Yeah, but did they know how to drill?

hph6203 said:

---

Yeah, but did they know how to drill?

---

They actually did take up some interesting tools that they mostly didn't get to use much. I still have the first prototype of a long handled sample scoop they used to practice collecting regolith in sample bags. It ended up being too heavy, so the one they took up was totally different.

Dumb question, but why the emphasis on pilot experience? How much "flying" do these spaceships actually require? I get the Apollo 13 correction burn situation, but today? Also, I thought the underwater medical officer was an interesting choice.

Regardless, excited to see them all in space.

A lot of being a test pilot involves specific sets of inputs when presented with certain conditions and having the discipline to follow through with tasks as instructed. Also the psychological bearing to accept the risks of being in a fringe environment with little margin for error and still getting tasks completed.

If I had to guess, you're still looking at test pilots for things like physical fitness, g-force resistance, decision-making under pressure, able to mentally and emotionally handle being in a small confined space for long periods, etc.

And yeah in theory you might need to take over control. Although I'd agree that's less and less important.

Marvin said:

---

Dumb question, but why the emphasis on pilot experience? How much "flying" do these spaceships actually require? I get the Apollo 13 correction burn situation, but today? Also, I thought the underwater medical officer was an interesting choice.

Regardless, excited to see them all in space.

---

After ISS was completed, NASA was focused on microgravity research and the astronaut selections reflected this emphasis. But with the pivot to the moon and Artemis, NASA is transitioning back to exploration with lots of dynamic spacecraft docking and landings.

From that perspective, test pilots are obvious. It's not about trying to ride lightning but executing very precise and time critical procedures.

As for the dive doctors, that is focused on the EVA portions of the mission. NASA has several dive medicine / physiology experts because barotrauma and decompression sickness are a common part of doing EVAs.

I think you mean a common *risk* associated with EVAs. I know there have been occasional instances of crew and/or test subjects experiencing DCS symptoms, but if it was happening regularly during EVAs, the docs and the Safety reps would be going ballistic.

Okay now I'm picturing "The Right Stuff" auguring in a moon capsule at 7000mph

Flying Crowbar said:

---

I think you mean a common *risk* associated with EVAs. I know there have been occasional instances of crew and/or test subjects experiencing DCS symptoms, but if it was happening regularly during EVAs, the docs and the Safety reps would be going ballistic.

---

Barotrauma is well controlled because the crew can usually pause a depress or repress and any sinus issues can usually be addressed with Sudafed or Afrin beforehand. We should have done a contingency repress for Luca but nobody wants to deliberately injure anyone, even in a contingency.

DCS is a different kind of risk altogether and is not as uncommon as you might think. The atmospheres and suit pressures planned for Artemis are very challenging from a DCS perspective and there is a strong push to reduce prebreathe times so the crew can spend more time outside. The docs you think would go ballistic have accepted that DCS is inevitable during the Artemis campaign.

Life would be much simpler if they would use a 70% O2 atmosphere like on Skylab.

lb3 said:

---

Flying Crowbar said:

---

I think you mean a common *risk* associated with EVAs. I know there have been occasional instances of crew and/or test subjects experiencing DCS symptoms, but if it was happening regularly during EVAs, the docs and the Safety reps would be going ballistic.

---

Barotrauma is well controlled because the crew can usually pause a depress or repress and any sinus issues can usually be addressed with Sudafed or Afrin beforehand. We should have done a contingency repress for Luca but nobody wants to deliberately injure anyone, even in a contingency.

DCS is a different kind of risk altogether and is not as uncommon as you might think. The atmospheres and suit pressures planned for Artemis are very challenging from a DCS perspective and there is a strong push to reduce prebreathe times so the crew can spend more time outside. The docs you think would go ballistic have accepted that DCS is inevitable during the Artemis campaign.

Life would be much simpler if they would use a 70% O2 atmosphere like on Skylab.

---

I am not familiar with the suit/capsule pressures used, but is there a risk of oxygen toxicity using enhanced O2 atmospheres for prolonged periods? Or are the pressures close enough to 1 Atm to make it a non issue?

I think probably some oxygen toxicity risk along with combustion risk with how much Velcro there is on the ISS (although surely that Velcro would be more fire resistant)

txags92 said:

---

lb3 said:

---

Flying Crowbar said:

---

I think you mean a common *risk* associated with EVAs. I know there have been occasional instances of crew and/or test subjects experiencing DCS symptoms, but if it was happening regularly during EVAs, the docs and the Safety reps would be going ballistic.

---

Barotrauma is well controlled because the crew can usually pause a depress or repress and any sinus issues can usually be addressed with Sudafed or Afrin beforehand. We should have done a contingency repress for Luca but nobody wants to deliberately injure anyone, even in a contingency.

DCS is a different kind of risk altogether and is not as uncommon as you might think. The atmospheres and suit pressures planned for Artemis are very challenging from a DCS perspective and there is a strong push to reduce prebreathe times so the crew can spend more time outside. The docs you think would go ballistic have accepted that DCS is inevitable during the Artemis campaign.

Life would be much simpler if they would use a 70% O2 atmosphere like on Skylab.

---

I am not familiar with the suit/capsule pressures used, but is there a risk of oxygen toxicity using enhanced O2 atmospheres for prolonged periods? Or are the pressures close enough to 1 Atm to make it a non issue?

---

Oxygen toxicity you're thinking about impacts the central nervous system and requires hyperbaric pressures so that's not a concern in spacecraft.

Theoretically it's possible to see impacts in the lungs from a prolonged exposure to highly enriched oxygen environments. We even have flight rules to prevent that sort of thing but that's probably going to result from wearing an oxygen mask for days at a time. In the small confined volumes of a spacecraft flammability concerns and depleting oxygen reserves will become an issue long before edema sets in, so it's not a practical concern IMO.

lb3 said:

---

DCS is a different kind of risk altogether and is not as uncommon as you might think. The atmospheres and suit pressures planned for Artemis are very challenging from a DCS perspective and there is a strong push to reduce prebreathe times so the crew can spend more time outside. The docs you think would go ballistic have accepted that DCS is inevitable during the Artemis campaign.

Life would be much simpler if they would use a 70% O2 atmosphere like on Skylab.

---

I was thinking of ISS EVAs, not Artemis EVAs. What I should have said was that if the crew was regularly experiencing DCS symptoms during ISS EVAs in the EMU, the docs and Safety would have a problem.

I'm aware of the Exploration Atmosphere Prebreathe Protocol test campaign for Artemis, where the objective of the testing is to determine a vehicle cabin (or in this case, a test chamber) gas mix and suit prebreathe duration that will result in a statistically acceptable number of DCS events, such that the likelihood of any single EVA has a low risk of DCS. The goal is not to get zero events. If a test series completes its simulated EVAs and none of the subjects experiences DCS symptoms, then the question has to be asked, "Was that particular protocol too conservative? Can the prebreathe duration be shortened? If so, by how much? Should the cabin's gas mix/pressure be changed, and if so, to what?"

I'm also aware of the concept of a walking prebreathe, where the crew begins the EVA at a higher suit pressure and the suit pressure slowly decreases to the operational pressure, which is a good idea from an ops standpoint, but it is challenging from a suit design/mobility perspective.

(Based on your history on this thread, it's evident you know all that. I guess I was typing all that out for the benefit(?) of everyone else.)

I agree with you about the 70% O2 cabin atmosphere. A zero-prebreathe suit would be optimal from an EVA timeline perspective.

I'm a fan of the walking prebreathes and higher suit pressures generally. The Orlan operates at 400 millibar or 5.8 psia so we have some experience above 4.3 psia. I personally think the increased fatigue and injury risks are worth effectively eliminating the prebreathe.

lb3 said:

---

txags92 said:

---

lb3 said:

---

Flying Crowbar said:

---

I think you mean a common *risk* associated with EVAs. I know there have been occasional instances of crew and/or test subjects experiencing DCS symptoms, but if it was happening regularly during EVAs, the docs and the Safety reps would be going ballistic.

---

Barotrauma is well controlled because the crew can usually pause a depress or repress and any sinus issues can usually be addressed with Sudafed or Afrin beforehand. We should have done a contingency repress for Luca but nobody wants to deliberately injure anyone, even in a contingency.

DCS is a different kind of risk altogether and is not as uncommon as you might think. The atmospheres and suit pressures planned for Artemis are very challenging from a DCS perspective and there is a strong push to reduce prebreathe times so the crew can spend more time outside. The docs you think would go ballistic have accepted that DCS is inevitable during the Artemis campaign.

Life would be much simpler if they would use a 70% O2 atmosphere like on Skylab.

---

I am not familiar with the suit/capsule pressures used, but is there a risk of oxygen toxicity using enhanced O2 atmospheres for prolonged periods? Or are the pressures close enough to 1 Atm to make it a non issue?

---

Oxygen toxicity you're thinking about impacts the central nervous system and requires hyperbaric pressures so that's not a concern in spacecraft.

Theoretically it's possible to see impacts in the lungs from a prolonged exposure to highly enriched oxygen environments. We even have flight rules to prevent that sort of thing but that's probably going to result from wearing an oxygen mask for days at a time. In the small confined volumes of a spacecraft flammability concerns and depleting oxygen reserves will become an issue long before edema sets in, so it's not a practical concern IMO.

---

Thanks. I wasn't sure it they were running pressures significantly above 1 atm to give a margin of error for leaks or not.

Shots fired. This time it isn't the trans left

$FLY you have some explaining to do here. So your engine is garbage??? pic.twitter.com/ENwOGAZKxz

— FranciscoSpace5🚀🔬 (@FranciscoSpace5) September 24, 2025

Background and more details on his remakes. He seems like a big richard with a lot of talk and blame.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/09/astras-chris-kemp-woke-up-one-recent-morning-and-chose-violence/

Aside from drawing what I'm sure is a large salary for himself, does this guy have any real accomplishments in the arena where he's criticizing people? A record of 2 out of 7 successes on extremely low mass launches doesn't seem to make a strong statement that he's worth listening to.

He's profiled in Ashlee Vance's book When the Heavens Went on Sale. He came off like a guy that if you took all the claimed characteristics of Elon on Reddit and put them into a real person.

Starlink-1586, launched from the U.S. Air Force’s Eastern Test Range in Florida on August 17, 2020, re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere over the Eastern Pacific earlier tonight and was observed by a large number of residents in Northern California. pic.twitter.com/8jgllBoUZR

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) September 26, 2025

STARSHIP FLIGHT 11: 1 Week Delay - the @USCG Local Notice to Mariners (NOTMAR) now starts No Earlier Than October 13, at 18:15 CDT (23:15 UTC)

🗺️ @NeedPizza42 pic.twitter.com/yIawsMl7i6

— Ryan Caton (@dpoddolphinpro) September 26, 2025

Update: Starship test flight 11 is now scheduled to launch as soon as Monday October 13th between 6:15 pm and 8:22 pm central time according to a new updated official U.S. Coast Guard hazard notice posted today.
9/26/25https://t.co/s6QnWZD6Qz pic.twitter.com/myRKuEYWbS

— Starship Gazer (@StarshipGazer) September 26, 2025

lb3 said:

---

Starlink-1586, launched from the U.S. Air Force’s Eastern Test Range in Florida on August 17, 2020, re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere over the Eastern Pacific earlier tonight and was observed by a large number of residents in Northern California. pic.twitter.com/8jgllBoUZR

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) September 26, 2025

---

SpaceX, not just content to lead in launches, is leading America in "number of visible reentry events" by a huge margin. China however is the undisputed king in "dropping space debris on people"

I think most regulars here know it but seeing as how neither post says it explicitly I'll add that these are planned deorbit/reentry events. It's just a fact of life with such a low orbit and the satellites are designed to burn up completely in the atmosphere.

There should be another ~800-1000 of these in the next year as the initial constellation members age out. Pretty much every other satellite operator would cease to have satellites at that rate.

Yep, exactly. Although the Starships are probably the most dramatic examples and more on the "unplanned" side of things

There's gonna be a crap load of Starship reentries over on the conterminous US in the coming years. I'm not sure how visible they'll be, I personally hope they're visually spectacular.

I don't think unplanned is the right term.

I think he means the current ones. There's certainly been a few unplanned reentries the past couple of years.

Fair.

Yeah I just meant the last few years I feel like we've been treated to many exciting space fireworks shows.

We’ve worked through system checkout tests on Booster and Ship and are in final verification work for Starship flight 11. The last V1/V2 with flight 12 being the first V3 flight for both Booster and Ship with the new launch pad being prepared for that flight as well. Exciting… https://t.co/UYJHHUOoh6

— Shana Diez (@ShanaDiez) September 29, 2025

My kids have that whole week off school for fall break. Where is the best place to stay/watch as a family of 4 with kids aged 6 and 12?

pic.twitter.com/UOeFGNjLqp

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 30, 2025

Anyone know what happened with the Firefly test gone awry on Monday?

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/video-firefly-aerospace-rocket-explodes-during-testing-in-central-texas/
The company said it is assessing the impact from the event, which it referred to as "a loss of the stage." Additionally, no other facilities were impacted.

What is "a loss of the stage"?

WATCH: A Firefly Aerospace rocket exploded during testing at its Central Texas testing center on Monday, according to Firefly Aerospace.

Video courtesy: Shelina Fauriehttps://t.co/pEPwt8zxDA pic.twitter.com/Xm6ZnZlZK7

— KXAN News (@KXAN_News) September 30, 2025

TexAgs91 said:

---

Shots fired. This time it isn't the trans left

$FLY you have some explaining to do here. So your engine is garbage??? pic.twitter.com/ENwOGAZKxz

— FranciscoSpace5🚀🔬 (@FranciscoSpace5) September 24, 2025

---

This guy seems a bit prophetic this morning.

normaleagle05 said:

---

My kids have that whole week off school for fall break. Where is the best place to stay/watch as a family of 4 with kids aged 6 and 12

---

Sapphire Towers in a unit that ends in "..09" above the 5th floor

unobstructed view from both patios, kitchen and LR windows.
all the 09 units are 3/2 1/2 units

We booked a rental last night that is in Port Isabel. Turns out it is down the street from Everyday Astronaut's broadcast studio with basically the same view.