problems.

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @08:25AM (#57040606)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Think about it, we all live in a place that can burn down at any moment. Yet, none of us own blast furnace suits to protect us from the fire. We just try to leave where the fire is at.

      Speak for yourself. I keep a portable, unfoldable fire shelter in my car.

      • Speak for yourself. I keep a portable, unfoldable fire shelter in my car.

        Too many wet years followed by a dry year. Basically you'd be safer if you lived in drought conditions all the time.

        • "Too many wet years followed by a dry year. Basically you'd be safer if you lived in drought conditions all the time."

          I'd be safer if people didn't live in the middle of forests, so that we could let them go through natural burn cycles necessary for forest health. Some of the first laws on the books in California outlawed the practice of setting such fires, which the natives did as a form of land management. The house I lived in for the last eleven years just burned down a week ago in the carder fire, which

  • I call B.S. on this one (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Bruce Perens ( 3872 ) <bruce@perens.com> on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @09:26AM (#57040978) Homepage Journal

    First, NASA is not likely to be the primary entity running the next moon mission. They will participate, but that will be done by private enterprise.

    Second, of all of the blockers in the way to a lunar mission, a lunar surface suit is smaller in magnitude than things like a lunar lander, which nobody has at the moment. Consider, for example, a SpaceX mission to the moon. The Dragon 2 capsule is not capable of landing and returning on its own. They would need a vehicle for the Dragon 2 to sit on top of. And the Falcon 9 stages are not appropriate, because they are not cryogenic - they don't work when exposed to cold for more than a few hours.

    SpaceX BFR still has a lot of risk and is a long way away. ULA is developing a cryogenic stage, but that's also a long way away.

    • Space X has no interest in sending people to space. They can make money by sending hardware.
      • Well, this is contradicted by essentially all of their communications about BFR and the fact that it's eventually intended to hold 100 people for a rather long voyage. Not that it exists yet. But since they probably can be paid to do various non-people missions with BFR, the prospect of getting it to the point that it does hold people is pretty good. Consider Boeing and air force jets before the 707.

    • First, NASA is not likely to be the primary entity running the next moon mission. They will participate, but that will be done by private enterprise.

      Really? What private enterprise is going to do it and where is the profit motive for them? No profit motive = no private enterprise funding unless you have someone as crazy as Elon Musk who controls a private company and doesn't have to care about profits. Until you can establish a profit motive and quantify the risks private enterprise is going to sit this one out.

      Second, of all of the blockers in the way to a lunar mission, a lunar surface suit is smaller in magnitude than things like a lunar lander, which nobody has at the moment.

      Lunar lander, human rated launch vehicle, transport capsule, mission equipment, etc. There is no scheduled mission to the moon nor is there

      • Given the existence of BFR as a working thing; rather than a dream just being staffed up for development, as it is today; I think there will be a lot of cargo business. Given that, extension of it into a man-capable platform can be achieved economically, as Boeing achieved the 707 after being paid to make some similarly-sized Air Force jets.

        Lunar lander: we have the part that holds the people, not the part that gets it down to the moon and back. Remember, the original design for Apollo by Boeing was for the

    • A point of correction: Falcon's stages are cryogenic*, which is precisely the problem with using them for deep-space missions.

      Oxygen must be kept extremely cold to remain liquid (especially as the Block 5 variant uses super-cooled liquid oxygen and RP-1 to achieve greater fuel densities). The much-hyped "extreme cold of space" is true enough in the shadow of the Earth, but in sunlight it's getting rid of excess heat that is the greater challenge. On the launchpad, the rocket can remain connected to re

  • Wasn't NASA working on a new suit called the "Z" Suit?

  • They've got plenty of time. SLS was supposed to launch in 2017. After a series of delays, it was supposed to launch in 2020. Now that date is said to be "low confidence". The idea that we'll have an operational space station in lunar orbit in 2025 is kind of a bit unrealistic right now.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      Indeed. The probability of hitting the existing schedule is roughly less than 10% based on their estimation history.

      There is less professional risk in making optimistic estimates than making pessimistic estimates because pessimism will hurt your career now, versus say 5 years away. Would you rather get slapped now, or in 2023? One may not even be with the same org in 5 years.

      The only thing likely to stop the slip is another nation embarrassing us with some dazzling space activity: AKA "Sputnik 2.0"

  • This phenomenal six-part documentary series by the Science Channel, now available on YouTube and Daily Motion, interviews many engineers who worked on Apollo. There is one episode dedicated to the space suit, for which the contract was awarded to none other than Playtex.

  • "our" (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    No.. My space agency is ESA and they are on track for the moon with China.

  • Fun fact: The suits used during the Apollo program were made by ILC Dover, which was a branch of the International Latex Corporation.....which was originally famous for making Playtex bras and girdles.

    Does this mean that it was "one small step for (trans) man"? ;-)

  • back to the future! (Score:3)

    by k6mfw ( 1182893 ) on Tuesday July 31, 2018 @11:43AM (#57042156)
    This reminds me of what happened many decades ago when it was imperative to make a spacesuit, but various barriers were overcomed. Great post from Major Blud about ILC Dover. ILC was the one company that knew how to make movable joints from experience making girdles, other companies had suits that would be way too big. So they paired up ILC with Hamilton Standard because the latter knew of aerospace bureaucracy. Obviously there were tensions between the two.

    Fascinating story overall, a book called Space Gear mentioned when the contract was finally awarded for the Apollo EVA suit, the ILC guy at a dinner party threw the prototype suit in the fire place in front of the NASA guy, "now you know how I really feel the way we were treated" (or something like that). Since then there have been documentaries that show the old ladies (ILC selected the best seamstresses for this group) sewing the spacesuits (and yes they too wanted to walk the surface of the moon). ILC manager recalls watching Neil and Buzz on the lunar surface thinking, "finish up! finish up! get back into the LM!" because he knew all the things that could fail on the suit. These suits are not exactly indestructible.

    There was a program at NASA Ames of a hardsuit design, not bulky with many flexible joints and with higher than 5 psi pressure so reduce the 4-hour prebreath time. John Young wrote in his bio book about spacesuit designs of various ideas but NASA kept with its "monster suit."

    Overall maybe need someone with the technical, managerial, leadership talent to head up a spacesuit design. Be able to harness resources and battle the bureaucracy for a usable space suit. But forget about Mars (it will always be 20 years into the future a Mars EVA suit will be needed).

Slashdot Top Deals

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall

Close