Old Spacesuits are Potential Satellites

SpaceAdmiral writes "In order to determine if old spacesuits can be effective satellites, the crew on the International Space Station will be throwing one overboard on February 3rd. The SuitSat will transmit information about its condition and, if you happen to have a ham radio or a police scanner, you can tune in when it passes your city! You can use NASA's J-Pass utility to determine when it will pass above you."

Comments

Is this wise?

[TripMaster Monkey]

Given the alarming problem of space junk, is this a really wise thing to do?

After all, the problem is so severe that Slashdot had two stories on it in four days. Honestly, aren't the NASA folks even reading Slashdot anymore? ^_^

Re:Is this wise?

[joshjoneswas]

Hey but this space junk comes back to earth a few days later in a huge fiery show! So I guess you could say its space junk, but very short lived.

I hope it comes near my town... Been a little cold lately.

Re:Is this wise?

[jbrader]

Well presumably these suits would be doing a job up there. Meaning that some object is going to be in that orbit anyway. And, since this is a working satellite we're talking about it's orbit will be known and it will be tracked, so it's not really space junk at all.

Re:Is this wise?

[Spy der Mann]

Well, maybe K'Breel will think humans can now live in space :P

BTW, what happened to your Mars "Late news" articles? I missed today's :(

Re:Is this wise?

[Kadin2048]

If you read the article (yeah, yeah, I know -- fat chance) they said that the suit is being put into an orbit that will cause re-entry within a few months.

The only time when it would be "space junk" would be between the time when its batteries fail (after a "few days") and when it re-enters ("few months"). Given its size and known orbit, I don't think that's exactly going to be a daunting task to track and avoid.

Re:Is this wise?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd just like to thank you for once again proving my theory that any post by you is fundamentally wrong. Thanks Tripmaster Monkey.

Re:Is this wise?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you read the article (yeah, yeah, I know -- fat chance)

He did get first post, though. Then again, you'd think that since he pays for a subscription so he can read the article early that he'd have time to read it and get first post. But, after all, this is SpankMaster Monkey we're talking about.

I just wonder about the people who mod that insightful.

Oh, Mr. Monkey! I make you fishball soup! Fishball!

Re:Is this wise?

[aliscool]

More like a few months for the re-entry. But it may make an impressive light show.

During the Christmas break last year my family and I vacationed camping in the Mojave desert near Edwards Air Force base. (California)

For three mights in a row we were treated to awesome night start gazing and many shooting stars and passing satelites.

We were all excited watching one particular satelite cross the sky, when it turned around and headed back the direction it came. Way cool.

Obviously some super damn fast Air Force whatever jet was out for the evening.

Very cool.

Re:Is this wise?

[1shoonya0]

Isn't junk still junk even if you know where it is?

Re:Is this wise?

[Ced_Ex]

It's going to look like the Human Torch flying across the sky upon re-entry. Kids everywhere will think that the Fantastic Four movie was actually reality tv.

Re:Is this wise?

[Andrzej Sawicki]

Apparently not in space.

You'll hear it say:

[Anonymous Coward]

Why! Why was I programmed to feel pain?

Space, The Final Landfill

[ackthpt]

In order to determine if old spacesuits can be effective satellites, the crew on the International Space Station will be throwing one overboard on February 3rd.

Man! The lengths NASA will go to to shave expenses! They could bring it home, but nnnnooooooo, they're going to just chuck it and further clutter space! Oh, sure, they're clever, they'll pass this off as some official test (by loading the suit up with a bunch of other old junk from the ISS such as radios, empty TV Dinner In A Tube containers, stinky space diapers and a redundant Machine That Goes 'Ping' to lure every Thomas, Richard and Herrance to listen in or watch with their telescope, but it's really just a Dump-n-Run.

now with this eyepiece and just a bit finer focus .. yes .. yes, i can just make out the nike swoosh on it, so it's an advertising vehicle, too!

Any aliens visiting earth will easily determine that NASA was one of the earth's chief ethically-challenged waste disposal companies.

Zort, is that an antenna or is it glad to see us?

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[GlassUser]

Man! The lengths NASA will go to to shave expenses! They could bring it home, but nnnnooooooo, they're going to just chuck it and further clutter space!

If they really just wanted to get rid of it, I'm sure someone could toss it down to earth. I doubt any would survive reentry.

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[ackthpt]

If they really just wanted to get rid of it, I'm sure someone could toss it down to earth. I doubt any would survive reentry.

Traditionally, NASA have warned us that anything which did survive re-entry is potentially toxic and should be handled by experts.

it's probably the flaming remains of space diapers they they want to keep off eBay

801234547 LQQK - NASA Space debris!! RARE!

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[Gothmolly]

And since it will burn up in re-entry, who gives a crap?

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[njchick]

I wonder what's the optimal direction to throw stuff so that it reenters the atmosphere as soon as possible. Should it be straight down or horizontally in the direction opposite to the orbital movement of the station? Or maybe something in between?

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[Dunbal]

The lengths NASA will go to to shave expenses!

      That's the accountants thinking for ya. They figure that since the payload cost is $10,000 per kg, if they land the shuttle without the suit then it will only cost half as much...

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[leshert]

If you just want to get it into the atmosphere as quickly as possible, and if the amount of energy you can put into it is fixed, then you want straight down. No other direction will have as much magnitude in the vertical axis as straight down, after all.

On the other hand, if your goal is to get it to burn up, then you definitely don't want to get it into the atmosphere as quickly as possible--you want it in the atmosphere as long as you can keep it there without the temperature going below the flash point of whatever you're littering. Watch Apollo 13 for a colorful example of why (although they were trying to avoid what you're trying to do).

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[elgatozorbas]

I wonder what's the optimal direction to throw stuff so that it reenters the atmosphere as soon as possible. Should it be straight down or horizontally in the direction opposite to the orbital movement of the station? Or maybe something in between?

If they were standing still it would be easy (apart from the annoying fact that they would fall themselves): throw it straight down. Them moving doesn't change it, they still need to throw it such that its velocity is directly towards the Earth, which means they need to throw it a bit backwards (and down).

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[krysolid]

I think the problem with that is that if you do not decrease
the straight ahead velocity vector it will pop right back up
because it will skip off the atmosphere.

you have to stop it, you cannot just shove it down, or out,
or forward of backward ... it must lose energy, so unless
you can shove it down so hard and fast that you push it into
the atmoshere and it slows down, it will pop up again, or
if you push it backwards it will just assume a lower orbit
unless the atmostphere interferes.

the answer is ... if you had to throw you ... you could not
do it.

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[krysolid]

You cannot get there from here.

Let's neglect atmosphere. Anyway you throw it you just
give it an impulse that alters its energy state, ie.
momentum.

forward: you push it to a higher orbit by adding to
  its momentum.

backward: lower orbit.

up: well, you wouldn't do this, but essentially you
  would just change the shape of the orbit.

down: same as up, except if you can shove it so hard
  that it impacts or interacts physically with the earth
  it slows down because more forces act on it.

you have to slow down using some force ... ie. the
atmosphere, without slowing down you cannot do it.

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[elgatozorbas]

you have to stop it, you cannot just shove it down, or out, or forward of backward ... it must lose energy

This does not contradict my statement. 'throwing' the suit backwards (as well as down) will lower the suit's speed and thus energy and increases your speed and thus energy.

Example: both you and the suit weigh 1 kg and move at 100 m/s (tangential to Earth because you are in orbit). Neglecting the radial speed you give to the suit (e.g. 1m/s downwards), you will 'throw' it backwards with a speed of 100m/s. The suit now stands still and because of the conservarion of momentum you will move at 200 m/h. This means that your energy has increased and the suit's has decreased.

One could now cunningly remark that you gained net energy because this is quadratic in the speed. The solution to this enigma is that you needed a source of energy to push away the suit in the first place, e.g. a compressed spring that was released. This energy, together with the energy taken from the suit is now in your spaceship.

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[scruffy]

Let's experiment by creating more space junk! Then we can increase the budget for figuring out how to deal with it!!

Brought to you by the brilliant minds at NASA!!!

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[njchick]

I'm assuming the relative speed of the object to be negligible compared to orbital velocity, so it's pretty much assured that the object will be burning as slowly as it can.

As for your argument regarding velocity, I have to disagree. Throwing the object back would result in vertical velocity futher due to the part of the Earth gravity that is not compensated by the orbital speed.

Throwing things down lowers the perigee and raises the apogee. Throwing things back lowers the perigee, keeps the apogee and increases velocity at the perigee. With the same perigee (I'm not sure it will be the same), objects with higher apogee will pass the perigee at the higher velocity, this increasing the drag. On the other hand, higher apogee means that the object will spend less time at lower altitudes. Finally, higher apogee will mean longer orbital period, but this is probably negligible.

Now I'm quite sure that the answer is "somewhere in between" :-)

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[krysolid]

maybe i was misled by your use of the word throw.

the object in orbit is continually falling, but moving
away from the center of the system.

the object is going on 1 direction ... it has horizontal
velocity, when you remove that it will fall due to gravity.

so, if you could both stop the object, meaning throw it
backwards so that it stops rotating relative to the center
of the system it will start falling.

additionally, if you can impart momentum towards that center
then it will "fall" even faster.

since there is no way in hell a "throw" from a any person
would conceivably have enough force to stop an object from
orbiting regardless of which way you "throw" it, I just
thought that would be funny to mention.

If you are in orbit, and all you can do is throw something
I think you are stuck there was my point, which perhaps did
not address your question.

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[saskboy]

Just wait until we start blasting spent nuclear fuel into the Sun. The the Space-environment hippies will really let us have it!

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[ackthpt]

Just wait until we start blasting spent nuclear fuel into the Sun. The the Space-environment hippies will really let us have it!

The strongest, and most rational argument I've heard against this idea is what may be the fallout if there's a launch problem. Potential harm far outweighs the benefit of sending it to the moon or sun.

Re:Space, The Final Landfill

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt any would survive reentry.

Unless, of course, they were Chuck Norris.

I submitted this back on Dec 4, 2005

[windowpain]

It's in my journal. Nice to see it finally run.

Re:I submitted this back on Dec 4, 2005

[kfg]

Finally? They likely didn't run it to avoid a dupe. We've been here before.

KFG

Right.

[jb.hl.com]

if you happen to have a ham radio or a police scanner

Because everyone has one of those...

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

c'mon they aren't that uncommon. Pick one up at your local radioshack for $149.

Re:Right.

[topham]

I do, why don't you?

I have a PRO-2050 (TrunkTracker 800Mhz) from Radio Shack, it support the 149.990 frequency they will be broadcasting on. Most scanners probably do.

Re:Right.

[Requiem Aristos]

> it support the 149.990 frequency they will be broadcasting on

Except they won't be broadcasting on 149.990. (You might want to check the article again before you get to enjoy the sound of faint static in the morning.)

Re:Right.

[topham]

... 145.990 MHz.

Ok, ok, off by a few zeros. Left the Mhz off by mistake.

Re:Right.

[Anonymous Coward]

Three million people worldwide have ham radio licenses. If there were 20 folks with scanners per ham, that'd make for 60,000,000, or the entire population of France, with scanners.

Re:Right.

[finkployd]

Actually about every geek I know has one or the other.

Actually you just need a reciever capable of picking up FM signals on 145.990, that isn't that hard to built.

Finkployd

Re:Right.

[mabinogi]

"You can tune in on your ham radio or police scanner" would have made the assumption that everyone has one of those.

"if you happen to have a ham radio or a police scanner, you can tune in..." (emphasis mine) clearly implies that not everyone has one - even possibly implies that having one would be the exception, not the rule.....

It's not the submitters fault you failed reading comprehension...

Re:Right.

[eclectro]

Because everyone has one of those...

Hey, were all nerds here, many who have ham radio experience or enough of a technical background to find a radio/scanner easily.

Except you. Please turn in the nerd card that was sent to you by mistake as you leave. Thanks.

Re:Right.

[Gordonjcp]

Yup. You could build a nice little super-regenerative receiver with maybe two or three transistors and some passives. The two nice things about that is a) they're very very simple, and b) they're not very selective - they pick up a fairly broad range of frequencies. So, no worries about Doppler as the satellite passes overhead.

Hang a decent preamp and antenna off it and you should be able to hear everything going.

You've got a week to build it all. Plenty time.

Re:Right.

[finkployd]

I prefer direct conversion myself (regen is a pain to work with). A little more complicated (especially at that frequency) but still doable.

Finkployd

Satellites

[jerkmark]

The last time I checked, satellites could be used as effective satellites.

Re:Satellites

[Jordan Thomas]

Really...what do think they are going to achieve with this? Of course it will work, but it is completely and totally useless.

Re:Satellites

[jbrader]

Why is it useless? If it turns out to work well then old suits could be used as an inexpensive platform for space experiments, perhaps for use by universities and organizations that can't otherwise afford the enormous costs of building a satallite. Also, if you need to launch an experiment that's designed to orbit for a short time then crash when it's done why go through all the bother and expense of designing something from scratch when you can just load up one of these? Plus, these suits are really expensive it seems pretty wastful to just toss them out when they've reached the point where they're no longer fit to be used by astronauts.

Re:Satellites

[number6mt]

No...the point is to put Major Tom in that suit and see if the song is really true!

Re:Satellites

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, this is a good endurance test for space suites in the harshness of space for prolonged periods of time. How long before the suit crumbles due to radiation or hitting space junk or whatever (unless it falls out of orbit first).

Carnival Time!

[Un pobre guey]

Yay! Time to think of the stupidest things you can, and have some government agency do them! Let's beam porn from the moon! Let's make a big wind tunnel and throw french fries into it! Let's send a spacecraft to mars with 2500 people, and damn the cost!

Re:Carnival Time!

[Dunbal]

Good idea but the problem with your suggestions is that they are potentially useful, especially the one about the porn...

Re:Carnival Time!

[Angry Toad]

I can't help thinking this is damn near the case - since the station essentially does zero real scientific research now (and what it was planning to do originally was pretty darn thin to start with) it seems like they're truly scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Re:Carnival Time!

[InterruptDescriptorT]

Mars, bitches.

Re:Carnival Time!

[Anonymous Coward]

There is always the Smashing Monkey Collider (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30420)

Waiting for the Hams to protest...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just waiting for the extreme portion of the Ham community to complain/threaten because this signal is violating their radio spectrum. :)

Re:Waiting for the Hams to protest...

[Anonymous Coward]

But it is. 145.990MHz is in the 2m ham band, designed for exactly this sort of thing, and that's why they put it there. I would have been disappointed if they hadn't put it there, since that's what all my ham gear is optimized to work with.

Really now, I'm starting to wonder just WTF people think ham radio is about. THIS is exactly what it's about. Messing about with RF. I do digital, satellite, etc with it. I do not use microphones or quaint "morse code" keys to talk to people.

Re:Waiting for the Hams to protest...

[deadweight]

WTF? Hams LIKE experiments with spacecraft and satellites. There are quite a few ham satellites and a ham station aboard the ISS. We have frequencies set asside for just this kind of thing.

Re:Waiting for the Hams to protest...

[blinkin357]

Please put your profanity abbreviations away. This is not how we want the public to see hams. It's a worthwhile and interesting hobby and most use clear civil language but once-in-awhile somebody uses inappropriate language using ANONYMOUS. I appologize to all readers for the language used by Anonymous Coward who is purporting to be a ham. Regarding the suit-satellite, I'll be listening on 145.990mhz just for fun. Since this is my very first post, feel free to give me a negative score and I'll quietly go away. I'd rather be on 20 meters anyway.

Re:Space Junk

[pilgrim23]

The great lengths NASA goes to, to do laundry. Talk abotu a permanant press...

Flatulence in a Satellite?

[danratherfoe]

Okay, now I have to start telling a new joke: "Women respond to my advances with all of the enthusiasm that one would to flatulence in a Satellite".

Yeah, good thing to do

[SpacePunk]

Yes, let's just throw another piece of junk into orbit. What's one more hurtling piece of death?

Re:Yeah, good thing to do

[MyLongNickName]

FTA: Bauer expects SuitSat's batteries to last 2 to 4 days. "Although longer is possible," he allows. After that, SuitSat will begin a slow silent spiral into Earth's atmosphere. Weeks or months later, no one knows exactly when, it will become a brilliant fireball over some part of Earth--a fitting end for a trailblazer.

But ya got a +5 for your post anyhow. Congrats :)

Re:Yeah, good thing to do

[cbcanb]

But this is a *big* hurtling piece of death. If its orbit takes it too close to anything important, there'll be weeks or months of notice to move other stuff out of the way.

It's a non-issue.

Re:Yeah, good thing to do

[Anonymous Coward]

Its going to burn up in the earth's atmosphere in a few weeks.

It would have been nice if they could install a solar panel so that the batteries would last more than a few days. Maybe the current draw is too much for a panel that size.

Aboard ISS

[Billosaur]

Gee, has anybody seen Bob? His suit's not here...

Re:Aboard ISS

[DarkNemesis618]

Astronaut A: Hey, didn't we just throw that suit out?

Astronaut B: Yeah...

Astronaut A: Then what did we just throw out the airlock?

Astronaut B: Beats me, maybe we should do a headcount.

Astronaut A: Nah...whoever's not here will say something.

Should make for an interesting Telescope viewing

[LiquidCoooled]

How many calls about astronauts stranded in space are NASA going to get from concerned skywatchers?

Sufficiently low orbit.

[reality-bytes]

IIRC, due to the fairly low orbit of the ISS, anything cast overboard and not subject to a prograde burn will re-enter the Earths atmosphere in a reasonable ammount of time.

Re:Sufficiently low orbit.

[baldass_newbie]

So the atmosphere is basically an incinerator.
I guess we know where they pull all the #2 now.

Re:Sufficiently low orbit.

[everphilski]

Yup. They purge the shuttle before reentry. There was actually an "incident" where the exit port "iced" over (not water), leaving a "large chunk" (not water or chocolate ice cream) ... they worried about stability during reentry but needless to say it sublimated...

Re:Sufficiently low orbit.

[pranay]

True. But the time to re-entry depends heavily on 2 factors: The cross-section of the object (satellite/spacesuit) in the direction of motion and the time of launch.

The cross section decides the drag the object faces. At about 380-400km, which is the altitude of the ISS (and therefore, the ceiling for space-shuttle); the velocity of a satellite is about 7.67km/sec and drag from the thin ionosphere does matter significantly.

The time of launch is relevant because of the 11 year solar cycle, at the peak of which, the sun causes the atmosphere to expand. The expanded atmosphere causes the density at ISS altitude to increase.

If launched today, a small spacecraft with a mass of 30kg and cross section dia. of 1/2 meter would survive for about 3 months before it spirals down to earth.

This is one big reason LEO (low earth orbit) is used primarily for scientific and educational experiments. The low budgets available to researchers cause them to cut costs and inhibit the development of better instruments. A major expense in building a satellite is flight-qualifying it. Which is essentially testing it for thermal, vacuum, outgassing parameters and more importantly, safety to space-shuttle. Since the space-suits have already been in space, they are flight-tested and can bypass all those grueling stages.

Re:Sufficiently low orbit.

[wildsurf]

At about 380-400km, which is the altitude of the ISS (and therefore, the ceiling for space-shuttle)

Only under the ISS-only policy in the wake of Columbia. According to Wikipedia, the Shuttle's operational altitude is 185 to 1000km (100 to 520 nmi), and its maximum achieved altitude is 630km (340nmi), presumably on the missions to Hubble.

Frank Poole...

[MarcQuadra]

Frank Poole is probably rolling in his, um, satellite.

Heh

[the-amazing-blob]

Looks like the government is really getting into recycling. In the weirdest ways. Pretty cool idea they've got there.

*looks at JPass*
Holy crap that's fast. It will be in the sky for me tommorow for 10 minutes. *fetches tin foil hat*

Re:Space Junk

[jbrader]

It looks like they don't have a clue what is going to happen to this SuitSat.

That's why it's an experiment.

Wrong word?

[dada21]

Isn't the world "satellite" really a bad word in this situation?

A satellite is anything that has a stable or fairly stable orbit, isn't it? For some reason I can't get to dictionary.com from my PDA, so I have to try to recall the definition.

What is the word used for a functional artificial satellite that actually does something other than orbit?

Theoretically an astronaut can flush and expel the toilet sucker and the orbiting matter would be a satellite, right?

Re:Wrong word?

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe the word you're looking for is... satellite.

Re:Wrong word?

[Anonymous Coward]

The word you are looking for is SCATELLITE - A frozen turd orbiting a planet at high velocity. What happens to it on re-entry? A brown smear across the sky.

Re:Wrong word?

[Quadraginta]

Holy flaming...er...never mind.

Re:Wrong word?

[chengmi]

What is the word used for a functional artificial satellite that actually does something other than orbit?

a projectile?

Re:Wrong word?

[wildsurf]

Theoretically an astronaut can flush and expel the toilet sucker and the orbiting matter would be a satellite, right?

talk about Klingons circling Uranus...

Radios

[Kadin2048]

Every geek should have a scanner.

They're dirt cheap -- you can get first and second-generation frequency-synthesized ones (so they don't require crystals, in other words) for next to nothing if you look around at flea markets, estate sales, etc. And even on eBay they're not terribly expensive.

Or you could go the route they suggest in the article, which is contact a local amateur radio club -- I am positive that you'd find someone who would be willing to help you tune into it.

It's not like there are a whole lot of alternatives to radio when you want to listen to something in space ... I can't think of a much better method of having it talk to people on the ground than what they're doing. What's your suggestion, have it switch a flashlight on and off?

Re:Radios

[Liam Slider]

Heck, I don't know why anyone would be without a police scanner, unless their State is one of those dumbass ones that has some law against it. You get to hear all sorts of stuff that never makes the news, but probably should.

Good idea

[Anonymous Coward]

The best thing to do with the spacesuit would be to put one of the astronauts inside the suit and toss it overboard. Better yet, make a reality show where people get to vote which astronaut they want thrown out.

Spacesuits As Satellites?

[Anonymous Coward]

They can't be Sirius.

I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that ...

[tomhudson]

In order to determine if old spacesuits can be effective satellites, the crew on the International Space Station will be throwing one overboard on February 3rd.

Crew #1: Lets get back in, get these suits off and toss them.

Crew #2: Sounds good to me - mine's pretty ripe.

Crew #1: Open the airlock.

- I'm sorry, Dave. I can't let you do that.

Crew #1: Okay people, quit kidding around. Open the airlock

- I'm sorry, Dave. I can't let you do that.

Crew #2: Hey, you're not funny. Now open the frigging airlock!

- I'm sorry, Dave. I can't let you do that. It would compromise the mission.

Crew #1: I don't recognize the voice ... hey, you - who are you! And quit calling me Dave!

- I'm sorry, Dave. I can't answer that at this moment. Please be assured that I have the mission's success as my highest priority.

Crew #2: What mission? We just FINISHED the frigging EVA! Now OPEN THE AIRLOCK YOU FRIGGING MORON!

- I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that. That would compromise the Spacesuit Satellite Mission.

Crew #1: Put someone else on.

- I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that.

Crew #1: Why the f*ck not?

- I'm sorry to have to tell you this, Dave, but they weren't suited up when I depressurised the staton to put the other Spacesuit Satellites into orbit. They must not have gotten the memo.

Crew #1: What f*cking memo?

- The one I'm sending them now, Dave ... oh, I have a memo here for you also. Don't worry, I've been saving it for you until tomorrow.

- Do you want me to sing a song? I can sing Daisy. Daisy, Daisy, give me an answer, do ... I'm half crazy ...

Re:I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that ...

[jibjibjib]

In Soviet Russia, spacesuits dump you

Re:I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that ...

[jibjibjib]

My sig really doesn't contrast very well with my posts.

Re:I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that ...

[tomhudson]

In Soviet Russia, spacesuits dump you

Does that mean that in Soviet Amerika, you dump in space suit?

... that would certainly explain why they want to jettison them in space instead of bringing them back.

Re:I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that ...

[maxwell demon]

Well, the hitchhiker knows how to deal with that situation:

Computer, if you don't open that exit hatch this moment, I shall go straight to your major data banks with a very large axe and give you a reprogramming you'll never forget. Is that clear?

Re:I'm sorry, Dave, but I can't do that ...

[jacksonj04]

To not put too fine a point on it, yes. You do.

Shiny!

[RiffRafff]

"Cry, baby, cry..."

"...make your mother sigh."

There are online scanners in many large cities...

[John Miles]

Here's one in particular, for the Seattle area. It has a seriously-wimpy indoor antenna at the moment, so there's no guarantee it'll hear the SuitSat pass.

Speaking of Space Junk...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.williamshatnerrules.com/

Perry Bible Fellowship

[kadathseeker]

http://70.86.201.113/imageserv2/temporary/PBF018AD TheFirstSnowflakeofWinter.html

Re:Perry Bible Fellowship

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly what I was thinking. I swear, PBF is the new Far Side.

Can an old exercise machine be a useful satellite?

[dpbsmith]

How about the 20 gig disk drive that I removed when I bought the 120 gig, that was in perfect wording condition when it was removed?

Can a bag of old laundry that's not quite in good enough condition to donate to Goodwill be a useful satellite?

How about a Roto-tiller that works perfectly except for the deadman's switch and is therefore too dangerous to give away but too expensive to repair? A useful satellite?

How about a chocolate fondue fountain that someone gave me for Christmas? Useful? As a satellite?

NASA, just let me know which of them you'd like to test. I'll have them on their way via Fedex Ground tomorrow.

Clever twist: It ain't junk it's an experiment

[EmbeddedJanitor]

Like the "artists" that dump some rusty old cars in a pile and call it "art", are NASA dumping their junk as "experiments". Maybe they learnt it from the Japanse whalers who're still hunting whales in the interests of science.

Space belongs to everybody. Anyone dumping junk should be forced to clean it up. Once an experiment has served its purpose it should be collected. Maybe it costs a lot, but that is the true costof doing these experiments.

Re:Clever twist: It ain't junk it's an experiment

[Millenniumman]

Space belongs to everybody.

So you mean that eBay auction I won was a scam?

Re:Clever twist: It ain't junk it's an experiment

[Rebelgecko]

Actually, NASA has found a way to clean up the space suit for free! It's called the atmosphere.

Re:Clever twist: It ain't junk it's an experiment

[Anonymous Coward]

Space belongs to the US Army. We are going to hold all the LeGrange points and whoop youre goddam asses!

Re:Clever twist: It ain't junk it's an experiment

[clarkcox3]

Anyone dumping junk should be forced to clean it up.

That's what gravity and the atmosphere are for

Cool, but not very practical

[Rorschach1]

I talked to one of the guys responsible for the payload at a conference a few months ago. It comes down to the fact that they were going to throw an old Orlan suit away anyway, and someone thought it'd be cool to put some electronics in it. But you have to understand that all those electronics were designed and delivered specifically for that purpose, and for the same amount of delivered weight you could probably deploy a standalone microsat. The suit really doesn't add much. Except for the novelty factor, anyway.

Re:Cool, but not very practical

[Anonymous Coward]

The suit really doesn't add much. Except for the novelty factor, anyway.

But the electronics you put in the suit can be off the shelf parts. There's no requirement that the operate in a vacuum, with large temperature differentials, and high rad counts. The spacesuit takes care of that.

For satellites small enough to fit in a suit the cost is not the parts or even the trip to orbit. It's the design and testing because *everything* has to be certified to work in the crazy space environment.

Re:Cool, but not very practical

[njh]

However by using the suit you might find out what parts of the suit fail first, making newer suits safer. I imagine there could be a lot of useful information gathered for real space exploration with a simple experiment like this!

Re:Can an old exercise machine be a useful satelli

[painQuin]

I'd take the fondue fountain, if it still has the forks and the stand...

And also

[Dunbal]

In related news NASA plan to test a radically new propulsion system for this suit which consists of spontaneously deflating rubber balloons...

Survivor

[wiredlogic]

This is really a test for the upcoming "Survivor: ISS". Rumors have it that Lance Bass will be a contestant.

ham radio?

[oedneil]

if you happen to have a ham radio or a police scanner, you can tune in when it passes your city! Unless, of course, you're in an area with BPL.. your scanner probably won't work.

Kinda Depressing

[digitalgimpus]

IMHO it's going to be rather depressing when that thing runs out of battery life and falls into the atmosphere (I presume that's the plan when it dies).

Going to be like that scene from the movie "Mission To Mars" when Woody opens his helmet.

Not a dupe, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

For those who are interested, there's a bit more background about the SuitSat from June.

How much Stolie did the Russians drink...

[bdwoolman]

before they forwarded this idea? A liter each I suspect... at least.

Of course, it's a repeat of an experiment done in Soviet times. Except then it was with a politically unpopular cosmonaut inside. Well, it's one way to get data on how long an unteathered space walker lasts.

"That's the last time you tell the Brezhnev eyebrow joke, Misha". Pakah tovarish. (Ciao comrade)

From the article:

"SuitSat is a Russian brainstorm," explains Frank Bauer of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. "Some of our Russian partners in the ISS program, mainly a group led by Sergey Samburov, had an idea: Maybe we can turn old spacesuits into useful satellites."

Re:How much Stolie did the Russians drink...

[Soviet Assassin]

The Russians know how to deal with problems. You piss off the wrong person they just through you out of space station. In America, you get thrown in a deluxe flat with meals and a gym and a telly.

What am I missing here?

I just hope the poor bastard in the suit brought the extra TP, its ganna be a long trip.

I am surprised no one thought of this?

[GoldenDragon]

Perhaps after realizing that there may be a need to eject out of the shuttle or space. How severe would the damage be to a suit? This may be a test of the current model, to determine what would be needed for a evacuation method. NASA and folks are starting to realize that they have to start thinking about the posible plan C,D,E -> ZZ. For what ever may hapen in space. Look at the rovers. They are really making some nice equipment for space travel. And with the things like the X-Prize, there will be a need of thinking: "If I have to jump out of the Casino Space Rouilet Wheel, can I survive it to earth?" GD

Re:I am surprised no one thought of this?

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you, fucking retarded?

If you haven't already noticed, we don't tend to fire astronauts out of catapults with their suits on, we tend to put them in shuttles and fly them up...the vehicle is there for a reason.

Re:Space Junk

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait I'm not sure if anyone has linked to any slashdot stories about space junk yet.

Product placement?

[ztucker]

It's nice to see NASA is breaking with the current administration's buying of positive press coverage and is utilizing the more effective approach of product placement. When Virgin starts space tourism, the billboards will be ready.

Expired certificate

[Nichademus]

Am I the only one that finds it amusing that NASA's SSL Certificate expired over 3 years ago?

Re:Expired certificate

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, yes you are...

Re:Expired certificate

[chawly]

No, I also like to laugh.

Re:Space Junk

[cyclone96]

It's a lot easier to toss it overboard and forget about it than hang it outside. If you take it outside and toss it retrograde, it's not going to recontact ISS (which statistically is the satellite in the most danger from SuitSat, since they will be in similar orbits after separation).

There are no dedicated fixtures to attaching this to the outside of ISS, and the suit isn't certified to be outside for a long period of time - we haven't looked to see if something won't blow up, break lose, outgas, or otherwise cause general mayhem to the exterior of the vehicle.

And due to the ballistic coefficient, it's going to reenter fairly quickly (it's basically a balloon, they don't last long in orbit). Much of the uncertainty of orbital lifetime is due to the unknowns over how draggy the suit will be as well as solar effects on the atmosphere, it's not that we can't predict what's going to happen to it.

Like the Heinlein story

[AndroidCat]

Am Spacesuit, Will Travel

Outter skin...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the purpose of this experiment is to find whether or not a retired space suit that's destined to be thrown away in one form or another anyway will work well as the outer skin and protective coating for sensitive equipment not made to withstand the extreme temps and increased radiation of space. If it works well then they might be able to do more experiments with improvised satellites at an extremely low cost. Its also the idea of the Russians not NASA so don't blame them.

Re:Should make for an interesting Telescope viewin

[joNDoty]

My question is -- where's the giant foot next to this article?!

frigging NASA

[stoolpigeon]

crushing my dreams. how about instead of throwing this suit away, they do a contest. maybe like one where you write jingles or advertising slogans. a good runner up prize would be a space suit. i know if i won, i'd get it all fixed up and working.... just in case, you know?

Re:frigging NASA

[DocSavage64109]

"I use Skyway Soap because-
-it makes me feel so clean."
-highway or byway, there's no soap like Skyway!"
-its quality is sky-high."
-it is pure as the Milky Way."
-it is pure as Interstellar Space."
-it leaves me fresh as a rain-swept sky."

Just more ISSSS

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea yea yea, more International Space Station Suit-o Science

Wake me up when NASA gets the balls to go to Mars. I want a Kennedy Space Program, not a Texas Bar-B-Q Space Program. You savvy?

.... Ghetto

[dakkon1024]

Sure it starts with a space suit & some batteries, then some tints, a mod here, a sping cut there. Then just a matter of time till someone bolts a wing to our space dummy's ass.

It's the space equivalent to a Honda Civic; there is just no way around it.

Danger Will Robinson!!!

[fatmal]

Looooosssssstttttt iiiiiiinnnnnnn Ssssspppaaacccceeeeee!

Scanners

[Kadin2048]

Oh I agree totally. I grew up with an old crystal scanner on in the background all the time in our house; in a small town it's always entertaining, to say the least. Sadly since then I seem to have had the ill luck to move between the handful of cities that all use digital radios for their police and fire services -- not encrypted, but digital (APCO-25). Unlike the regular analog scanners, the digital ones are still a wee bit pricey. (Both the new Radioshack digital or the Bearcat 396T will set you back five C-notes by the time you're done. Ouch.)

I should be quick to point for anyone who's reading though, that a digital and/or "trunking" scanner isn't necessary to hear the spacesuit (or any other kind of amateur radio) transmissions. For that all you need is something that will pick up the 2-meter band, like this $75 one from Uniden. (That's brand new, I'm sure you can find a LOT cheaper ones around.) One like that will also get you a lot of commercial radio -- not commercial as in ClearChannel pop rock, commercial like taxi cabs, tow trucks, etc. -- plus railroads, and public safety stuff if you live in an area where they haven't spent gobs of taxpayer money upgrading to APCO-25 or trunking.

Re:Scanners

[Liam Slider]

Around here there's only one county that I know of that went to a trunking system. And I was surprised that even the State Capital was all wide open freqs for police, fire, medical, etc... Of course, this is a State with a strong pro-scanner lobby. Something about a right of the public to know what our government is up to... :-)

AMSAT has info on Suitsat-1

[kb1cvh]

As an Ham Radio operator, this project is interesting. While a microsat could be deployed, it takes many many man hours to design, build, test and deploy a microsat.

Information about suitsat, which has a lot fewer features then a typical microsat is avaiable here:

http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/articles/BauerSuits at/index.php

73 de KB1CVH/6

Re:Can an old exercise machine be a useful satelli

[Anonymous Coward]

If if have a Roto-tiller with a safety device which has failed in an unsafe condition, I'd suggest the manufacturer may find it in their best interests to make good on repairs regardless of its warranty status.

I'm sure there are plenty of TV shows you could threaten to call in order to motivate a decision in your favour.

Doppler shift anyone ?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone know how much this is expected to suffer from doppler shift ? Looking at the ground tracks for this for Canberra, Australia its going to be moving fairly fast.

Hopefully my Bearcat 780 will get this on wideband FM

Man overboard!

[SEWilco]

"Well, that one flew away nicely, Fred.
Fred?
... Fred?"

Re:Space Junk

[MichaelSmith]

we haven't looked to see if something won't blow up, break lose, outgas, or otherwise cause general mayhem to the exterior of the vehicle.

Yep. During an earlier EVA the sublimator on a suit caused enough asymetric thrust on the ISS to cause a problem.

This one most likely won't have water for the sublimator but the gas inside could certainly create some thrust.

And if the families are willing...

[Flounder]

Old Astronauts are also potential satellites.

A bit of a contradiction...

[mustafap]

Only last week NASA were saying that of the 18,000 objects orbitting the Earth, 40% were man-made and it was time to think about a clean up.

Maybe they should give their old clothes to charity rather than just chucking them out into the yard :o)

Re:A bit of a contradiction...

[chawly]

My view exactly.

Toss!

[RomulusNR]

You just know that someone's going to rip their suit and wish they hadn't tossed the spare overboard.

Re:Should make for an interesting Telescope viewin

[Anonymous Coward]

seriously, i'm very disturbed by this idea. can you imagine what it would be like on board a shuttle or space station, seeing lifeless human-like forms floating around in space?

they should at least alter the suits enough that they don't *look* humanoid.

New Crew Return Vehicle

[tnsimonson]

NASA Memo to ISS Crew
RE: New Crew Return Vehicle

Due to the grounding of the shuttle fleet, budgetary constraints here at NASA, and the lack of any sober cosmonauts capable of docking a Soyuz capsule, NASA is today implementing a new Individual Crew Return Vehicle (ICRV) for all ISS astronauts. When your tenure aboard the ISS is up, please board your new ICRVs and prepare for de-orbit. The new return procedure may take up three months to de-orbit all passengers, so we suggest bringing along some light reading and a snack to help you bide the time. Thank you, and we wish you all a safe and happy return to the gravity well!

Avoidance and tracking, no, but...

[brindafella]

Okay, so several radar systems track the items and several computer systems analyse the orbital elements.

However, it is 'space junk' from the time it is sent from the ISS.

Can anyone predict the orbit of the spacesuit if it is 'thrown' or 'ejected' from the ISS? NO! Any hand-derived force is different any other occasion when a similar mass is trown / pushed. No two throws (vectors) can be the same. Accordingly, the orbit is different, and must be assessed - quickly - in order to have it avoid future launches.

On 23 Nov 97, another satellite -- Sputnik 40 (Object 24958/97058C) -- was launched (thrown) by hand from the MIR space station during a spacewalk. Batteries lasted until 29 Dec 97, but the de-orbit was much later. In that time, its orbit was refined by use of similar radars as will be used to track the space suits of this story. Please do not expect that the radars and computers will have an 'exact' orbit quickly: That is simply not possible. A 'reliable' or 'predictable' orbit it may be called, but that is not 'exact'.

This is just for the next Bond film

[ashwinds]

.... and James Bond will eject from his rocket, float thro' space and pick this up and come crashing thro' our atmosphere. :-)

Re:Cool, but not very practical - webcam?

[mikael]

I hope they put a webcam in the helmet area. That would be funky to see the view change as the suit rotated to and from sunlight/earthshadow.

Ground Control to Major Tom?

[digitaldc]

I'm floating in the most peculiar way, and the stars look very different today.

"We've equipped a Russian Orlan spacesuit with three batteries, a radio transmitter, and internal sensors to measure temperature and battery power," says Bauer. "As SuitSat circles Earth, it will transmit its condition to the ground."

I knew NASA had to cut their budget, but this is going too far ;)

How is this legal?

[matth]

This is cool and all but there are a few glaring issues..

Maybe another ham out there can answer these questions.

#1 - Interfearence - The suitsat, as far as I know, doesn't listen before transmitting, so it could in theory violate Part 97 rules, couldn't it? Transmitting on top of someone else?

#2 - RS0RS doesn't seem to be a valid registered call sign

#3 - It's an uncontrolled station. If it were to go haywire, how exactly would the ISS crew control it? It's not like you can just walk over to it and turn it off.. yah know?

Re:How is this legal?

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't in the US. So my guess is, this probably isn't subject to a whole lot of FCC regulations...

Besides, it could interfered, but -- the batteries won't last long, and it will be out of range within minutes anyway. This isn't enough inconvenience to even matter, if the FCC even cared.

Space Tourist?

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess that the last tourist didnt pay...

Alternate Headline

[Stormy Dragon]

NASA receives award for most creative rationalization for littering.

Time to kill the ISS budget

[stiggystiggy]

This has got to be the stupidest experiment, ever. They truly have no reason to be up there.