
New Spacesuit Unveiled for Starliner Astronauts - daegloe
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-spacesuit-unveiled-for-starliner-astronauts
======
mbenjaminsmith
I think it's generally agreed upon that the Space Shuttle program was
needlessly wasteful and more PR- than science-driven. A heavy space plane has
zero advantages over a capsule for most work done in LEO. It's good to see
this renewed focus on more practical designs.

(If that's incorrect and you're qualified to correct me please do.)

 _Having said that_ , the name Starliner writes a check that a manned capsule
won't ever be able to cash. This is the first time I've heard of Boeing's
Starliner and it got me really, really excited until I pulled up a picture of
it. They really should have picked a less grandiose name.

~~~
grinich
Shuttle flew a decent number of missions for the National Reconnaissance
Office, conducting secret experiments and deploying spy satellites. Most of
the missions are still classified, but many folks have said the military needs
drove the design of the Shuttle program. There are pretty obvious advantages
to a spaceplane if your goals include capture of enemy satellites.
[http://www.space.com/34522-secret-shuttle-
missions.html](http://www.space.com/34522-secret-shuttle-missions.html)

It turns out a lot of science space research is heavily driven by military
space presence. For example, Hubble has a 2.4m mirror because there was
already a factory making that size for dozens of spy satellite.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-11_Kennen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KH-11_Kennen)

And ever heard of "The Dish" at Stanford? It's a 150-foot radio telescope the
US Air Force funded during the Cold War to ostensibly "study the chemical
composition of the atmosphere." Total BS. The Air Force built it to intercept
signals from Soviet radar systems after they bounced off the moon.

(Thankfully Stanford got to keep it and it's been used for hundreds of
projects since then.)

~~~
creshal
Retrieval of objects in space and bringing them back to Earth is about the
_only_ mission where the Space Shuttle was superior to capsule designs. This
was also used in a handful of science missions for studying long-term exposure
of various materials.

But the vast majority of the Shuttle's 130 flights would have been better
served by an Apollo or Gemini derived design.

~~~
grinich
From what I've read, Shuttle also did quite a bit of satellite repair (like
fixing Hubble). And the orbiter's cargo bay certainly was useful to transport
many parts of the ISS.

The Department of Defense still actively uses a spaceplane-ish vehicle. It's
just a much smaller unmanned one called the X-37b. Many folks speculate it's
used to repair and refuel spy satellites, and potentially even rendezvous with
and and hack enemy satellites.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37)

Generally I totally agree though-- capsule design makes way more sense for
anything leaving or reentering atmosphere. The upcoming Orion are clearly in
that directly.

~~~
creshal
> From what I've read, Shuttle also did quite a bit of satellite repair (like
> fixing Hubble)

It did, but a capsule can do the job just fine too – for JWST, it is (or was)
planned to do repairs using the Orion capsule and a mission module docked to
it.

> And the orbiter's cargo bay certainly was useful to transport many parts of
> the ISS.

Kinda, yes. But an unmanned rocket could have done the same job, and likely
cheaper than the Shuttle.

Most of the civilian Shuttle missions could have been easily served by other,
much cheaper craft – but who knows what happened during the classified ones,
it might actually have been cheaper to the taxpayer at large (if not NASA) to
have one craft to serve both roles.

> The Department of Defense still actively uses a spaceplane-ish vehicle. It's
> just a much smaller unmanned one called the X-37b. Many folks speculate it's
> used to repair and refuel spy satellites, and potentially even rendezvous
> with and and hack enemy satellites.
> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37)

We don't really know, but given how little fuel capacity it has and how long
it stays in orbit, it's more likely that the DoD's stated purpose of long-
endurance testing of new spy hardware is true.

~~~
dotancohen
The X-37 has demonstrated over ten times the delta V of the space shuttle. Why
do you assert that it a limited fuel capacity?

~~~
LeifCarrotson
If the rumor is that it's being used to refuel satellites, there are two
considerations:

1\. Can it get to many satellites? Yes, it has good delta V, though I think
you're mixing the X-37's delta V with its boosters and the delta V of the
Shuttle orbiter without its SRBs and external tank.

2\. Can it carry fuel for those satellites? No, not much. The X-37 has a
maximum total takeoff weight of 5000 kg, while the Shuttle can get 27000 kg to
LEO. Unfortunately, only one X-37 will _fit in the payload bay_ of the
Shuttle, so we can't actually lift five X-37s in the Shuttle.

Many large satellites weigh more than the X-37's total mass. The biggest
individual consumer, the ISS, requires about 7000 kg of fuel annually to stay
in orbit. A KC-135 in-air refueling tanker is much faster than an oceangoing
supertanker, but you wouldn't use the former to empty an oil rig!

~~~
grinich
The ISS needs that much fuel to boost it's altitude due to drag in LEO. But
the refueling of satellites by the X-37 is hypothesized to be at much higher
altitudes where there is very little drag.

These satellites don't need altitude boosts-- they use propellant for orbital
changes (e.g. to "re-task" a spy satellite to a new region). But instead of
chemical rockets they often use xenon gas ion engines.

The key thing with ion drives is their "specific impulse." High-thrust
chemical rockets are needed to get out of the atmosphere and perform fast
burns, but ion engines are often >10x more efficient once already in orbit.
And because there isn't a chemical reaction, there is less corrosion and they
can last for years.

Refueling xenon for the ion drives of spy satellites would double or triple
their mission lifespan. They don't need much -- maybe just a couple hundred
kg. And this could literally save billions of dollars since these satellites
are so expensive to build.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_impulse#Examples](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_impulse#Examples)

------
The_Magistrate
These are just suits meant for in-vehicle use and not meant for EVAs, correct?

~~~
DavidSJ
Correct. I don't think Starliner has any EVA capability in fact.

~~~
rbanffy
If your EVA is really short (and really, really, really needed), I imagine
these will do.

~~~
dotancohen
That would probably be an EVOS rather than an EVA.

------
luckystartup
These are still not very cool. Why is there such a big disconnect between
Hollywood movies, and these real space suits? I mean, even the shade of blue
isn't particularly nice. If this was a toy, I don't think it would sell very
well.

I know it doesn't really matter and the function is far more important than
the aesthetics. But still... can they hire some of these Hollywood guys?

I think Elon Musk has the right idea:
[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3573869/Elon-...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3573869/Elon-
Musk-wants-create-superhero-astronauts-SpaceX-hires-Marvel-costume-designer-
make-spacesuit-Mars.html)

I do think these NASA suits are getting better, though:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_series_space_suits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_series_space_suits)

~~~
mynameisvlad
Because Hollywood movies are not generally based in, you know, reality.
They're meant to be flashy and futuristic because that is what the audience
expects in sci-fi movies. Real life isn't flashy and futuristic, though, and
there's a lot of requirements to the suits which aren't super exciting.

So, yknow, good thing it's not a toy but a functional piece of clothing that's
supposed to help astronauts do their job.

~~~
thret
PR is certainly part of their job. I think OT has a point.

~~~
mynameisvlad
Not really. Their job is to keep astronauts safe. Glitz and glam don't keep
astronauts safe, boring does.

Flashy lights and colors will most likely distract the astronauts in flight.

~~~
njharman
Without PR, there is no public interest, no funding, and no astronauts in
flight needing protection.

Why do you think there is big announcement, press event if not for PR?

~~~
Retric
PR is other peoples jobs, just not the people designing a suit. IMO, critical
safety systems are reasonable exceptions to the PR game.

------
richardboegli
Boeing's announcement:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13484880](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13484880)

------
keypusher
What is the benefit of having the helmet attached to the suit directly instead
of detachable like the existing suits? If I was spending months in one of
these aboard the space station, I think I would prefer to not have the helmet
flopping around behind me all the time.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
Perhaps just so that it's there if you need it?

~~~
keypusher
Maybe they could put it on a leash.

------
ChuckMcM
So I assume the starliner has touch screens too, when I saw those on the
Dragon Crew I thought "Gee how are they going to use those in gloves?" Sking
and trying to use your phone is challenging this is just flying through space
:-).

While not EVA suits they presumably work during a depressurization event so I
wonder if they are candidates for mars suits.

~~~
kalleboo
Resistive touch screens still exist, and would probably still be preferable
from a reliability point of view (I have all kinds of troubles with capacitive
screens when there's sweat, humidity, low temperatures, etc)

~~~
ChuckMcM
Oddly I've found resistive touchscreens to be _less_ reliable but anecdotes
are not data so it could just be I'm unlucky.

One of the interesting things I also find is that using a touch screen on
CalTrain while it bounces around is difficult, I can't imagine what it will be
like to hit the correct control button on the touch screen of a rocket under
boost.

------
tmsldd
Put the zipper to the front side. You could wear it alone without asking for
help from another astronaut and save time in case of emergencies.

~~~
Luc
You think the issue of where to put the zipper didn't come up in the thousands
of man-hours it took to design that thing?

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
Design by committee?

In which case the zipper is definitely in the least practical place.

Anyway, it's an interesting question that possibly has some story to it which
would be interesting to hear.

~~~
Luc
> In which case the zipper is definitely in the least practical place.

Argh! How would we even know it's in the least practical place? Is it because
you don't put on your coat that way?

These things are not designed with the same constraints. Getting into a space
suit is a slow deliberate process, with people there to help.

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
I can think of at least one edge case where things might be different.

Emergency re-entry, time to put on your suit, but everyone else is dead.

But anyway, I'm just saying it would be _interesting_ to know why certain
design decisions were made, what trade-offs were considered, requirement
constraints.

Saying something like _you reckon they didn 't think of that_ doesn't _add_ to
the conversation.

------
bjd2385
The photo made me wonder if NASA had consulted Nike's marketing department.

~~~
lorenzhs
The shoes are Reeboks, not Nikes. I'm not even kidding:
[http://www.boeing.com/space/starliner/](http://www.boeing.com/space/starliner/)
(scroll down to the suit and click the plus next to the shoe)

------
quotha
"The most important part is that the suit will keep you alive"

That's more important than the color of the suit.

------
transfire
Next time they might want to consider hiring a professional seamstress.

------
santaclaus
> Touchscreen-sensitive gloves

So... has anyone rocked some snapchat during a spacewalk yet?

~~~
froindt
Who knew this is how exciting the future would be: Snapchat in space! Maybe
they could make the claim of "First app used by a human in a vacuum and micro-
gravity".

All the startups in Silicon Valley are vying for that. /s

~~~
dotancohen
[https://xkcd.com/713/](https://xkcd.com/713/)

------
flippyhead
They should have hired Hollywood to do the designs.

~~~
coldcode
The same people who wrote Armageddon? Reality and Hollywood are two unrelated
concepts.

