Not really anything new that folks on here aren't already tracking but a pretty good behind the scenes look.

Scott Manley, not directly space related, but interesting how easy this is today, so I figured I'd add some of my own commentary.

This technology should not be so easily implemented by anyone in the US. To me, this is scarier than anything about some nut job getting a gun; we have an open Biden-border and terrorists pouring over it with no control over their access to (illegal) anti-aircraft weapons/manpads. It's only a matter of time, imho.

What do we see for the future of manned spaceflight in the US given that the dems plan to tank our economy is working?

I think Artemis has maybe 5 years at most. It has ongoing congressional support, but is plagued by extreme cost overruns, delays, and cannot compete with what Starship will become. Not even Apollo lasted more than 5 years after Apollo 11. But SLS is not out yet. I think they will at least get to lunar orbit, possibly even a couple of landings using Starship. But given the cost, I don't see how it's possible to go much beyond that.

That means either the moon program is scraped, or they go with one of the more obvious choices:
- Using only Starship
- Using Dragon to take crew to/from earth orbit with Starship doing the rest.

There's also talk of food shortages and I think this recession is going to be a deep one. Given that, do you think the lunar program will be scrapped or will they go with one of the other options? If it is scrapped, will SpaceX do it alone? Or will NASA continue its slow progress towards building lunar gateway and a permanent lunar base?

How resilient do you think Artemis is to upcoming administrations? Notwithstanding economy problems, it seems to have support on both sides of the aisle.

Artemis has contractors in each of the 50 states, it's the perfect poison pill to ensure continued funding, excepting for a RUD on the pad or something like that.

bthotugigem05 said:

---

Artemis has contractors in each of the 50 states, it's the perfect poison pill to ensure continued funding, excepting for a RUD on the pad or something like that.

---

So did Apollo, yet still only lasted 5 years past Apollo11. What is their goal in getting to the moon? If you look up Artemis, their goal is a joke:

Quote:

---

With Artemis missions, NASA will land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon, using innovative technologies to explore more of the lunar surface than ever before. We will collaborate with commercial and international partners and establish the first long-term presence on the Moon. Then, we will use what we learn on and around the Moon to take the next giant leap: sending the first astronauts to Mars.

---

What is #1 on their mission statement? Land the first woman and first person of color on the moon? WTH... That is THE primary focus of going to the moon? Will dems get that part done and say mission accomplished. We're done? If the main goal is not to put a long term base on the moon, I think the moon program will end quickly.

Looks like sn24 may have had some issues on the test stand with TPS and internal structures over the last couple days?

I also didn't realize starliner had the docking ring issue near the station, nor that there seems to be some questions about final parachute certification?

The heatshield rumors about dragon seems to have been squashed( I knew it was false when ib3 said it was for obvious reasons), inthought the press might try to run with that to get Musk.

The lack of be-4s continues to be disturbing. Vulcan-centaur is a very important vehicle for national security payloads, and at this point I would almost be supportive of some govt funding towards ULA to investigate alternative engine proposals. I'm curious if any existing designs could be adapted to meth/lox operation (the actual engineering differences in operation are a bit above my physics and engineering knowledge) ? The AR-1 is on the table, but unless it can be adapted to run methane at a comparable performance, the redesign of the fuselage will kill the idea in principle, as well as replacement of GSE.

Hermeus Sounds like it got it's next round of funding, and is moving forward with some demonstrator (scaled) production.

New investors @founderfund and In-Q-Tel also participated alongside existing investors @khoslaventures, @canaanpartners, @blingcapital, and @riseoftherest

— Hermeus (@hermeuscorp) March 10, 2022

They've renamed the ultimate passenger model (hopeful…) Halcyon.

The lessons learned from development, flight test, airworthiness, and operations of Darkhorse will inform how we develop our commercial passenger aircraft Halcyon pic.twitter.com/OZMn1HlcuW

— Hermeus (@hermeuscorp) March 10, 2022

On the crew dragon heat shield, it was apparently a structure behind the actual heat shield (carbon composite) that failed inspection and is going to get the shield replaced prior to it flying again. This (structural, not the part that is replaced/refurbished) part must have cracked/had an anomaly of some sort;
[url=https://appel.nasa.gov/2010/10/17/40s_space-x-html/][/url]

Full statement here pic.twitter.com/P0cQ5fZVgQ

— Loren Grush (@lorengrush) May 24, 2022

Yeah, if my butt was to sit in that thing hitting the atmosphere at 28K mph, I'd want it in tip top shape.

Also, Dreamchaser is supposed to be on the 2nd Vulcan Centaur launch, to happen next year now:

Weigel: The second Vulcan flight, carrying the first @SierraSpaceCo cargo Dream Chaser to the ISS, is currently scheduled for February 2023.

"We'll be ready when they're ready."

— Michael Sheetz (@thesheetztweetz) May 17, 2022

Anyway, ULA's Tory Bruno says they are good on the RD-180 inventory to finish off the old Atlas':

I accelerated the delivery of the last RD180s last year and have all we need to fly out Atlas in a warehouse in Alabama. https://t.co/uN5rl6y5sR

— Tory Bruno (@torybruno) May 20, 2022

By popular demand, a clearer view. #VulcanRocket
(that "small' tank next to it is a Delta IV...) pic.twitter.com/AMn3Doy0ft

— Tory Bruno (@torybruno) May 5, 2022

He's a pretty funny guy/follow on Twitter, fyi.

Classified. But I can share that it involves a very large decoy nut https://t.co/VSSTWVxBFU

— Tory Bruno (@torybruno) May 8, 2022

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Looks like sn24 may have had some issues on the test stand with TPS and internal structures over the last couple days?

I also didn't realize starliner had the docking ring issue near the station, nor that there seems to be some questions about final parachute certification?

The heatshield rumors about dragon seems to have been squashed( I knew it was false when ib3 said it was for obvious reasons), inthought the press might try to run with that to get Musk.

The lack of be-4s continues to be disturbing. Vulcan-centaur is a very important vehicle for national security payloads, and at this point I would almost be supportive of some govt funding towards ULA to investigate alternative engine proposals. I'm curious if any existing designs could be adapted to meth/lox operation (the actual engineering differences in operation are a bit above my physics and engineering knowledge) ? The AR-1 is on the table, but unless it can be adapted to run methane at a comparable performance, the redesign of the fuselage will kill the idea in principle, as well as replacement of GSE.

---

I wasn't saying there wasn't an issue with the heat shield. Just that it wasn't something to worry about because if there were public rumors you could be sure that NASA was aware of the issue and working it (and that SpaceX was already planning to swap heat shields.) ;-)

Parachutes are extremely challenging in general and capsules are very sensitive to landing velocities (horizontal as well as vertical) and impact angles. Land landings are obviously less forgiving than at sea. These concerns are something to keep an eye out for and may never go away because chute models aren't as precise as many other types of models and testing and flight experience may not see the wind gusts at just the right magnitude and frequency to induce instability, for lack of a better term.

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Looks like sn24 may have had some issues on the test stand with TPS and internal structures over the last couple days?

I also didn't realize starliner had the docking ring issue near the station, nor that there seems to be some questions about final parachute certification?

The heatshield rumors about dragon seems to have been squashed( I knew it was false when ib3 said it was for obvious reasons), inthought the press might try to run with that to get Musk.

The lack of be-4s continues to be disturbing. Vulcan-centaur is a very important vehicle for national security payloads, and at this point I would almost be supportive of some govt funding towards ULA to investigate alternative engine proposals. I'm curious if any existing designs could be adapted to meth/lox operation (the actual engineering differences in operation are a bit above my physics and engineering knowledge) ? The AR-1 is on the table, but unless it can be adapted to run methane at a comparable performance, the redesign of the fuselage will kill the idea in principle, as well as replacement of GSE.

---

I've been banging the "I'm not convinced Starship's TPS will work" pot for a while now, and this latest batch of flying tiles has done zilch to make me feel better.

With regards to the BE-4 thing, absolutely NO to govt funding for a new rocket engine. The only govt intervention I want is a FULL ****ING IRS DRIVEN AUDIT of Tory Bruno and every other decision maker that said "yes, we will trust Blue Origin to make this new, vitally important rocket engine even though they have NEVER DONE SOMETHING LIKE THIS BEFORE". I want to know how much Bezos spent to buy that decision, because that's the only explanation I can come up with for them choosing BO over Aerojet-Rocketdyne. I want the emails where they discussed the decision with engineers. And if ULA has to come up with a new rocket engine for Vulcan, then that needs to come directly from their pockets. What an absolute disaster.

This came out recently, and is ok, but I've read that it's supposed to be survivable even if some fall off.



It's benefit, in this instance from my limited non-aerospace eng. degree, is that it is so massive, the load on each tile/square inch is lower, thermally, and it slows down earlier/higher in the re-entry than, for instance a capsule or the space shuttle.

Elon has also hinted/said he wants to really decrease the upper flap sizes (or even delete them). Not sure if that is going to happen but I think they have some redundancy with the small tiles, and fiberglass behind them to have confidence it is aerodynamically/thermodynamically not a crazy concept.

Oh I know. I just happen to be the biggest pessimist in the world.

Also, FAA announced this morning that the PEA release has been delayed 2 more weeks to June 13. Not that anyone is surprised...

A certain poster on TA got to work on the Orion (I think) parachutes. Just saying…

Oh boy.

NASA has selected two companies to provide its first new spacesuits in four decades, and it’s a pretty big deal. https://t.co/Duu17o6fpV

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) June 1, 2022

Quote:

---

The winners

Axiom Space is already building its own private space station, and its chief executive, Mike Suffredini, said Wednesday that the company's customers definitely want to do spacewalks. The contract award means that Axiom will be able to hire 300 additional employees to work on the spacesuit project, which now must also operate in the dusty environment on the surface of the Moon. Axiom's partners include KBR, Air-Lock, the David Clark Company, and Paragon Space Development Corporation.

"It's fantastic to have a partnership where you can benefit from the years of experience that NASA has, and all the work they've done to advance the design to where it is today," Suffredini said. "And then us as a commercial company can come in and work with them to build it in a way that's lowest cost so that we can both utilize the suit to meet our needs."

The other winner was Collins Aerospace, which will lead a team that includes ILC Dover and Oceaneering. These three companies have experience building spacesuits, with Collins designing the Apollo spacesuits used during the first Moon landings. While Collins does not have a private space station, it plans to offer its suits to other companies planning to build them in low Earth orbit, said Dan Burbank, senior technical fellow for the company.

The companies beat out a lot of other bidders for this opportunity. More than 40 firms were listed as "interested parties" when NASA first announced the private spacesuit program, formally known as the Exploration Extravehicular Activity Services, or xEVAS, contract. Blue Origin, Honeywell Aerospace, Leidos, Sierra Space, and SpaceX were among the other interested parties.

---

So, not spacex. These are pretty complicated, not real disappointed SpaceX won't be committed to throwing more engineering resources at this.

300 people to develop a spacesuit?

I feel like if this were a college competition you would get 10+ concepts from teams of 20-30 students.

bmks270 said:

---

300 people to develop a spacesuit?

I feel like if this were a college competition you would get 10+ concepts from teams of 20-30 students.

---

Not surprising that ILC and David/Clark got the nod given they each have 60 years experience building suits. I'm just surprised they didn't go with one legacy vendor and one new space vendor.

bmks270 said:

---

300 people to develop a spacesuit?

I feel like if this were a college competition you would get 10+ concepts from teams of 20-30 students.

---

This piqued my curiosity, and it's actually a very complex engineering problem. For instance, in a pressurized suit, moving may change the internal volume, and thus pressure, in the suit. That means you face constant resistance if you do anything the decrease volume, and even small movements may become physically taxing over time. Then there's life support, eating and drinking, materials science for suit longevity in extreme conditions, weight, visibility, dexterity (feeling things through the gloves and moving fingers), etc.

Also, holy **** the cost of a spacesuit! The suits NASA bought in 1974 were about $100 million each in today's dollars. I understand why, but I had no idea that were that expensive.

Ship 24 cryogenic proof testing has begun.https://t.co/9tCZafcbaB pic.twitter.com/FXte9NYWQx

— Michael Baylor (@nextspaceflight) June 2, 2022

I'm an idiot.

Explain how internal volume would change on an airtight container.

I'll try. It's like squeezing a balloon from the inside.

OnlyForNow said:

---

I'm an idiot.

Explain how internal volume would change on an airtight container.

---

We learned a lot on Gemini 9 with Gene Cernan's space walk. You can see him talk about it some here at 30:09 through the end of the video, but I read much more about it in his autobiography. It's quite a story.


Ed White was the first American astronaut to walk in space. His mission was easy. Just float out there for 15 minutes and come back in. In Cernan's mission, he actually had to do some work outside. That's where we learned how much we didn't know about space walks.

His suit was very stiff. He was practicing gripping tennis balls to get his hand strength up because the pressure in his suite fought against him closing his grip.

There was very little to grab on to out there, and he was flailing all over the place. His heart rate skyrocketed, and his visor fogged up. He was in a very dangerous situation. Then when he tried to reenter the capsule, it was very difficult because of the pressure in the suit. Mission Control discussed contingency options to reenter the atmosphere without Cernan on board. Faced with a life or death situation, he found the strength to get himself inside the capsule.

Afterwards he came up with numerous suggestions to improve the suit, add handholds, and neutral buoyancy training (NBL).

Buzz Aldrin was the beneficiary to all this experience and training and he made it look like a cake walk, and was like "what's the big deal Gene?".

Squeezing a ballon even from the inside wouldn't change its volumetric capacity, unless it's untied.


Change matters arrangement inside sure, but that's a lot different than changing the volume.

Are we talking about two different things or am I not really understanding what's going on.

Honest question.

Does it talk about how it was difficult, to renter the capsule? Like he was weak and couldn't move the suit, or there was like a pressure wave difference between the capsule and space meaning a lot of wind rushing out pushing him back physically. Hence why "air locks" are a thing I assume I reality and not just sci-fi.

OnlyForNow said:

---

Squeezing a ballon even from the inside wouldn't change its volumetric capacity, unless it's untied.


Change matters arrangement inside sure, but that's a lot different than changing the volume.

Are we talking about two different things or am I not really understanding what's going on.

Honest question.

---

Actually balloons stretch. Spacesuits don't. So it's more like you have a balloon made of stiff fabric. It's not going to want to bend too easily, and if you do, you'll be kinking it and increasing pressure on the inside.

It has nothing to do with air tightness

Wear a long sleeve shirt and rotate the cuff on one of the sleeves. It will tighten over your arm as you do it, and you'll neither the volume of the sleeve has shrunk.


Take two rings with strings tied from one to the other to form a cylinder. Twist one 180 degrees. Now you have two cones joined at their tips with a combined volume much less than the original cylinder.

OnlyForNow said:

---

Does it talk about how it was difficult, to renter the capsule? Like he was weak and couldn't move the suit, or there was like a pressure wave difference between the capsule and space meaning a lot of wind rushing out pushing him back physically. Hence why "air locks" are a thing I assume I reality and not just sci-fi.

---

I couldn't find the book unfortunately (that's really annoying), but I found this

Quote:

---

As soon as Stafford and Cernan depressurized the spacecraft and opened the hatch above Cernan's head, he immediately discovered how difficult it was to move. His pressure suit was hard as rock in the space vacuum and his lower half was almost immobilized by the metallic "pants." In his memoirs he described his spacesuit as having "all the flexibility of a rusty suit of armor." Tasked with evaluating the dynamics of moving around with the umbilical that carried his oxygen and communications, he was already becoming exhausted and sweaty the circulation of oxygen around the head and body was the only cooling mechanism in the Gemini suit. He then moved to the back of the spacecraft and tried to don the AMU. Fighting the suit and lacking proper handholds and footholds, Cernan found the task nearly impossible.

Finally, he made all the required connections, but he was sweating so profusely his visor fogged over. He could only use the tip of his nose to rub out a small zone of visibility. His heart began racing dangerously. Rather than letting him fly the AMU, Stafford ordered him to quit. Almost blind, Cernan slowly dragged himself back to the cockpit, where getting in and closing the hatch proved to be another nightmare. He was "in excruciating pain" as he bent the suit to sit down, assisted by Stafford. After a difficult struggle, they closed the hatch and repressurized after being out for two hours. When Cernan popped open his visor, he looked as red as a boiled lobster. Stafford took the water gun for drinking and rehydrating food packages and squirted him in the face, even though globules of water floated around the cockpit and could short out electronics. Before the flight, chief astronaut Deke Slayton had talked with Stafford about throwing overboard an incapacitated or dying Cernan in an emergency. Stafford later said he wouldn't have done it, but he would have had no choice.

---

So other than being difficult because the suit was so primitive, inflated and stiff, I think by that time Cernan was just exhausted.

There where one or two more failed spacewalks after Cernan, Aldrin succeeded because he helped pioneer neutral bouyancy training, and treated it more like diving. He undoubtedly learned a lot, but he also gets credit for changing the approach.

OnlyForNow said:

---

I'm an idiot.

Explain how internal volume would change on an airtight container.

---

Think about it like trying to squeeze an unopened beer can.

If you want to use the balloon analogy, let me add a variable. Cut off the leg of a pair of denim blue jeans. Put a good adhesive inside. Blow up the balloon inside the denim tube. Tie off the balloon, then seal up each end real tight against the balloon. So you've got a denim and rubber sausage casing stuffed with pressurized air. Now imagine your leg inside that sausage and try bending it. You know when you bend your knee, or elbow, or whatever, your jeans crease and fold up. But now they cannot because there's a balloon inside there.

Instructions unclear, my jean sausage balloon is in a…weird place.

Actually... since you put it that way. Yeah, pressurize it and bend it wrong. That explains it pretty well

That has nothing to do with volume though.

And I'm splitting hairs but that's my point, the volume doesn't change. Being physically difficult to move has nothing to do with volume. The volume of a space suit is "X" Liters, it doesn't change if it is working correctly in space or on earth. Pressure on the suit can certainly make it impossible to move, but it doesn't increase or decrease its volume.

OnlyForNow said:

---

That has nothing to do with volume though.

And I'm splitting hairs but that's my point, the volume doesn't change. Being physically difficult to move has nothing to do with volume. The volume of a space suit is "X" Liters, it doesn't change if it is working correctly in space or on earth. Pressure on the suit can certainly make it impossible to move, but it doesn't increase or decrease its volume.

---

Changing the shape changes the volume. Again, go put on a long sleeve shirt. Stick your arm out, grab the cuff in your hand, and rotate it. You'll notice the sleeve tighten as it wraps around your arm. That means the volume in your shirt sleeve has reduced.

Also again, think of a cylinder and twisting both ends. As you twist, the sides collapse in until they form cones. The resulting shape has less volume than the previous cylinder.

Alternatively, there's this:



As he twists the bottle, he is reducing the volume. The material and surface area have not changed.

The change in volume results in a change in pressure, so if you move, change the shape and of the suit, and reduce the volume, you are increasing the pressure, which requires work.


ETA
Being physically difficult to move is a result of changing the volume because you're now compressing the gas and changing the pressure.

Or consider this:

A 2x2x2 cube has a volume of 8 cubic units and a surface area of 24 units

You can garage the surface area to 1x1x5.5 and have the same surface area of 24 units, but a volume of only 5.5 cubic units.

You are maybe confusing volume and mass. The mass of the air in the suit is constant. The volume is not.




ETA Or consider a volleyball. When there's no air, it makes a bowl shape and the volume is basically 0. Inflate it and you have a sphere. Now return it to the bowl shape. Obviously the volume is less. The mass of air is still the same. You've had to work extremely hard to compress that mass.

OnlyForNow said:

---

Does it talk about how it was difficult, to renter the capsule? Like he was weak and couldn't move the suit, or there was like a pressure wave difference between the capsule and space meaning a lot of wind rushing out pushing him back physically. Hence why "air locks" are a thing I assume I reality and not just sci-fi.

---

Gemini had no airlock. Both crew wore space suits and they depressurized the whole cabin. Same for Apollo when they did spacewalks.

I'm thinking of the suit having a positive outward pressure keeping it "stuffed" full of air and astronaut.

What you're saying is that the pressure of space is decreasing the potential volume of the space suit by exerting outside forces acting on the malleable suit.