Slashdot Mirror


MIT Team Designs a New, Sleek, Skintight Spacesuit

iamdrscience writes "MIT aeronautics professor Dava Newman has designed a new spacesuit along with her colleague, Jeff Hoffman and a group of students. This is far sleeker and lighter weight than the suits used by astronauts today, promising greater mobility than the traditional bulky suits of today which can weigh 300lbs or more. Instead of gas pressurization, the new prototype BioSuit employs "mechanical counter-pressure" in the form of skin-tight layers wrapped around the body."
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/biosuit-0716.html

383 comments

  1. Slashcode predicts ... by A+non-mouse+Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Nothing for you to see here. Please move along."
    --
    libertarian: (n) socially liberal, financially conservative; neither left, nor right.
    1. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by A+non-mouse+Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Exclusive pictures.

      Turns out, it only works if you wear it in a robotic cat.

      --
      libertarian: (n) socially liberal, financially conservative; neither left, nor right.
    2. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And once again, slashcode is right. At least there's nothing new for us to see, since the newfangled biosuit is just a revieved space activity suit from the early seventies, featured in an even goofier picture at astronautix.

    3. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by Bastardchyld · · Score: 2, Funny

      So it took MIT to invent "Space Spandex."

      So tell me again what you get when you take 5 grad students with a Lance Armstrong fetish and an affection for NASA, and how does it better society?

      --
      $diff terrorists hippies
      $
      $rm -rf *terrorists *hippies
    4. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this would be more like it... pluguits :)

    5. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by pugugly · · Score: 4, Funny

      It gives us a tight, form-fitting suit to be worn by fit women going into space.

      Admittedly, this is just a first step to a world where all the women look like the covers of 50's pulp magazines, but really, how can that *not* improve society.

      I for one welcome our new Amazonian over, um, overladies?

        - Pug

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
    6. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by dasare1503 · · Score: 1

      I think the site is down - can't seem to load it. Saw it blogged here after some searching though. (http://lifewithoutfries.blogspot.com/)

    7. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by ThePengwin · · Score: 1

      How i wish i piloted an EVA :D oh, ah, yeah, um never mind that :P

    8. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 2, Funny

      Space brassiere. One small step for a woman, a giant throbbing problem for mankind.

    9. Re:Slashcode predicts ... by MCraigW · · Score: 1

      The next generation of Power Rangers has arrived !!

  2. But why .... by taniwha · · Score: 3, Funny

    is Margaret Thatcher modelling it?

    1. Re:But why .... by Basehart · · Score: 1

      Difficult to tell. They should make it see-through so we can see what's going on in there, or at least the breast parts like Barbarella's.

    2. Re:But why .... by taniwha · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I swear that's Thatcher

    3. Re:But why .... by jb.hl.com · · Score: 0

      SPACE THATCHER!

      I smell a meme in the making.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    4. Re:But why .... by sokoban · · Score: 5, Funny

      You see, they were really trying to get Teri Hatcher, but the memo just said "T. Hatcher".

      Somebody misread it as Thatcher, and just ran with it.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
    5. Re:But why .... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So people don't go out into the next latex shop and try to find it. Ya know, text becomes secondary when ... ohhhh, bouncy!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:But why .... by WhatHappenedToTanith · · Score: 3, Funny

      Space Thatcher? Great, as if us comet miners didnt have a hard enough job already!

    7. Re:But why .... by KliX · · Score: 1

      You must be British or Canadian, nobody else would make that joke!

    8. Re:But why .... by Usquebaugh · · Score: 1

      No wonder the face mask is tinted

    9. Re:But why .... by iamhassi · · Score: 0

      "is Margaret Thatcher modelling it?"

      Who cares! Skin-tight space suits on fit, smart astronaut women?

      That's every slashdotter's dream!

      Bring on the skin-tight space suits Barbarella!!!

      Dammit, if I would have known skin-tight spacesuits were really coming I would have studied Astro Physics and went for Airforce ROTC instead of comp sci :(

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    10. Re:But why .... by sokoban · · Score: 2, Funny

      Close enough, I'm from Kentucky.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
    11. Re:But why .... by AGMW · · Score: 1
      I used to dream of Space Thatch!

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    12. Re:But why .... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      Please don't confuse me for a perv, but I think this suit approaches the ideal model of manga female spacesuits. I say they're pretty similar (except for the bust size, lol).

  3. Perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for any metrosexual astronaut.

  4. uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm going to have alot trouble hiding my giant boner as I check out the female astrounaut corps.

    1. Re:uh oh by Gregb05 · · Score: 2, Informative
      1. I seriously doubt you're going to space.
      2. This will likely be the bottom most layer in a series of materials while spacewalking.
      3. When NOT spacewalking, people would likely wear uniforms or other apparel over this.
      Sorry to destroy hundreds of nerds' dreams.
      --
      --
    2. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm going to have alot trouble hiding my giant boner as I check out the female astrounaut corps.

      Naww ... just slap a pinkie-sized bandaid on it under the suit and no one will be the wiser.

    3. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You forgot, "4. I doubt you have a giant boner."

    4. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'm going to have alot trouble hiding my giant boner as I check out the female astrounaut corps.

      No shit -- that's a boner??? I thought you had a zit on your crotch.

    5. Re:uh oh by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Dude, if you can pop wood at -270 C, you deserve to show off that bone, for you would have conquered the ultimate attack of shrinkage. You would be a hero to showers and growers everywhere, and achieve instant membership in the Dick Hall of Fame®. So wear you're woody with pride, for legends will be written about you: Super Boner.

      --
      Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
  5. Neat... by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Kinda reminds me of the suits from Star Trek TOS - sans the goofy helmet and the nameplate - or of something from Power Rangers...

    1. Re:Neat... by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Which is the ultimate in Star Trek stupidity of course. We've got force fields and warp drives and transporters but you need to go outside? Oh, put on this suit which hasn't changed much from the Apollo days.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:Neat... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      In the animated series, they used 'life support belts,' which projected a force field around the wearer and maintained an atmosphere with suitable pressure and oxygen levels. They seemed like a much more sensible idea, but also made you wonder why they didn't wear them for away missions all the time, keeping them safe from all those nasty plagues they kept running into.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Neat... by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      One also has to ask, why remain so vulnerable? Why not alter yourself to be better adapted to space? Clinging to "pure" humanity when it isn't in your interest is kinda primitive. People with skin twice as think and pores that close when exposed to vacuum, seems like something a people who went through a eugenics wars could manage.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    4. Re:Neat... by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not to be a Star Trek geek (or too far off-topic), but weren't the Eugenics Wars actually *against* people who were engineered like that? If the last time they tried it, it almost meant the end of civilization as genetically-engineered warlords took over nations, I don't think 200 years would be long enough to take a risk trying it again.

      I mean, haven't you seen Wrath of Khan? That guy was bad-ass.

    5. Re:Neat... by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      I think this is another example of why Star Trek earth wasn't the utopia that it was made out to be. I mean a people obsessed with purity of genetics is not exactly admirable.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    6. Re:Neat... by Belacgod · · Score: 0

      And what about the Sauron Supermen?

    7. Re:Neat... by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more along the lines that if you painted the suit black, and then plated the helmet with some kind of shiny metal, you'd look kind of like Daft Punk....

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    8. Re:Neat... by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      but also made you wonder why they didn't wear them for away missions all the time, keeping them safe from all those nasty plagues they kept running into.

      DUH! For the same reason that made it possible for the Enterprise at Warp Speed (any version, any series) to travel at the Speed of Plot!!!

      ;-)

      C'mon, that's like asking "Why didnt Voltron just 'Form Blazing Sword' in the beginning of the episode and cut the idiotic Robeasts in half and end the episode right then?"

      Well, just a thought... but I think the answer is the same. It would be a pretty boring episode... ;-)

      Mod Off-Topic like the rest of this sub-thread!

    9. Re:Neat... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      So, what happens if the fields breaks - why leave yourself vulnerable to the correct operation of something so complex as a force field? You can wear that thing on top of something more reliable and durable - belt and suspenders.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    10. Re:Neat... by rben · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Um... StarTrek isn't real. It's a shock, I know, but true. :)

      Humanity has, effectively, radically altered it's evolution. We are no longer selecting for the fittest in quite the same way as was done while we were evolving. Now it's more like survival of the richest and most prolific. It's hard to say what effect that will have over the long haul. Back in the first part of the last century, this was a huge worry that gave rise to the ideas that lead to Hitler's genocidal campaigns. Most people don't realize that many, if not most, of the great thinkers of that time were all for coming up with some way to insure that the "lesser" races wouldn't "out breed" their "betters." In the U.S., this lead to a widespread effort to sterilize anyone with a sub-standard I.Q., regardless of the cause of the problem.

      We're not far from a time when people who are rich enough will be able to pick and choose traits that they want their children to have. The world of GATTACA might not be so far off. This kind of genetic tailoring makes the most sense when you talk about moving off planet.

      People aren't designed to live in space. We have all sorts of problems from space sickness to muscles deterioration. People who spend a long time in space come back to Earth and need months to regain their full strength and health. I suspect we'll see similar problems on the Moon and Mars, where the lower gravity will have as yet unknown medical effects. At the very least, it will probably cause a loss of calcium in the bones, making it difficult for someone who spends a long time on the Moon or Mars to return to Earth.

      If we really want to move off the planet, we'll wind up making changes to our bodies and genetic make up in order to better adapt ourselves to the new environment. Think about it, if we can design a human that can live in zero gravity without ill effects, the cost of building space habitats drops by orders of magnitude. Ultimately, if we survive the consequences of our stupidity, I suspect Humanity will split into a bunch of different genetically engineered species that are adapted for different environments, both in space and here on Earth. I can see people going back to the oceans. Perhaps they'll have gills and modified arms and legs. People who live full-time in zero gravity might adopt a more spherical body that is pushed along by much less robust arms and legs. Astronauts might be designed to withstand high gravity acceleration. Ultimately, all these things may become possible.

      If we survive long enough, I think it's inevitable.

      --

      -All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
      www.ra

    11. Re:Neat... by pragma_x · · Score: 1

      Oh, you mean like this guy?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vrlitwhai_Kridanik

      "As a commander type Zentradi he is larger and stronger than the normal Zentradi soldier and can even survive in the vacuum of space for limited periods of time, allowing him to go toe to toe with a Battroid."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zentradi

    12. Re:Neat... by AndersOSU · · Score: 1

      We are no longer selecting for the fittest in quite the same way as was done while we were evolving. Now it's more like survival of the richest and most prolific.
      Why oh why is slashdot the last bastion of social darwanism?

      First, are you telling me there is a genetic reason why the rich are that way?

      Second, are you telling me that the rich are the most prolific?

      Humanity hasn't altered its evolution as you might like to think, if you live in a malaria infested region sickle-cell anemia still isn't such a bad thing.
  6. obligatory by penp · · Score: 5, Funny

    They're waiting for you, Gordon. In the Test Chamber.

  7. Sci-Fi correlation by perlhacker14 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is it just me, or does this sound like something out of Sci-Fi? Sleek, skintight, spacesuits? Anyway... Finally! A redesign of the spacesuits. This has been coming for a while, and most people probably should have forseen a new design. What amazes me is how futuristic and sci-fi this sounds... or is it just progress? What ever the case, this is real progress and innovation.

    1. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1
      No, it's not just you, it's the whole concept:

      their prototypes are not yet ready for space travel, but demonstrate what they're trying to achieve --a lightweight, skintight suit that will allow astronauts to become truly mobile lunar and Mars explorers.
      (emphasis mine)

      Well at least there is something to see here, but move along anyway...

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What did you expect? That spacesuits would become bulkier and more restrictive?

    3. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by X0563511 · · Score: 5, Informative

      To be worn in space, the BioSuit must deliver close to one-third the pressure exerted by Earth's atmosphere, or about 30 kPa (kilopascals). The current prototype suit exerts about 20 KPa consistently, and the researchers have gotten new models up to 25 to 30 KPa. This isn't just a proof-of-concept, this is a real prototype under testing.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    4. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I'm holding out for force-field suits. Just flick a switch on a cigarette-pack-sized device clipped to your belt, and Voila! instant spacesuit.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by pluther · · Score: 1

      Is it just me, or does this sound like something out of Sci-Fi?

      You mean, unlike the very concept of space travel at all?

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    6. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by pugugly · · Score: 1

      These would be forcefield suits, from the same Starfleet Engineers that gave us the Holodeck and Transporter?

      Survey Says - NO!

      Pug

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
    7. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by ZachMG · · Score: 0

      somewhere in all those Arthur C Clarke shortstories theres one about anitgravity and if you read it there are many problems with it, such as the fact that it takes massive amounts of energy to create it and if you wanted to bring something into it it takes the same amount of energy as it would to move that object far enough away from all gravity forces to the point that its not affected any more to move that object the few inches into the feild. so think about it, what are the good things to come from "force feilds"?

      --
      There is hopeful symbolism in the fact that flags do not wave in a vacuum. --Arthur C. Clarke
    8. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by Eivind · · Score: 1

      Sure !

      Sci-Fi will adopt this immediately, some of it already has.

      Not because of flexibility or anything lame like that. No, for a much more fundamental reason. Sleek and skin-tight is just plain more *sexy* than bulky inflated ones.

    9. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by Muchsake · · Score: 1

      Sci fi will adopt it because it is a lot cheaper to spray paint a SCUBA suit than to make a convincing looking contemporary space suit.

    10. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by Eivind · · Score: 1

      That too, I guess.

    11. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by Toad-san · · Score: 1

      Yep, this kind of suit was detailed in a science fiction story, oh, 30 or 40 years ago.

    12. Re:Sci-Fi correlation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well since the original research was done 40 years ago, no surprise really. Of course the old capistan partial pressure suits rely on mechanical counterpressure too..

  8. The future is now! by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 4, Funny

    All these skintight spacesuits on attractive women in science fiction movies are finally reality!

    --
    I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
    1. Re:The future is now! by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      "All she needs now is a ray gun." That's what I thought when I saw the picture.

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    2. Re:The future is now! by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      All these skintight spacesuits on attractive women in science fiction movies are finally reality! Now we just need to figure out how to make women think smart is sexy, then they'll be falling all over us to have sex, just like in any proper Heinlein novel.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  9. 300 lbs by iluvcapra · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...can weigh 300lbs or more...

    Masses 300lbs, weighs nothing, but still no friend of mobility.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    1. Re:300 lbs by z-j-y · · Score: 1

      It's not like the astronauts are going to break dance in outer space anyway.

    2. Re:300 lbs by BigMike1020 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...Masses 300lbs...
      Masses 136kg, weighs nothing. Pound is a unit of force, not mass.
    3. Re:300 lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It weighs 300 pounds on earth, where 99.9999999% of humans reside.

    4. Re:300 lbs by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      Weighs plenty on the Moon (50+ lbs.), even more on Mars (100+ lbs.).

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    5. Re:300 lbs by QuantumRiff · · Score: 1

      except during liftoff, when it ways much more than 300 pounds.. By eliminating a few of these from the space shuttle, (or its future replacement) they have more stuff they can haul up for the same amount of fuel.

      I don't remember the exact costs, but isn't payload charged something like $20,000/pound?

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    6. Re:300 lbs by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Pound is a unit of both, fool.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    7. Re:300 lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the traditional bulky suits of today which can weigh 300lbs or more" They really can weigh 300 lbs. They exist on earth for a long time before they exist in space, and get used here as well. There's nothing wrong with that statement. Sure, they also mass 136kg (as others noted) but they still weigh 300 lbs.

    8. Re:300 lbs by tarogue · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, silly! A pound is a unit of currency. A stone is a unit of weight.

      --
      Life sucks, but death doesn't put out at all. -- Thomas J. Kopp
    9. Re:300 lbs by jjon · · Score: 1

      It weighs 300 pounds on earth, where 99.9999999% of humans reside.

      But it's a space suit - it's only going to be used by the 0.0000001% who aren't on earth...

    10. Re:300 lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i can imagine that a significant bulk of spacesuit usage happens on earth.

    11. Re:300 lbs by ucblockhead · · Score: 1
      No, the statement is completely correct. They can weight 300lbs or more. For instance, on Earth, they weigh over 300 lbs.


      Of course, virtually any article of clothing can weigh 300lbs or more somewhere in the universe.

      --
      The cake is a pie
    12. Re:300 lbs by Belacgod · · Score: 5, Funny

      Really, stone should be a unit for measuring drug potency.

    13. Re:300 lbs by Srsen · · Score: 1

      Weighs nothing in space. But seven suits for the crew is 2100 lbs. that they have to get off the launch pad.

    14. Re:300 lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and a pounding is what happens to smart ass nerds in the lunch room after they are finished being witty and pedantic to some primeval jock.

    15. Re:300 lbs by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      Actually, the slug is the Imperial mass unit. Pounds are just for weight, and weight is dependent on local gravity.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    16. Re:300 lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Masses 300lbs, weighs nothing, but still no friend of mobility.

      Verbing nouns is fun!

    17. Re:300 lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    18. Re:300 lbs by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Verbing weirds language.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    19. Re:300 lbs by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      That's nice, but we were talking about the U.S. customary system, not the U.K. imperial system.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    20. Re:300 lbs by Jerry+Smith · · Score: 1

      Weighs plenty on the Moon (50+ lbs.), even more on Mars (100+ lbs.).
      It was designed for space, not for the moon. Surface on the moon consists of dust and sharp vulcanical pieces of stone (IANANasaEngineer), so the suit should be able to cope with that.
      --
      All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
    21. Re:300 lbs by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 1
      Nah Man, everyone knows the use Elmo to measure drug potency:
      1. Elmo = you start sounding like him.
      2. Elmos = you start hearing him.
      3. Elmos = you start seeing him.
      and so on till you hit 10 Elmos, where you think you're trucking along on Sesame Street talking to Big Bird and coloring on the walls, when in reality your running down the street naked and being chased by the cops and flinging your own poo everywhere.
      --
      Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
    22. Re:300 lbs by InvisblePinkUnicorn · · Score: 1

      Actually, slugs are units of mass. Stones are for throwing.

    23. Re:300 lbs by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      There is a pound mass and a pound force.

    24. Re:300 lbs by AdamThor · · Score: 1

      Masses 136kg, weighs nothing.

      Masses 9.32 slugs, you commie!

      --
      -- "Oh. This guy again."
  10. Walkers, SciFi book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These suits were described in Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars - called walkers in those books.

    1. Re:Walkers, SciFi book by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      These suits were described in Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars

      Dr Seuss wrote sci-fi?

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    2. Re:Walkers, SciFi book by SnowZero · · Score: 1

      Nope, Kim Stanley Robinson. A name that is both effeminate and ultra-manly at the same time. Anyway, Ann would give you an angry glare, while Sax would just tilt his head and consider you unimportant.

  11. Three Boobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad it won't fit the Sci-Fi chicks with three boobs.

    1. Re:Three Boobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is quite possibly the least appealing thing I've heard all day.

  12. Next challenge: by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 5, Funny

    The next thing they have to make is a chain metal bikini that can give Elven Warrior Maidens the protection from dragon fire they need.

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
    1. Re:Next challenge: by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I saw a girl wearing one of those at the MD RennFest a few years ago. I asked my wife if she would wear one. She declined.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    2. Re:Next challenge: by The+Fun+Guy · · Score: 1

      Well, geez, that's a question that pretty much answers itself, unless the wives on your planet are, statistically speaking, MUCH more open-minded that the wives we have here on Earth. You get points for asking, though.

      --
      The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. - Mark Twain
  13. Hottie in a spacesuit! by Bootle · · Score: 1

    Mmm mmm.... what? Dave Newman? blarghghgh NOOO!

    Oh. DavA Newman... whew!

  14. With the fist of an angry god! by Misanthrope · · Score: 2, Funny

    http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/people/dnewman/bi o.html
    What more could a nerd ask for. I mean really, she designs
    space suits.

    1. Re:With the fist of an angry god! by Gilmoure · · Score: 4, Funny

      Her right ear looks to be 1/4" lower than the right. Deal breaker, that is.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    2. Re:With the fist of an angry god! by theripper · · Score: 1

      Her right ear is 1/4" lower than her right ear?

      That would explain her smashing good looks.

    3. Re:With the fist of an angry god! by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Eggs. I mean, we do believe in evolution, don't we?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    4. Re:With the fist of an angry god! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, we ARE doing government work here!

    5. Re:With the fist of an angry god! by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Except that she got her B.S. when I was 6. I'm sure it's fine for some of you older fogeys, though :)

    6. Re:With the fist of an angry god! by NeilTheStupidHead · · Score: 1

      Damn kids, off my lawn, good old days, etc. But seriously, dude, I'm younger than you are and I wouldn't hesitate, so it's really down to personal perference.

      --
      Lose: misplace or fail || Loose: not bound together
  15. Two thoughts... by tgd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One, how are they going to keep the astronaut warm/cool in it.

    Two, they talk about how its safer if it gets punctured because the hole can just be patched without affecting the rest of the suit. How are you going to puncture it in a way that doesn't puncture, you know... you? Even if the suit doesn't depressurize, it can't be good for your cardiovascular system to have a gaping wound exposed to vacuum or micropressures.

    1. Re:Two thoughts... by Mikkeles · · Score: 1
      'One, how are they going to keep the astronaut warm/cool in it.'

      A skisuit/parka with silver mylar coating.

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    2. Re:Two thoughts... by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Particularly since coagulation requires the presence of air in order to occur. Your wound wouldn't clot.

      Though, the puncture they might be worried about would be pinpoint-sized, small enough to get through the suit but losing enough energy to be embedded in it. OTOH, if you're wearing an ultra-light pressure garment, you could wear a flak jacket and you would get your durability back while keeping a mass STILL smaller than that of current suits.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    3. Re:Two thoughts... by turtledawn · · Score: 1

      embedded resistance heaters, maybe. Or a layer of mylar between layers of spandex material would work for warm, but then you have to deal with cooling.

      As far as wounds, I'd think that anything characterized as a gaping wound would pose a more immediate hazard then exposure of said wound to microgravity though perhaps the reinforcing strips could serve as attachment points for light tourniquets.

      --
      Uh, "if it looks roughly mouse-shaped according to my infra-red sensitive pit, eat it"? --Chris Burke 09-08-10
    4. Re:Two thoughts... by delong · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One, how are they going to keep the astronaut warm/cool in it

      The main advantage of counter-pressure suits would be ditching the gas pressure that makes movement difficult. Additional layers could be added for radiation shielding and temperature/moisture control. As long as the additional layers did not inhibit movement as much as the traditional suit, it would still be a net gain development in the technology.

      Even if the suit doesn't depressurize, it can't be good for your cardiovascular system to have a gaping wound exposed to vacuum or micropressures

      Astronauts run the same risk in today's suits. The difference is with traditional suits, a puncture leads to your blood boiling and a quick asphyxiation from lack of atmosphere. Boy-o.

    5. Re:Two thoughts... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      One, how are they going to keep the astronaut warm/cool in it.

      That's just one thing that the advocates of skinsuits would rather you didn't think about.
       
       

      Two, they talk about how its safer if it gets punctured because the hole can just be patched without affecting the rest of the suit. How are you going to puncture it in a way that doesn't puncture, you know... you?

      That's another thing they don't want you to think too hard about.
       
      The fact is, the actual pressure bladder is a fairly small fraction of the weight of a full spacesuit. Thermal protection, micrometeorite protection, life support, etc... etc... account for the vast majority of the weight and the bulk (and restriction on movement). Absent the sudden availability of unobtanium, skinsuits don't actually work. And I don't mean 'stuff that is on the horizon but needs R&D', nor 'stuff that has been thought about but nobody has ever really detailed'... I mean pure unalloyed unobtanium - stuff we haven't even a clue how to go about doing yet.
    6. Re:Two thoughts... by PieSquared · · Score: 1

      I'm sure you could get away with some insulation and some heat/cooling coils that would directly heat your skin instead of the air around your skin. Though you'd need finer control then you need with the air between you and the heating/cooling element. Or something. As for puncturing you instead of the suit... well, I fail to see how that is worse then puncturing you *and* depressurizing your old suit. I mean, it isn't like the old suit was more resistant to these type of punctures then the new one. You can probably even tack on *more* protection with a net increase in mobility this way. Anyway, your body will eventually stop pumping blood to an extremity that gets a hole in it rather then keep pushing it into space, I believe. Obviously you'd have to get back to pressure ASAP, but I'd think you have a better chance this way then the old way.

      --
      Does a line appended to your comment give your post meaning in and of itself, or only in relation to those without?
    7. Re:Two thoughts... by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      What if your body is not aesthetically pleasing in a skin tight suit? Is there going to be segregation when trying to leave Earth? At least big bulky suits can help conceal extra bulges and such.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    8. Re:Two thoughts... by amccaf1 · · Score: 1

      One, how are they going to keep the astronaut warm/cool in it.


      All space travelers will be issued with a Tom Baker scarf.
      --
      "Flag on the moon. How did it get there?"
    9. Re:Two thoughts... by JamJam · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Third Thought: In order to deliver the one-third the pressure exerted by Earth's atmosphere that these suits will need to be custom designed for each individual. Which is fine if you plan on using the suit in a short period of time. Not so great for a mission to mars, where by the time they get there travelers would have lost quite a bit of muscle and body fat. I doubt the suit would still fit properly to provide the necessary (minimum) 30 kPa's.

    10. Re:Two thoughts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One, how are they going to keep the astronaut warm/cool in it. Slashdot comes through once again. You better contact this MIT aeronautics professor immediately and explain this phenomenon known as "radiation" in terms he can understand. Phew, disaster averted.

    11. Re:Two thoughts... by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I'm no expert, but it's a vacuum actually a pretty good heat insulator. That's why it's one of the layers in a thermos (aka vacuum flask). AFAIK, the main reason you freeze in space is because the low pressure causes your fluids to evaporate, which is an endothermic process. Keep the pressure up, and you keep the heat up.

      Now you'd also need layers in the suit to prevent radiation both from leaving the suit (and losing heat that way) and from entering the suit (since you'll be outside the protection of the earth's atmosphere and magnetosphere).

    12. Re:Two thoughts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh god, shut up.

      You're not correct about a single one of your assessments, and every "problem" you claim exists is easily surmountable, and has been proven so.

      Why post incorrect bullshit Derek? That hard up for the other slashtards to give you a karmajob even though you're completely wrong?

    13. Re:Two thoughts... by leeward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Astronauts run the same risk in today's suits. The difference is with traditional suits, a puncture leads to your blood boiling and a quick asphyxiation from lack of atmosphere. Boy-o.

      Astronauts get into their spacesuits and decompress for quite awhile to a low pressure; about 3 psi if I remember correctly. A complete loss of pressure will not cause any decompression problems at this point. Even without decompression, your blood still would not boil if exposed to a vacuum. Your body maintains enough mechanical pressure to keep the blood at about 1.5 psi. The blood will only boil if you put it into an open container and expose it to vacuum. Of course, the asphyxiation problem remains...

    14. Re:Two thoughts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The current generation of space suits are custom configured for their intended wearer as well. Of course this is from a set of "interchangeable" parts but the point being that Nancy Rocketjock cannot automatically use Bobby Spaceman's suit.

    15. Re:Two thoughts... by tgd · · Score: 1

      No, you cool from radiative cooling, and very quickly. Get in the sun, you bake, get in the shade and you'll radiate all your heat away. Radiative cooling is so effective, you can freeze water on a cool night with a solar oven as the reflector works in reverse.

    16. Re:Two thoughts... by CorSci81 · · Score: 1

      Uh, maybe if the ambient air temperature is below freezing. In which case your water would likely freeze anyway.

    17. Re:Two thoughts... by matrixghost1286 · · Score: 1

      The Puncture Problem has been solved,

      In the event the suit is cut, torn, or punctured,
      one simply cuts the arm off a nearby Borg drone,
      and uses some of the cabling from the Borg to tie off the suit.
      Then proceed with whatever activities outside the safety of the space vehicle
      (i.e. shooting an interplexing beacon).

    18. Re:Two thoughts... by tgd · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Um, no. Its easy to do even with some aluminum foil or mylar film up to 40 or so, and with a real good reflector and VERY clear skies, its been done up to almost 50 degrees.

      Google is your friend.

    19. Re:Two thoughts... by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 1

      Armored body suits! This keeps getting better and better.

      Now lets see what we can do about those elven maidens...

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
  16. Somehow I just have a vision.... by HerculesMO · · Score: 1

    of somebody wearing spandex and a helmet.

    --
    The price is always right if someone else is paying.
    1. Re:Somehow I just have a vision.... by sconeu · · Score: 2, Informative

      RTFA. That's exactly the picture *in* TFA!

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  17. Concave body spaces by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I remember correctly, previous studies into this kind of suits had problems getting a tight fit (needed for counterpressure) on concave parts of the body - e.g. armpits, etc. If any of the members of the team happen to be lurking, could you fill us in on how those are being addressed?

  18. Another plug for the metric system by A+non-mouse+Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Masses 300 lbs, weighs nothing, but still no friend of mobility.
    Somebody who does this for a living will have to back me up (or shut me up), but isn't pounds (as in lbs.) a measurement of weight, as in the English-system unit of mass times the earth's gravitational acceleration, unlike the metric unit, grams, which is strictly-speakly a measurement of mass-only (as in free of gravitational acceleration)?

    And on that note, how is having 300 lbs (or mass-equivalent) less gear going to keep you from hopping off the moon into outerspace forever? Didn't the extra mass come in handy to keep people from flying away?
    --
    libertarian: (n) socially liberal, financially conservative; neither left, nor right.
    1. Re:Another plug for the metric system by eln · · Score: 5, Funny

      And on that note, how is having 300 lbs (or mass-equivalent) less gear going to keep you from hopping off the moon into outerspace forever? Didn't the extra mass come in handy to keep people from flying away? Actually, the new space suit makes astronauts look sexier, thereby causing the moon to be more attracted to them. This increased attraction makes it less likely they will fly away. Of course, it also means they have to change back into the clunky old fashioned space suits when they want to take off, in order to decrease the Moon's attraction enough to let them go. It also means that the Moon may call them several times a day to try to get them to come back, and may occasionally drift closer to the Earth to get a better look at them, despite the restraining order barring the Moon from getting within 230,000 miles.

      Sure, this seems like a good idea, but it's really not cool to play around with the Moon's emotions like that. No one has visited it in 35 years, and it is getting pretty desperate for attention.
    2. Re:Another plug for the metric system by A+non-mouse+Coward · · Score: 1

      "Sure, this seems like a good idea, but it's really not cool to play around with the Moon's emotions like that. No one has visited it in 35 years, and it is getting pretty desperate for attention."
      Ahem, Officially. ;)
      --
      libertarian: (n) socially liberal, financially conservative; neither left, nor right.
    3. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Informative

      but isn't pounds (as in lbs.) a measurement of weight

      According to Wikipedia, "pounds" originally and still may refer to force (weight). However the "pound avoirdupois", avoirdupois being the system used in the United States, is defined to be a measure of mass.

      And on that note, how is having 300 lbs (or mass-equivalent) less gear going to keep you from hopping off the moon into outerspace forever? Didn't the extra mass come in handy to keep people from flying away?

      Escape velocity from the moon is 2.4 km/s. I don't think that merely weighing 1/6th as much as you do on earth would allow you to launch yourself at that speed. The astronauts would be able to leap even farther than they could in the bulky spacesuits, though.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    4. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      lbs is afaik the imperial equivalent of kg in terms of what it measures. And kg measures mass.

      Mass "becomes" weight in presence of another mass, due to gravity. And would be measured in kilopond (kp). But ever heard anyone say that? I mean, outside a physics lab?

      So you can imagine how tired I am lately. That friggin' huge lump that Earth is surely weighs me down.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Another plug for the metric system by rentedflowers · · Score: 1

      And would be measured in kilopond (kp). But ever heard anyone say that? I mean, outside a physics lab?

      In engineering labs? I can't recall the last time I heard a physicist do something in pounds. All snark aside, when talking about building big things out of steel, kips (kilopounds) and mips (megapounds) come in very handy. So handy that one often drops the "pound" right out, so that thousands-of-pounds-per-square-inch become ksi.

    6. Re:Another plug for the metric system by rossifer · · Score: 1
      A pound is a unit of force, but the pound is commonly used as a mass unit (would be a technically "lb-mass") because of it's familiarity to US readers. Everyone in the US then knows what you mean, and when you need to be precise about your units, it's not very hard to remove the acceleration component.

      The inverse happens with the kilo in the metric system. You could convert to newtons whenever you need force, but kilogram-force will be easier for most metric-thinking people to relate to. Basically, when communicating with lay-people, scientists and engineers have learned to be flexible.

      Didn't the extra mass come in handy to keep people from flying away?
      Actually, you can't get to escape velocity on the moon using your feet. You can jump to a possibly more dangerous height without the extra mass/weight, but you'll quickly learn not to.
    7. Re:Another plug for the metric system by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      um...
      in reference to the "hoax" landings or the secrete base on the dark side?

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    8. Re:Another plug for the metric system by lordofthechia · · Score: 1

      Correct, the lb is a unit of weight or force (like the metric unit Newtons). The slug is the English unit of mass.

      --
      Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
    9. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but isn't pounds (as in lbs.) a measurement of weight

      1 lb. is a measure of weight
      1 ft-lb. is a measure of work or energy (1 lb of force over a distance of 1 ft)

    10. Re:Another plug for the metric system by radl33t · · Score: 1

      he imperial system is awesome because there is a pound force, weight, and a pound mass, mass. Of course, you've always got the slug if you don't want to bother with two different units of the same name.

    11. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Apogaion · · Score: 1

      lbm: pounds mass
      lbf: pounds force
      lbs: should be pound seconds, a unit of impulse.

      Using lbm instead of slug for units of mass leads to such horror as this: (F [lbf])=(m [lbm])(a [ft/s^2])/(32.174).
      Both confusing and painfully inelegant. Shudder. Please can we switch to SI?

      --
      This account verified sig-free since..., uh, never mind.
    12. Re:Another plug for the metric system by goarilla · · Score: 1

      unlike the metric unit, grams, which is strictly-speakly a measurement of mass-only (as in free of gravitational acceleration)?
      it's both and if it isn't strictly speaking it's still used as both a unit of mass as weight
      we tend to say - hey fat ass, you weight over 100 kilograms
    13. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Moofie · · Score: 1

      It surely is.

      There is a unit called the "pound mass", which is numerically equal to the weight of an object in a 1 G gravity well. I always found it extremely awkward, because you basically had to carry around a conversion factor called "gee sub C" (yeah, not gonna bust out the HTML subscript tags, sorry) in order for your numbers to work out. Dimensional analysis is needlessly complicated.

      Use slugs. That's the English equivalent of a kilogram. 1 slug weighs 32.2 pounds (force) on Earth's surface.

      Conversely, the metric unit of weight is a newton. 9.8 newtons masses 1 kilogram. If you look at the acceleration due to gravity expressed in English and metric units, you will see the happy parallel structure.

      Use this knowledge only for good.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    14. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Please note the absence of the u in a kilopond.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re:Another plug for the metric system by tygerstripes · · Score: 1

      However the "pound avoirdupois", avoirdupois being the system used in the United States

      Avoirdupois? To have peas?

      --
      Meta will eat itself
    16. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So /that's/ where they hide our poo?!

    17. Re:Another plug for the metric system by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      And on that note, how is having 300 lbs (or mass-equivalent) less gear going to keep you from hopping off the moon into outerspace forever? Didn't the extra mass come in handy to keep people from flying away?

      To be on the moon isn't quite like being on Armageddon's asteroid, if you get kicked in the balls by the hot mean chick you won't drift away in space. On the moon, if you jump, you might get a few meters high, but you'll fall back, at about the same speed at which you jumped. So yeah, this is really not a concern on the moon. If you wanted to jump from the moon and drift away in space, you'd have to jump at a speed of over 5300 mph.

      You could jump butt naked on a trampoline on the moon, you'd get to jump pretty high, but you would always fall back.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    18. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Speare · · Score: 1

      "Pound avoirdupois"? That sounds like Frenchy talk. I say we start using "Freedom Pounds!"

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    19. Re:Another plug for the metric system by dgbrownnt · · Score: 1

      The astronauts would be able to leap even farther than they could in the bulky spacesuits, though. "One small step for man, one giant leap for the new, sexy astronauts!"
    20. Re:Another plug for the metric system by Nivag064 · · Score: 1

      Actual English Measurements are metric!

      Pounds are part of the old Imperial system...

      I was brought up using pounds, feet, etc. Metric is much much easier.

      -Nivag

  19. Oh No.... by MojoRilla · · Score: 2, Funny

    Welcome to a world where the Fantastic Four get science right. Nooooooooooooo!

    1. Re:Oh No.... by carou · · Score: 1

      Don't worry - Red Mars got there years beforehand.

  20. Great, commercialize it by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    One of the interesting space startups at the moment is Orbital Outfitters, a company supplying space suits for the NewSpace community. Go sell them this technology so they can actually test it.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  21. Wrong! Re:300 lbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Masses 300lbs, weighs nothing, but still no friend of mobility.

    This is utterly wrong, not insightful. Pounds is a measure of weight, which is the measure of the force of gravity upon an object's mass.

  22. The Millennial Project by White+Shade · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A book called The Millennial project was released several years ago that describes skin-tight space suits in very clear and specific terms, dicussing how a tight material is sufficient to handle the pressure, and how just a chest plate might be useful to provide radiation protection and protection from micrometeors and the like. I believe it described the use of tungsten..

    It's a really interesting book, talks about a lot of other technology, and seems pretty darn reasonable about most of it too.

    http://www.amazon.com/Millennial-Project-Colonizin g-Galaxy-Eight/dp/0316771635

    --
    ìì!
    1. Re:The Millennial Project by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      It's also known as the "me too" space colonization book. It pales in comparison to the O'Neil original.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:The Millennial Project by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Von Braun had one as well: Where the Winds Sleep.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:The Millennial Project by CuriousKangaroo · · Score: 1

      The Brin & Benford book "Heart of the Comet" also mentions spacesuits like this in the later part of the novel.

    4. Re:The Millennial Project by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "chest plate might be useful to provide radiation protection and protection from micrometeors and the like"

      Screw that - I would demand a titanium codpiece.

      Gotta protect the parts that really matter.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    5. Re:The Millennial Project by cremes · · Score: 1

      In Victor Koman's KINGS OF THE HIGH FRONTIER he also describes spacesuits very similar in scope and technology to the original post. BTW, great all around book about a private space race which we are *finally* seeing come to fruition.

    6. Re:The Millennial Project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a fascinating book. Unfortunately its ideas include some serious flaws, like a curve in the linear accelerator launcher that would squash anything launched on it into a thin paste, a total inability to accrete ocean calcium in the described manner, and electro-stimulus of muscle tissue to maintain the muscle tone of residents of null gravity habitats. OTECs work though, and it had some seriously big dreaming in it that is worth remembering when thinking about colonizing space.

  23. Air Pressure by MrSteveSD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You can exert mechanical pressure but the real air pressure inside the suit is going to be zero. That means water is going to boil off. Presumably they have considered that issue.

    1. Re:Air Pressure by overshoot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You can exert mechanical pressure but the real air pressure inside the suit is going to be zero. That means water is going to boil off. Presumably they have considered that issue.
      Of course -- it's a great way to keep the astronaut cool. Just add water (orally, thank you; like any athlete hydration is essential!)

      If that means "too cool" then a sweater or other insulation should be used. As long as it breaths. Gore-Tex is wonderful stuff.

      --
      Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    2. Re:Air Pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yeah, the air pressure in the suit is technically going to be zero -- there'll be no air in the suit. Nor will there be vacuum in it. It's skintight.

      Surely you don't imagine that the helmet will be unpressurized?

    3. Re:Air Pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the suit is stretchy and airtight, it won't have 0 pressure inside. Any airspaces trapped inside would have to stretch the suit to drop in pressure, and from the sounds of it, it's hard to stretch, hence it holds in pressure still.

    4. Re:Air Pressure by treeves · · Score: 1

      If you RTFA, it said that the suit is not airtight, and doesn't need to be since skin is quite airtight. It doesn't talk about the thermal issues.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    5. Re:Air Pressure by hypermanng · · Score: 1

      I believe overshoot's post was a joke, moderator. If air pressure inside the suit was really zero, the astronaut would die of the bends.

      --
      I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
    6. Re:Air Pressure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Normally, wouldn't marketing a space suit as "Not Air-tight" hurt sales? :P

      But seriously, that is a very interesting angle... But what happens with your orifices? (That is, those not covered by a helmet?)

      (Insert obligatory joke about annoying bosses with sticks or heads up their rears.)

      I guess it'll be addressed by the SuperDiaper.

    7. Re:Air Pressure by Alioth · · Score: 1

      No it's not, because the suit pressing on the body of the wearer will cause the pressure of the gases, liquids etc. that the wearer is made of to be something greater than zero. The suit is only airless if there's no occupant!

  24. Hoopy Froods by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    If the suit is skintight, then we should see a lot more of the Female Astronaut Program. All of it!

    Of course, this development will open the way for space fashion. Designers will now be able to dress up the outside of astronauts, without it looking like a 1950s monster movie. Superfluous garments that don't constrain us will now be possible, and we'll start competing with them out on the space cameras.

    It'll finally look a lot more like the SF movies that have inspired most of us to care about humans in space. Now all we'll need is those neat little hoops at the ends of their arms and legs. And a talking robot.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Hoopy Froods by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/biosuit2-enlarg ed.jpg

      Yes, you can see the shape of her butt. I predict this will get near-unanimous approval.

      --
      -Styopa
    2. Re:Hoopy Froods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Space fashion?! If I find out you had anything to do with Ukraine's entry in the Eurovision song contest I'll make you pay! Seeing that that was the most traumatic moment of my life *sniffle*.. some nights I still wake up screaming in terror.

    3. Re:Hoopy Froods by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Don't blame me. Those are NASA prototypes. Not ready for prime time, but better than burning up in reentry.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    4. Re:Hoopy Froods by AgentPaper · · Score: 1

      And it will be unanimous if you can get a suitably skimpy bikini under that thing.

      --
      First rule of trauma: Bleeding always stops.
    5. Re:Hoopy Froods by coldcell · · Score: 1
      Did you intend for Female Astronaut Program to have such a fitting acronymn?

      ...pun intended :P

      --
      Launchy.net changed my world.
    6. Re:Hoopy Froods by kramulous · · Score: 1

      If the suit is skintight, then we should see a lot more of the Female Astronaut Program. All of it!
      Dude, I don't know what things are like over there, but in this country, the nerdy chicks are not the sort I'd drool over as they do tumbles in spandex.
      --
      .
    7. Re:Hoopy Froods by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      It's very cold in space. And the operative word is skin "tight". We can put a woman on the moon, and we can bring back the corset. The helmets will still enclose the entire head.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    8. Re:Hoopy Froods by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The FAP being a "fitting" acronym might be a pun, but how is the acronym itself?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  25. It sure took a while by overshoot · · Score: 5, Informative
    Back when John Campbell was editor of Analog, one of the "Science Fact" articles proposed that spacesuits could be made of gas-permeable mesh that would let skin do what skin does: selective permeability. (Obviously, some parts such as the head still get air!) Provide pressure support but don't try to create an interior environment, and you eliminate a huge number of the worst design challenges of a spacesuit.

    You also make it a lot less vulnerable to life-threatening damage.

    Chalk up another one for the old Analog, right along with Giant Meteor Impact.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:It sure took a while by Banner · · Score: 1

      I was going to post this very thing then I saw that you had. If i had mod points you'd get a +1 insightful

    2. Re:It sure took a while by GileadGreene · · Score: 1

      IIRC, the Air Force did actual tests on suits of this sort in vacuum chambers several decades ago. I seem to remember Jerry Pournelle mentioning it in one of his essays (something in "A Step Farther Out" maybe?). Note that both Pournelle and Niven typically had their spacefarers wearing skintight suits.

  26. Old idea, new implementation by tpr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The idea of using mechanical pressure instead of air pressure is not new; quite aside from the fantasies of SF writers through the years there have been serious attempts to make 'spandex spacesuits' before.

    Major problems I've heard of include joint mobility (imagine a tight spandex sleeve - now imagine flexing your arm at the elbow against the resistance of the material) and the sheer unbelievability of the idea for most people. Of course, most of us would look like crap in a tight spandex bodystocking anyway.

    Thermal and radiation protection could be handled much as they are now except that it wouldn't be tied to the pressure vessel aspects of the suit. Imagine rather chunky overalls, for example. I suppose the good news is that the outer parts would then be much more universal, making them easier to manufacture and maintain. You could even store them outside the rather cramped airlock and put them on outside in, say, the shuttle bay.

    1. Re:Old idea, new implementation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      most of us would look like crap in a tight spandex bodystocking Cue Tron guy.

      Yup, nothing better than looking at a bunch of guys who look like they've been squeezed into a toothpaste tube.
    2. Re:Old idea, new implementation by networkBoy · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Of course, most of us would look like crap in a tight spandex bodystocking anyway."

      And therein is how I will repel the micro-meteorites. My ugly-ass body will scare them enough to deflect their path.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    3. Re:Old idea, new implementation by Jay+Maynard · · Score: 1

      If they asked me to be a test subject, I'd go...

      --
      Disinfect the GNU General Public Virus!
  27. head protection? by timmarhy · · Score: 1

    they must still use a normal life support system for the head, as you can't wrap anything over the astronauts head. i wonder how this would cope with a rip in the fabric to, you might have your flesh ripped from your bones and out the hole in the suit?

    --
    If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    1. Re:head protection? by Detritus · · Score: 4, Informative

      You've seen too many bad movies. A hole would result in some localized swelling of the exposed tissue. I'd be more concerned about severe sunburn, which can happen quickly in space.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:head protection? by hypermanng · · Score: 1

      Animal testing gives good data. A summary:

      http://www.sff.net/people/Geoffrey.Landis/vacuum.h tml

      --
      I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
    3. Re:head protection? by robbak · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, yes. One of the inhumane experiments done by NAZI scientists was exposing people to near-vacuums for various lengths of time. People can survive for an unexpectedly long time. If it is only for a minute or so, often they suffer no serious injury.

      Sorry, not links for you, but I have provided enough data for a search.

      --
      Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    4. Re:head protection? by largesnike · · Score: 1

      hmmm...vacuum's not that bad, actually in places where there is no direct sunlight, It'll be -273 degrees C, so you'll probably find that that bit of exposed flesh would get really cold. If exposed to sunlight, it'll burn pretty quickly, but not before you can get some tape on it.

      ...now a micrometeor in the arse...

      --
      "Laugh while you can a-monkey boy!" - Dr Emilio Lizardo
    5. Re:head protection? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Oddly, this is one of the few bits of science ST:TNG got right, in an episode entitled Disaster.

  28. Not new - see Mercury Redstone program by Neandertalensis · · Score: 1
    The suits used in the Mercury Redstone program also used mechanical counter-pressure. The modern elastic materials were not available then, so mechanical pressure was provided by miles of shoe-lace style ties up and down the legs, torso and arms. It was a long and laborious process to get in or out of one of these suits, and required a ground grew to suit up an astronaut (or U-2, X-15 pilot, etc.) before a high-altitude, low pressure flight.

    Kudos to the fine folks at MIT, but again, they have done nothing new.

    The first human in space was piloting an X-15 while the rocket program was still producing some rather impressive fireworks displays.

    1. Re:Not new - see Mercury Redstone program by tekrat · · Score: 1

      The first human in space was piloting an X-15 while the rocket program was still producing some rather impressive fireworks displays.

      Thank You. It's nice to see that I'm not the only human on planet earth that thinks that way. We could be colonizing other solar systems by now had we continued the simple space-plane concept instead of trying to beat the Russians at putting men ontop of missiles. What a collossal waste of time and money. Notice that Burt Rutan opted for an X-15 style system of mothership and dropship to win the X-Prize. Everyone else trying to build a "rocket" hasn't lifted off the ground yet.

      --
      If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    2. Re:Not new - see Mercury Redstone program by SirMeliot · · Score: 1

      I'll take a punt that the first human into space was under a helium balloon. I can't remember what the program was called, but I saw an interview with the pilot. He mentioned a problem with a faulty glove causing his hand to swell. He also remarked that the atmosphere was so thin that on the way back down (by jumping off with a parachute!) there was no sensation of falling or of air rushing past.

    3. Re:Not new - see Mercury Redstone program by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      On the subject of partial-body vacuum exposure, the results are not quite as serious. In 1960, during a high-altitude balloon parachute-jump, a partial-body vacuum exposure incident occurred when Joe Kittinger, Jr. lost pressurization in his right glove during an ascent to 103,000 ft (19.5 miles) in an unpressurized balloon gondola, Despite the depressurization, he continued the mission, and although the hand became painful and useless, after he returned to the ground, his hand returned to normal. Kittinger wrote in National Geographic (November 1960):

      And it goes on. Found at http://www.sff.net/people/Geoffrey.Landis/vacuum.h tml linked in another comment.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  29. Reminds me of the spacesuits in Pluto Nash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An undeservedly underrated movie, it had skin-tight (and sexxxy) spacesuits much like that pictured in TFA

    http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0180052/C59-28R.jpg

  30. This is good news. by Dunbal · · Score: 1

    I bet the Chinese are happy. Because after all, the US can barely keep its space shuttle flying, while the Chinese are planning a manned moon mission. They need these suits a lot more.

    Yes, call me a troll. After all, US foreign policy has done so much for world peace in the past few years. Those billions were well spent, boys. /sarcasm

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a troll. That's trillions we've spent blowing up mosques and in creating ineffective missile defense systems to try and hold the world hostage with nukes again.

      Don't sell US short!

    2. Re:This is good news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, in English, billions. You've mistaken thousand millions for billions, even though in the non-US world everyone calls them thousand millions.

    3. Re:This is good news. by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Uh huh. And what are the Chinese gonna do at the moon? That's right, nothing. Same as us. Haven't we had enough of expensive vanity projects?

      You, sir, are a troll.

    4. Re:This is good news. by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 1

      And what are the Chinese gonna do at the moon? Well, if they were using these new suits I would suggest maybe a round of lunar beach volleyball. Maybe they could team up with Sweden and borrow their Bikini Team.
      --
      Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
    5. Re:This is good news. by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Or, in English, billions. You've mistaken thousand millions for billions, even though in the non-US world everyone calls them thousand millions.

      Umm... huh? According to this wikipedia article, the following countries use the short scale:

              United States
              Canada
              Ireland
              Australia
              New Zealand

      and, of course... United Kingdom - albeit with some residual usage of the long-scale

      Ironically, of the nations which use the long scale, none of them are traditionally considered "English" countries.

  31. Like in Anime by tahuti · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Like in Anime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      http://img.verycd.com/posts/0702/post-495495-11723 22061.jpg

      Gotta love cartoon cameltoe.

    2. Re:Like in Anime by dbIII · · Score: 1
      A lot of the technology in that show made this year is based on real examples. Work has been going on with skintight spacesuits for some time to the point where people have been wandering about in the desert in Utah wearing prototypes (part of a Mars project and an international effort).

      It's not all real obviously - there's comic elements and a magical girl in it, which is how she survives the weight of two people at 8g (640kg spread from your body onto the accereration couch is too much for anyone).

    3. Re:Like in Anime by kaizokuace · · Score: 1

      what i thought was cool in rocket girls was that their suits didnt require them to do compression/decompression to get in and out of them. But yea when i saw this article that was the first thing i thought of. Another cool space anime going on right now is moonlight mile. I want space to be cool again! I mean, it was always cool to me but i mean cool to you know, other people.

      --
      Balderdash!
  32. One day... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Men and women will travel on vacations through space, go on space walks with suits that are skin tight, strong, and feel like they are not even there. Colonize mars and beyond.
    Not sit on earth as it is turned into a nightmare that last forever because of nanotech keeping you alive while you are beat and raped until the end of time by the one you tried to break.

  33. Simple Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where is the bathroom?

    1. Re:Simple Question by Gabrill · · Score: 1

      Out back. Take the tp with you.

      --
      Always going forward, 'cause we can't find reverse.
  34. How do you put it on? by Bazman · · Score: 1

    With a gas-pressurized suit, you put it on at atmospheric pressure and pump it up as you go outside. These squeezy suits are surely going to *hurt* if you wear them in a normal atmospheric pressure environment, and I dont see a way of ramping up the squeeze factor. Oh well, maybe they've got that in there somewhere, I just dont see it.

    1. Re:How do you put it on? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      it will squeeze at 2 atm in a pressurized environment, or about as much as being 30 feet underwater.

      it won't hurt it will just feel snug.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    2. Re:How do you put it on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only difference is that when you're 30 feet underwater you're breathing pressurized air... so you can actually breathe.

    3. Re:How do you put it on? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Heard of an existence proof? There's a model in the picture wearing the damn suit.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    4. Re:How do you put it on? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      so put on the breathing apparatus first

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    5. Re:How do you put it on? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Spacecraft generally use about 1/3 atm (5 psi), so it's more like being 10 feet under water.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    6. Re:How do you put it on? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inflatable seams and air bladders are two ways to adjust the pressure

  35. PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm thinking this has some inherent drawbacks. With gas pressure regulation, the pressure inside the suite is the same regardless of whether you are inside the space capsule (at 16psi ambient pressure) or outside (at zero PSI ambient). It seems to me that if this thing is mechanically applying 16 PSI in vacuum then it must apply 32 PSI when inside the capsule. That's going to raise your blood pressure. Not by enough to be harmful, (after all scuba divers have the same). But more importantly, if you take our helmet off now you suffocate inside the space capusle. You suffocate first because you cannot physcally open your lungs with 32 PSI pressing on them in a 16psi atmosphere. And secondly even if you solved that, then you still have the problem of the 32 psi pressure making it harder to dissolve gas in your blood, so your cells cant get air or release CO2. And finally, if you took your kemet off then you have the extra 16 psi in your bloodstream pushing against the back of your eye-balls.

    I wonder how they dealt with that?

    One speculation might be that they made the suit not stretchy but just a fixed size that EXACTLY fits you. This way you have no pressure until you expand into the suit which then applies a counter force.

    However I cant' see that actually being possible, and having any flexibility. If You expand even slightly your blood pressure will drop. it would have to fit everywhere exactly, down to the gonads. cause you'd get enormous swelling in any place there was no counter-force.

    Finally, I can't see how this works around your head. If the suit is not pressurized then how do you maintain 16psi pressure on the face? Sure you could have the person breath through a regulator. But the face itself would not have pressure on it.

    Obviously I don't understand how this thing works or can work.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by desenz · · Score: 1

      I think that might be why the article mentions a future version using a hybrid of our current type of suit with the newer skintight type. I don't really know much about space suits, though...

    2. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And what about room for the diaper? There's got to be room in the ass for expansion. How do you manage that with mechanical pressure?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    3. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by timeOday · · Score: 4, Funny

      It seems to me that if this thing is mechanically applying 16 PSI in vacuum then it must apply 32 PSI when inside the capsule. That's going to raise your blood pressure. Not by enough to be harmful, (after all scuba divers have the same).
      This gets at my question, which is why pressurization is needed at all. Diving from 1 to 2 atmospheres is no big deal. Why is going from 1 to 0 such a problem?
    4. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by MrNiceguy_KS · · Score: 1

      From TFA:

      "Newman says the finished BioSuit may be a hybrid that incorporates some elements of the traditional suits, including a gas-pressured torso section and helmet."

      --
      Redundancy is good And also good.
    5. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by glittalogik · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you never know when you're going to need to fly non-stop to Neptune and pepper-spray some bitch in the spaceport parking lot. No time for toilet breaks!

    6. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      How can it possibly make a seal to part of the person? If no seal then the limbs are pressurized too.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    7. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by icegreentea · · Score: 3, Informative

      cause in order to continue breathing, pressure within the lungs must equal pressure exerted on the body. you increase external pressure, you can increase air pressure with it (like in scuba). you decrease pressure, i guess you can decrease pressure to a certain degree. of course, 0psi external pressure = 0psi in the lungs = no gas = no good. hence the need to maintain pressure on the human body by w/e means.

    8. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by goombah99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can't say I'm an expert sure but it seems to me it's not symmetrical. Water, i.e. you, is not compressible, but the dissolved gasses and air spaces which are equilibrated to 16 PSi can expand. (when you go from 1->2atm->1 in scuba, the dissolved gasses are still mostly equilibrated to 16psi if it's quick, but you have to decomress if you wait long enough at 2atm. )

      Even if you survived the air space expansion, You'd basically have the Bends in few minutes from the dissolved gas release I believe. In addition to the painful pressure they cause, expanded gasses can also do fun stuff like kill nerves.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    9. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      rubber bands, duh!

    10. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by jfdawes · · Score: 1

      The article mentions that 30 psi is one third of the normal air pressure on earth. Don't really know where your figures are coming from (if you need 30 psi to be "safe" from a vacuum, then 16 is probably dangerous), but 48 psi is still only about half "normal" air pressure.

      Even if they had the spacecraft interior at 50 psi, 80 is still less than normal. I wouldn't be surprised if 120 barely only makes it uncomfortable.

    11. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by AgentPaper · · Score: 1

      it would have to fit everywhere exactly, down to the gonads.

      Which is exactly why you need to have women in these suits - much less irregularity to worry about...

      No, seriously. You can mechanically pressurize large and/or regular areas of the body (torso, limbs, etc), and use localized gas bladders for irregular areas (genitalia, hands/feet, etc). As for the head, that's easy; use a pressure helmet with a neck seal and feed breathing gas into that, just like dry-suit divers do.

      --
      First rule of trauma: Bleeding always stops.
    12. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by jafiwam · · Score: 1

      You mean kPa (thousands pascal).

      PSI (pounds per square inch) normal ATM is 14.7 PSI.

      You should stop using the gas station pump for your bike and use a hand pump with a gauge, then you would know that. :)

    13. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by swillden · · Score: 1

      The article mentions that 30 psi is one third of the normal air pressure on earth. Don't really know where your figures are coming from (if you need 30 psi to be "safe" from a vacuum, then 16 is probably dangerous), but 48 psi is still only about half "normal" air pressure.

      The article says 30 KPa is about one-third of normal air pressure on earth. 30 KPa is about 4.3 PSI. Nominal air pressure at sea level is 14.69 PSI, or 101 KPa.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    14. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by AgentPaper · · Score: 1

      Minor unit error - sea level pressure is 101.3 kPa, or 14.7 psi. 30 kPa comes out to about 4.4 psi - which is actually right in line with current EVA suits, which can run anywhere from 3.0 to 4.7 psi. (Note that you're breathing pure O2 in those suits. An O2 partial pressure of 3 psi comes out to about 10 psi of normal air, which is what you get in a commercial airliner).

      --
      First rule of trauma: Bleeding always stops.
    15. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by swillden · · Score: 2, Informative

      This gets at my question, which is why pressurization is needed at all. Diving from 1 to 2 atmospheres is no big deal. Why is going from 1 to 0 such a problem?

      One really big issue is breathing. With atmospheric pressure of 0, there's nothing in your lungs. To survive, you need a minimum of about 0.05 ppO2[*], which means that even if you're breathing pure O2 you have to have at least 1/20th of an atmosphere of pressure, or you'll die of oxygen deprivation. You need more than that if you're going to do any useful work, because the rate of O2 perfusion is proportional to the ppO2 that you're breathing. According to the article, the expected minimum level is about a third of an atmosphere (which is about 5 PSI, not 16 PSI).

      [*] "ppO2" means "partial pressure of O2". Multiply the percentage O2 in the gas mixture by the pressure (in atmospheres) and you get ppO2. A person breathing air (~20% O2) at sea level is breathing a ppO2 of about 0.2 (and a ppN2 of about 80%). A diver at 33 fsw is at 2 atm of pressure, so if he's breathing air he has a ppO2 of 0.4.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      Those pressure helmets don't seal. They only work because they are pressurized to the same pressure as the ambient water pressure and thus don't need a true seal to hold out the water. And for the rest of your plan, you're basically back to a pressurized suit.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    17. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by crashfrog · · Score: 5, Informative

      Obviously I don't understand how this thing works or can work.

      I think it's just that you don't understand how lungs work.

      When you inhale you don't inflate your lungs by increasing their volume, like opening a bellows.

      The way you inhale is by lowering the pressure in your chest cavity by means of the diaphragm, which contracts downwards, increasing chest volume. As the pressure in your chest (outside your lungs) decreases, air forces itself into your lungs and inflates them.

      It seems to me that if this thing is mechanically applying 16 PSI in vacuum then it must apply 32 PSI when inside the capsule.

      Yeah, but there's air inside your body pushing out, too, remember. That's what the 16 PSI is there for, in fact - to restrain the gases within your body. That's why the suit has to be pressurized - to push back on the pressures within your body that, normally, the atmosphere will push back against.

      So, inside the capsule, you're facing 32 Psi minus the 16 psi pushing out from inside you, so you're only against the 16 psi tension of the suit. I imagine it's like breathing with an ace bandage (or, like, a bra) around your chest - more difficult but certainly not impossible.

      And secondly even if you solved that, then you still have the problem of the 32 psi pressure making it harder to dissolve gas in your blood, so your cells cant get air or release CO2.

      Higher PSI makes it easier, not harder, to dissolve gases in fluids.

      Finally, I can't see how this works around your head. If the suit is not pressurized then how do you maintain 16psi pressure on the face?

      Big bubble helmet pressurized to 16 psi, like always. I don't see the problem.

      --
      I never have frustrations, the reason is, to wit:
      If at first I don't succeed, I quit!
    18. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      Memory says 101.325kpa

    19. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by goodmanj · · Score: 1

      I made this analogy in another post, but it's good here too...

      The suit doesn't apply a fixed pressure; it would be designed so it was more like a bottle with a fixed volume.

      Imagine a glass bottle full of 95 liters of water, plus a plastic bag full of 5 liters of air. (The bag represents the lungs.) The plastic bag has a tube (the throat and mouth) leading out of the bottle. Now, place the bottle in a 16-psi atmosphere, with the tube open to the air. The bottle provides zero back-pressure; the air pressure inside the plastic bag is also 16 psi.

      Now put the bottle in a vacuum, but connect the tube up to a 16-psi air supply. The bottle walls now push back as the air inside tries to expand, and the pressure inside the bag is still 16 psi.

      Now, the question is, how do you exchange air between the plastic bag and the air supply, if the bottle volume is fixed? The answer is, you make the bottle walls just *slightly* stretchy, so that a little bit of force (provided by the astronaut's chest muscles) can expand and contract the container.

      The key is, when lung pressure equals outside environment pressure, the suit is "slack", and exerts no force on the body inside.

    20. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Moofie · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Space capsules are not normally run at full atmospheric pressure. I believe the Shuttle runs at atmospheric pressure, but I wonder if that is just to make it easier on the crews on relatively short voyages. On a long mission, I imagine that a low-pressure environment will be easier to maintain.

      Just speculatin'...

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    21. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the engineers were waiting for you to come up with a solution to that problem. Because they probably didn't think of it.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    22. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by goombah99 · · Score: 1
      I think I pretty much addressed your comment in my original post when I said

      One speculation might be that they made the suit not stretchy but just a fixed size that EXACTLY fits you. This way you have no pressure until you expand into the suit which then applies a counter force. Where I then went on to site what I surmised be the problems with that.

      Now that said, your answer makes me rethink some of my objections. One of the objections was how to prevent tissue from swelling into the dead volumes once the ambient pressure on it removed. One answer I guess is to pressureize the suit statically--not dynamically. That is fill the suit with 16 psi and seal it. Don't allow the dead volume to change and this keep the pressure constant Can this be done? I doubt it. If the suit is sealed and pressurized then one has a problem if flexation would change the volume. In which case the suit becomes stiff about the maximum volume position in vacuum. So we can't use static pressure. Need to have a regulated pressure to allow the dead volume to change to get flexibility. But now we are back to a pressure suit.

      So As I said I can't quite see how this escapes using a pressurized suit. MAybe the article is just misleading.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    23. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      16 kPa, not psi. The pressurized head thing can be done with what we already have - maintain 1 atm on the head and equalize it before removing the faceplate. This is a solved problem, AFAICT - scuba can do it, as can modern airlocks, it just needs a bit of reworking. Sure, it's significant, but it isn't anything completely new like the suit itself.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    24. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by salec · · Score: 1

      However I cant' see that actually being possible, and having any flexibility. If You expand even slightly your blood pressure will drop. it would have to fit everywhere exactly, down to the gonads. cause you'd get enormous swelling in any place there was no counter-force.
      Fill the remaining empty space between body and suit with a fluid (or perhaps a gel). That would even the pressure and as a plus, double as anti-G equipment.
    25. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Alioth · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, ignoring for now that atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi, not 16 psi - there's no need for the suit or the occupant to actually be at sea level atmospheric pressure. In fact, it may be undesirable, as it means you need more powerful life support systems - more weight, more complexity.

      The human body is fine at 0.2 atmospheres so long as it's getting enough oxygen. While in the spacecraft without a helmet, with 0.2 atm (less than 4 psi) being pressed against your chest might be uncomfortable, it's not going to kill you.

    26. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by KoldKompress · · Score: 1

      So, inside the capsule, you're facing 32 Psi minus the 16 psi pushing out from inside you, so you're only against the 16 psi tension of the suit. I imagine it's like breathing with an ace bandage (or, like, a bra) around your chest - more difficult but certainly not impossible. To have that kind of experiance or comparison, I have to assume you're a cross-dressing Astronaut.
    27. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      0.2 atm would be a mostly oxygen environment. The human body would not be so very fine with that.

    28. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by vertinox · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why is going from 1 to 0 such a problem?

      The body sized hickey.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    29. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by db32 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Given the huge market in gonad swelling products I fail to see how this is a problem. I expect these guys to make a huge return on their investment with all the Sci-Fi babe references and now gonad swelling capabilities.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    30. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      And what about room for the diaper? There's got to be room in the ass for expansion. How do you manage that with mechanical pressure? In a skintight suit? Oh, boy. This reminds me of a bad joke I saw in a comic.

      Skinny geek: Hey, muscle dude! What's your secret to success with the ladies?

      Muscle dude: A cut physique and a winning smile. But the deal-maker is I put a potato in my speedo.

      Skinny geek dude: Thanks! I'll try that

      *later*

      Skinny geek dude: Hey, I tried it but they're all laughing at me.

      Muscle dude: (smacks hand to face) Yeah, but you're supposed to put the potato in front!

      One thing I wondered, with more advanced suits, would it not be possible to do IV feeding as well as IV waste removal? I can't imagine anything much worse than spending days in a suit and having poopy pants. I mean, you're going to be there in the retirement home if you live long enough, why start early?
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    31. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by mcvos · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that if this thing is mechanically applying 16 PSI in vacuum then it must apply 32 PSI when inside the capsule. That's going to raise your blood pressure. Not by enough to be harmful, (after all scuba divers have the same). But more importantly, if you take our helmet off now you suffocate inside the space capusle. You suffocate first because you cannot physcally open your lungs with 32 PSI pressing on them in a 16psi atmosphere. And secondly even if you solved that, then you still have the problem of the 32 psi pressure making it harder to dissolve gas in your blood, so your cells cant get air or release CO2. And finally, if you took your kemet off then you have the extra 16 psi in your bloodstream pushing against the back of your eye-balls. I wonder how they dealt with that?

      By not using 16 PSI (about 110 kPa, apparently) of pressure. Read the article, they're going for 30 kPa, so that's probably about 5 PSI. You don't need a full atmosphere to breathe, and your skin doesn't need the pressure of a full atmosphere either, so 30 kPa is probably plenty, once you're used to it. I suspect breathing aboard a pressurised spaceship in one of these suits without your helmet on will be heavy and tiring, but probably not bad enough to suffocate befoore you get the chance to take the suit of.

      I don't doubt that somewhere in the science fictioney future these skin-tight suits will be made of smart materials that adapt their pressure to your environment.

    32. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      good points. Or maybe they have a quick release tensioner about the torso like a ski boot?

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    33. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by viesturz · · Score: 1
      for those who didn't RTFA:

      Newman says the finished BioSuit may be a hybrid that incorporates some elements of the traditional suits, including a gas-pressured torso section and helmet. An oxygen tank can be attached to the back.

    34. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      IV waste removal is actually a pretty interesting idea, even if a bit sci-fi. I wonder what would happen to the "plumbing" organs, though, if an IV i/o system were used for long periods of time.

      And if we're going to get totally sci fi, then how about a transporter? or a worm hole?* (I imagine that would suck if you lived on the receiving end of the toilet wormhole. "Where does all this shit keep coming from?"

      *Link goes to Everything2 article about a comic. One of the storylines in the comic is the reverse of the above idea, where the receiving end of the wormhole is in a man's anus and he can't stop shitting.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    35. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And finally, if you took your kemet off then you have the extra 16 psi in your bloodstream pushing against the back of your eye-balls.
      OMG, KDE Nazi! (Sorry, couldn't resist that!)
    36. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Wow, I think a lot of people totally missed it, so I'll try to help out. The sarcasm meters must be blown. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

      Worst-case scenario, wearing the suit brings your internal pressure to 2 atmospheres - something you can easily withstand in a (very thin) diving suit. Unless you spend a long time wearing the suit in full atmosphere, and the atmosphere hasn't been adjusted to not have gasses that increase your risk of the bends, you will soon be out in space and back to 1 atmosphere. You may not want to live in the suit full-time, but they don't do that right now. Why would you assume they would with this one?

      If you'd read the article, you would have noticed that they said the target pressure is 30 kPa, about 1/3 atmosphere. That means wearing the suit full-time in the ship would put you at 1.3 atmospheres, which isn't huge. This site notes that 33 feet of water acts as 2 atmospheres, so we're talking like being under 10 feet of water on a long-term basis. Now, there's still the 1-atmosphere drop when you do an EVA, but this should be able to be handled with a decent decompression chamber (a.k.a. airlock), if it's even necessary.

      To the original poster: commendations on a witty and relevant comment.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    37. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On Planet Earth we do actually have female astronauts, you know.

    38. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Because it would cause the water in your body to instantly do a mix of exploding and freezing, and all the gases solved in it would also escape.
      When under such low pressure, water doesn't have a liquid state.

    39. Re:PHYSICS: Why skin tight may be a bad idea by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Absolutely it would be fine with that. Mostly O2 environments are used routinely to no ill effect (mostly pilots in unpressurized aircraft at high altitudes). People aren't going to be spending their lives in a space suit, only relatively short periods of time.

      If you think the human body "would not be so very fine with that" (relatively short periods of high O2 atmospheres at lower pressure), please post a link to the appropriate medical citation - and statistics showing that pilots are dropping like flies from it.

  36. what about the diapers?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    will the diapers still fit underneath?
    -dirtbag

  37. Reminds me of Traveler by bigattichouse · · Score: 1

    Traveler from GDW made a big point about space suits being skin tight at higher tech levels, so that users would not be encumbered, just sort of popped in my head when reading the headline.

    Same principle was used on Mars in Heinlein's Red Planet.

    --
    meh
    1. Re:Reminds me of Traveler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Kim Stanley Robinson's Red, Green, and Blue Mars series, which was what I thought you meant at first. Red Mars in particular has been identified by NASA administrators as what they see as a realistic initial Mars colonization mission.

    2. Re:Reminds me of Traveler by dogregor · · Score: 1

      Also in Heinlein's "Have Space Suit Will Travel" (c 1958)-- not the one the main character uses at the beginning, but ones provided later in the story by the good-guy aliens.

  38. Two MIT slashvertisements in one day? by the_tsi · · Score: 0, Troll

    I mean, seriously, who at MIT is paying Slashdot for all these ads? It's like suddenly MIT is the new Google or Apple or Nintendo.

    That said, imagine the computational power of a beowulf of MITs! If they cured fear and invented a new spacesuit in one day, imagine all the other crazy stuff they could come up with! Even better, if MIT can run Linux, then... wait, I guess most of MIT does already.

    I must be new here.

  39. Is the pressure the only thing? by JensR · · Score: 1

    I thought most of the problems are because the spacesuit needs to insulate against the heat and cold, and protect from radiation?

  40. Stupid sexy astronauts... by PhotoGuy · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Feels like I'm wearing nothing at all... Nothing at all... Nothing at all..."

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:Stupid sexy astronauts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahhh! Stupid sexy Shepard!

    2. Re:Stupid sexy astronauts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/Shepard/Flanders/

  41. Self-inflicted problems by overshoot · · Score: 2, Informative

    I thought most of the problems are because the spacesuit needs to insulate against the heat and cold, and protect from radiation?
    Heat and cold you handle with a reflective cover (yup, silver foil! another SF tradition upheld.)

    Heat especially is actually easier since human skin has built-in evaporative cooling. Can't beat vacuum for insulation. Most of the heating/cooling problems of current suits are self-inflicted by their bulky closed designs.

    Radiation? Nothing shorter than UV is going to be stopped by a suit anyway and UV can be blocked by that beautiful silver film.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  42. More important.. by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Funny

    won't people see the diaper?

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:More important.. by snakecoder · · Score: 1


      They will only see the diaper when it's full.

      The other concern is what is this going to look like when a male astronaut gets a boner.

      --
      -Nuke the moon
    2. Re:More important.. by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Male astronauts don't get a boners.

      They ARE boners.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  43. Slug, not plug! by counterfriction · · Score: 1

    The pound is a unit of force. It's metric equivalent would be the Newton. The British Engineering unit for mass is called the slug, which is ~14.6kg.

    --
    Sig free's the way to be.
  44. Geezerdom by overshoot · · Score: 1
    There are advantages to having been around a while.

    One of them is my collection of Astounding/Analog. Another, frankly, is a son who haunts used bookstores and sends me copies I'm missing from my collection.

    Now, all I need to do is knock over the University of Arizona's Special Collections library. I spent too many hours there as a student reading every issue that John Campbell edited, clear back to the 30s.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Geezerdom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth.
      Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate^W used bookstores.
  45. Back to old "disco" suits of the 1960's. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember in the 1960 the U.S. Air Force and Navy were testing pressure suits to work in the high performance jet fighters at that time and I remember those "disco" suits that they developed there were skin-tight and very uncomfortable. However for 40 years later I believe that materials have advanced enough for snug fit pressure suits that uses both air pressure and mechanical pressure to create a good pressure suit that will be easy to work in and have long duration that astronauts need. The current two EVA (Extra Vehicular Activity) suits that the Russians and Americans use are a compromise between many things like duration in EVA, pre-breath before use, dexterity of the suit so hopefully this will solve all of this.

  46. Larry Niven by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    I believe the book was "A Mote in God's Eye", where I first saw this concept explored.

    It also seemed to be one of the more hard science fiction books -- for instance, though there was faster-than-light travel between systems, travel within a system was still sublight, and without any sort of artificial gravity or "inertial dampening" -- if you want gravity, you accelerate, and there are couches to let you accelerate faster (3g or so), but when you're not moving, everything's weightless.

    (Getting even more offtopic, I wonder if Firefly might've worked just as well without artificial gravity. It'd be difficult to do, though.)

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    1. Re:Larry Niven by dwye · · Score: 1

      > I believe the book was "A Mote in God's Eye", where I first saw this concept explored. I read Niven, and he used this idea back in Gil The Arm days. One of the Belters had a suit that was painted with a naked women wrapped around from the front to the back, and an obviously coital position (I believe this was in World Of Ptaavs?). Just to get the horn dogs panting over the suit and the MIT professor even MORE to flip out over.

    2. Re:Larry Niven by Belacgod · · Score: 2, Informative

      In another book (I think it's N-Space), Niven goes through the Mote universe's physics and describes how the laws of physics would have to change to make that world's tech work. Pretty awesome.

  47. Referral Denied by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    Workaround: After following that link, go to the Address Bar and hit enter. Since the referral is now coming from the same URL as the image itself, it'll work this time.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  48. No it does NOT. by DrYak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Particularly since coagulation requires the presence of air in order to occur. Your wound wouldn't clot.


    No, it does NOT.
    If it was the case, you would die from internal bleeding at the slightest shock that would burst the smallest blood vessel.

    Contact to air is only 1 of the huge amount of conditions that can trigger cloting.
    Pretty much anything that isn't healthy un-wounded endothelium (the thing that covers the walls inside of blood vessels) can trigger clotting (thus the problems that can be encountered with prosthetic cardiac valves, or people who have damaged blood vessel walls because of way too much high cholesterol, or additive that are put inside glass container for blood sample handling).
    Bleeding in water is the only case where you don't clot easily. Not because water has some magical properties that prevents clotting, but just because the coagulation factors that are needed for clotting get diluted in the water.

    Back to the case, TFA mentions that bandage should be applied over the suit breach. Some pro-coagulant substance coating the middle of the bandage, where it goes over the hole, should help make sure the wound clots well.
    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:No it does NOT. by complete+loony · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not going to be fun removing the suit afterwards though.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    2. Re:No it does NOT. by coolGuyZak · · Score: 1

      Eh, teflon should fix that right up!

  49. Stupid sexy Flanders... by Cyno01 · · Score: 4, Funny

    n/t

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  50. MOD Parent Up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's right. Applying pressure to the body is only one part of the problem. This suit won't address the other problems and has some of its own. The idea also isn't revolutionary. NASA has considered skin-tight mechanical-pressure suits for years. This is only one such iteration.

  51. Needs oversized gleaming chrome codpiece! by StefanJ · · Score: 1

    I won't put one of these on without a radiation-proof 'nad shield.

  52. From the redundant department of redundancy: by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    This is far sleeker and lighter weight than the suits used by astronauts today, promising greater mobility than the traditional bulky suits of today which can weigh 300lbs or more.

    Or is today just redundant day today?

  53. Babes in space... by kimgkimg · · Score: 1

    Finally a reason to send Jessica Alba into space...

    1. Re:Babes in space... by MystikPhish · · Score: 1

      I thought her acting "ability" was reason enough to send her into space...

      --
      "I'm about to drop the hammer and dispense some indiscriminate justice!"
    2. Re:Babes in space... by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      And then she'll become invisible? No fracking way!

  54. Jumping with less mass by AlpineR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You can jump to a possibly more dangerous height without the extra mass/weight, but you'll quickly learn not to.

    Can you? Wouldn't you just land with whatever force you applied at the beginning of the jump? On Earth, I can jump a certain height unloaded and a lesser height while carrying a backpack full of rocks. I'll have farther to fall from the higher jump, but I'll have more mass getting attracted by gravity on the shorter jump. I think they would cancel each other out.

    Or, actually, there might be less force during the unloaded jump. When loaded I will achieve a lower velocity than when unloaded. Therefore I will have more time to push against the ground and put more energy into my jump.

    1. Re:Jumping with less mass by Jookey · · Score: 1

      you would land with the same velocity as you had at the beginning of the jump. The amount of force you experience upon landing is determined by how well you use your legs as shock absorbers.

    2. Re:Jumping with less mass by fractoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But the point is that you will land with exactly the same force as you would on Earth. The reason that jumping in low gravity is more dangerous isn't intrinsically the height you travel to - it's the fact that you have a much longer fall time and so any slight rotational velocity will affect your orientation that much more. Imagine jumping on Earth, and at the apex of your jump magically being flipped upside down so you land on your head. It wouldn't be pretty.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    3. Re:Jumping with less mass by rossifer · · Score: 1

      The issue is how long you're off the ground.

      On the earth, it basically impossible to stay in the air for more than half a second. An athlete's excellent standing jump imparts about 1kJ (100kg elevated by 1m) to his body. A jump on the moon with the same force will last about three seconds and put you six meters off the moon's surface. During those three seconds and twelve meters of vertical travel, there is a lot more opportunity to not land on your feet. Landing on your helmet on the moon is a very, very risky proposition.

      Which is what I meant by "a possibly more dangerous height".

      Regards,
      Ross

  55. Just a few, ahem, "challnges" by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 2, Interesting
    You can't just focus on one aspect of suit design.

    If you do, then, sure, you can optimize the heck to meet your goals, at the expense of everything else. Whopee ding.

    But in the real world, astronauts will be happy to trade off style for function. Especially life-saving functions.

    These spandex suits may look keen, but you've traded away:

    • Cooling and heating. The body has a very narrow temp range that is comfortable. You are not going to be comfortable in spandex with your sunward side near boiling and your shadowed side near absolute zero.
    • Ventilation. People sweat. You need a constant flow of air across the skin to take away the humidity, otherwise it's like wearing all-polyester clothes. Very uncomfortable after five minutes.
    • Speed of access. If your craft springs a leak it might be crucial to be able to do this stuff in a hurry. Ever try putting on a wet swimsuit when you're already wet?
    • Joints. If the elbows are not constant-volume, you waste energy bendig your elbows. oops.
    1. Re:Just a few, ahem, "challnges" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Joints: this is the major design challenge mentioned in the article. Note the visible lines on the surface of the suit - their length remains constant when the joints are flexed, so they can provide structural support to the lighter, more flexible regions.

      Cooling, heating, ventilation: not mentioned in the article, but the designers haven't necessarily overlooked them. They could have, for example, a network of coolant tubes sandwiched between other layers of the suit. Or the suit proper, for use in space, could have a baggy outer reflective layer. Or it could be intended for use on Mars, where the atmosphere prevents those sorts of temperature differentials.

      Speed of access: granted, but it's not going to be any worse than current designs, which require the user to spend an hour or so pre-breathing low-pressure air before closing up the suit. (Note that this design, in its current form, requires the same thing - but it has more potential for eliminating this step than current designs.)

    2. Re:Just a few, ahem, "challnges" by robbak · · Score: 1

      Cooling: simple. Just make the suit slightly permeable, and let the body regulate itself. It will take a little while for the body to get used to the different conditions (sweat a very little, and I get massive, instant cooling), but it will. And before you ask: yes, skin is just fine in a vacuum. It's just too stretchy, so the insides swell up. Provide it with some physical support (a tight suit that exerts .3atm, for instance!) and you are away!

      --
      Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
  56. Gas mix by hypermanng · · Score: 1

    The suit has to supply enough mechanical pressure to keep it from puffing out in response to the pneumatic pressure inside the suit.

    --
    I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
  57. Feels like I'm wearing NOTHING at all! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid sexy Flanders!

  58. Cloth? by VaticDart · · Score: 1

    They're still going to be making next generation space suits out of cloth? The hell with that! Give me the energy skinsuits from Dan Simmon's Hyperion books. While we're at it, I wouldn't mind a pair of Ouster angel wings, a FORCE assault rifle, and Hawking-Drive equipped starship.

    1. Re:Cloth? by UrktheTurk · · Score: 1

      !someone else has read those books? screw starships, give me a treeship.

    2. Re:Cloth? by kalirion · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure those skinsuits were said to be liquid, not energy. Unless of course they're liquid energy.... Anyway, if you're still talking about FORCE assault rifles and Hawking-Drive starships, I'm guessing you haven't read the two Endymion books. Personally I'd settle for one of the suits and a drop of Aenea's blood, and if I had to choose just one it would definitely be the latter.

    3. Re:Cloth? by VaticDart · · Score: 1

      I remember them being energy in "The Rise of Endymion" (the scene where Raul and Anena fly around inside the Treesphere) but more like liquid in the two Hyperion books, although my memory may not be quite right. As for why I chose a FORCE assault rifle and a Hawking-Drive starship... I couldn't think of any really cool weapons from the two Endymion books that I'd want, and would you really want to be pulverized and resurrected every time you took your Archangel starship out for a spin? Give me the Consul's ship, actually, with all his booze and his piano skills.

    4. Re:Cloth? by kalirion · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure myself, but I think it was a different sort of space-suit that they used to fly around the Treesphere (didn't it give them solar wings as well?) from the skinsuits. The skinsuits wouldn't have been invented for thousands of years anyway. If the Outers had had that kind of technology in Endymion's time, they wouldn't have needed to worry about the Pax.

  59. Pound-mass is a legitimate unit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One pound-mass is the mass that would experience a force of one pound-force in a gravitational field of 1g.

    Regarding jumping on the moon, conservation of energy dictates that your landing velocity will be the same as your liftoff velocity (baring any change in starting/final elevation like jumping off a cliff). You can only land hard enough to hurt yourself if you jump hard enough to hurt yourself...err, well I guess that's not quite right. Some people are just clumsy.

  60. John Varley's "Steel Beach" took it even further by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In that novel, one of groups involved had developed a "space suit" that was actually a force field that not only held in air, it was highly reflective (makes a great camo suit) and would actually stop bullets (with the side effect that the energy of the impact was dissipated by the field - with the "wearer" inside...).

    Pretty cool idea.

  61. Not exactly a new idea by Ernesto+Alvarez · · Score: 1

    This looks a lot like the space activity suit from the sixties. In fact, there's an edit in the wikipedia entry from january 2005 noting that the MIT is doing research that would lead to the suit we are seeing today.

    Check the papers at the end of the wikipedia article, too.

  62. space cameltoe by binarybum · · Score: 1

    great, we're totally going to attract the wrong kind of interstellar crowd when our space-folk start flaunting some camel-toe in these suits.

    --
    ôó
  63. Life imitates... anime o_O? by shish · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just a few weeks back there was some anime / subliminal propoganda sponsored by the japanese equivalent of NASA, and they had suits which looked just like that :O

    (That series also introduced me to reverse polish calculators, and it's true, I can no longer stand to use a regular calculator; RPN just seems so much more elegant...)

    --
    I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    1. Re:Life imitates... anime o_O? by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "I can no longer stand to use a regular calculator; RPN just seems so much more elegant..."

      The HP-35 calculator: The calculator NO ONE borrows more than once!

      "Hey, where's the EQUALS key?"

      Right now, to the left of my keyboard, is my HP-45 calculator, the follow on to the classic HP-35.

      It's about 35 years old and still works like new.

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    2. Re:Life imitates... anime o_O? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If someone hadn't posted a Rocket Girls reference after this long, I would have done so myself. Thank you.

    3. Re:Life imitates... anime o_O? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Life imitates... anime o_O? As others have said, this isn't new - the idea predates all anime probably :)
  64. It's so tight by LupeSpywalper · · Score: 1

    the astronauts will have to wear the diaper on the outside.

  65. easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    neoprene.

  66. Heating and cooling by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1
    The suit should be microporous, except for the head, which should be the traditional goldfish bowl. Vacuum insulates very well, so heating is no problem because the body can heat itself. Cooling is achieved the old-fashioned way, by sweating. Sweat evaporates through the micropores; the "heat of evaporation" cools the body.

    On a microscopic scale skin has no problem being exposed to vacuum for short periods of time (hours). The purpose of the suit is to hold back moderate pressures on a scale of greater than about a millimeter, so that air pressure doesn't explode your chest, so that blood an other body fluids don't boil, and so that blisters don't form from fluids trying to escape the body's fluid-tight skin.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    1. Re:Heating and cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the moon was + or - 200 degrees depending on whether you're in the sun or not- how can you sweat off 200 degrees? I imagine you do need some real cooling and heating.

  67. RTFA by overshoot · · Score: 3, Informative

    * Cooling and heating. The body has a very narrow temp range that is comfortable. You are not going to be comfortable in spandex with your sunward side near boiling and your shadowed side near absolute zero.
    Ahem. Vacuum is a wonderful insulator. Your sunward side gets only a little more sun than it does at the beach, and that's assuming you don't have a (nonpressurized) reflective layer to minimize radiative transfer. The opposite side doesn't radiate that much more than it does on a clear night, same comment about screening.

    * Ventilation. People sweat. You need a constant flow of air across the skin to take away the humidity, otherwise it's like wearing all-polyester clothes. Very uncomfortable after five minutes.
    Air? We don't need no steenking air! Has it occurred to you that several light-years of vacuum is about as good as it gets in terms of removing bodily outgassing? (Yes, that includes flatulence. No more jokes about "as funny as a fart in a vac suit.")

    * Speed of access. If your craft springs a leak it might be crucial to be able to do this stuff in a hurry. Ever try putting on a wet swimsuit when you're already wet?
    In an emergency with the current suits, you're screwed. They aren't exactly quick-on devices either.

    * Joints. If the elbows are not constant-volume, you waste energy bendig your elbows. oops.
    Most of the problem from current suits comes from the fact that they aren't form-fitting. Your elbow is already constant-volume, after all. It's that layer of (pressurized) air around it that makes the suit so tiring to work in.
    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:RTFA by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 1


              * Ventilation. People sweat. You need a constant flow of air across the skin to take away the humidity, otherwise it's like wearing all-polyester clothes. Very uncomfortable after five minutes.

      >Air? We don't need no steenking air! Has it occurred to you that several light-years of vacuum is about as good as it gets in terms of removing bodily outgassing?

      Neither the vacuum nor its thickness is of any relevance AFAICT. Vacuum doesn't suck, so I'm having considerable difficulty coming up with a way for a suit to be permeable to H2O and not to air.

      >In an emergency with the current suits, you're screwed. They aren't exactly quick-on devices either.

      Different situations and imperatives. Much of the time in putting on current suits is in making sure nothing is going wrong in the process. You don't want, under normal conditions, to put on the suit and then remember you forgot to clip on your toe switch. This cascades, and you spend even more time on the checklist because you've already invested a lot of time on the checklist. Also you go slow as you don't want to break anything.

      In an emergency the rules change-- you use the emergency checklist, which is much, much shorter.

              * Joints. If the elbows are not constant-volume, you waste energy bending your elbows. oops.

      Most of the problem from current suits comes from the fact that they aren't form-fitting.

      >Your elbow is already constant-volume, after all.

      Well, after the facts anyway.

      Having worn all kinds of tight clothing, I'm having trouble picturing how you could bend an elbow with any degree of comfort when it's encased in something so form-fitting that it applies 5PSI.
      Do an experiment-- put a couple tight turns of duct tape over your elbow and a few inches either way.
      Try bending it. Ouch. To simulate those fabled directions of equal whatever, use string instead of duct tape. Not much better. Lots of challenges here.

      One might think that chafing and rubbing might be major issues. Perhaps future astronauts will have to get sheep-dipped in silicone grease before slipping into a suit. Sounds very sensual. Congress will object.

      It's a fascinating direction for research, but IMHO still lots of hurdles.

    2. Re:RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vacuum is a wonderful insulator. Your sunward side gets only a little more sun than it does at the beach...

      At the beach, you have this lovely thermal mass of air all around you, conveying away your excess heat. If you take away that air, and allow your sunward side to reach radiative equilibrium with its surroundings, it's going to be pretty hot. For an Earth-surface analogy, imagine if the planet magically became tidally locked to the sun - one side would get unbearably hot, and the other unbearably cold. You're right, however, in saying that an extra reflective layer is a fairly neat fix to this problem - and it doesn't need to be implemented at this stage of the suit's development.

      You're also right about the issue of joints, and how fast it is to put on a suit. I think you've missed the point about ventilation, though. It's not bodily outgassing that's the problem - you can get rid of flatulence by having an outlet valve over the user's fundamental orifice. The problem is the sweat that builds up between the user's skin and the skintight layer of fabric. In loose clothing, there's airflow over the surface of the skin that will evaporate the sweat, but in this case, you need an innermost layer of fabric that will wick the sweat away (or some other solution). The article doesn't say whether or not they've solved this issue - but, if the user is smiling, I suppose it's probably not too uncomfortable.

    3. Re:RTFA by goodmanj · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ahem. Vacuum is a wonderful insulator. Your sunward side gets only a little more sun than it does at the beach, and that's assuming you don't have a (nonpressurized) reflective layer to minimize radiative transfer. The opposite side doesn't radiate that much more than it does on a clear night, same comment about screening. No. On a clear night, your body is radiating infrared energy with an effective temperature of 310 Kelvin, and the ground beneath you and the air above you is radiating infrared energy right back with an effective temperature of 250-300 K. In interplanetary space, the void around you radiates infrared energy back at you with an effective temperature near absolute zero K. (closer to 3k, but who's counting.) And the emitted energy goes like the fourth power of the temperature: this is a huge, huge difference. But it's easy to solve this the same way our current spacesuits solve it: several layers of reflective mylar film with vacuum between them, which reduce outgoing infrared to a manageable level.

      Air? We don't need no steenking air! Has it occurred to you that several light-years of vacuum is about as good as it gets in terms of removing bodily outgassing? I'd say the problem is more likely the other way around: losing too *much* water vapor. Vacuum has a humidity of zero; even worse, air provides a diffusive boundary layer which tends to trap water near the surface of the skin: the air molecules get in the way of the water molecules trying to escape. For skin within a porous fabric suit exposed to vacuum, evaporation is going to be far worse than the worst desert conditions imaginable on Earth.

      OK, you say, I'll just make sure to bring along some moisturizing lotion. There's another problem. A space suit of this type is basically a bottle of fixed volume. Suppose I take a 100-liter bottle and fill it with 95 liters of water plus a ziploc baggie containing 5 liters of air -- the 5 liters of air represents the astronaut's lung volume. Now, it's quite common for a hard-working person to lose a liter of water an hour through perspiration and respiration. Say we double that for the reasons given above. After an hour of hard work, the 100-liter bottle representing our space suit now holds 93 liters of water, and so must hold 7 liters of air. Uh-oh! our baggie can't hold that much air, and ruptures.

      I'm overstating the case a little bit, but the point remains that in a constant-volume suit like this, with no air space, any change in body volume, via perspiration, drinking, urination or defacation, comes at the expense of lung volume. If you don't keep things perfectly balanced, you don't get to breathe. On the longer term, if the astronaut goes off his diet and gains say 5 pounds of fat, that's 2-3 fewer liters of lung volume, and again, the astronaut can't breathe. They always said those twinkies would kill ya...

    4. Re:RTFA by hey! · · Score: 1

      Has it occurred to you that several light-years of vacuum is about as good as it gets in terms of removing bodily outgassing?


      So you're saying these suits will allow astronauts to bodily outgas where no man has outgassed before?
      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  68. Bends by overshoot · · Score: 1

    If air pressure inside the suit was really zero, the astronaut would die of the bends.
    No, the bends only happen if the pressure inside your body drops. That's not under discussion.

    Human skin actually does a very good job of selective permeability; osmotic pressures across it easily exceed an atmosphere. All it really needs is mechanical support to prevent the Mother of All Hickeys.

    So, no, it wasn't a joke. Nice that you can't tell which of my posts are serious though. I think. Maybe.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:Bends by hypermanng · · Score: 1

      While it seems ordinary to expect skin to resist excessive losses for some time period as long as it is mechanically supported, it would seem that the sweater and breatheability recommendation in the original post would work against that. Perhaps some even more advanced suit with a sophisticated regional seal system and/or with reinforcement including the face one could find a way to manage all the gas-filled cavities and points of high permeability so that one did not need any air pressure for extended periods. Given the demo suit, however, I just assumed it was a sort of joke.

      --
      I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
    2. Re:Bends by hypermanng · · Score: 1

      Thought I think the concept of a sweater in space is inherently funny

      --
      I am the one true god. However, as an atheist, I don't believe in myself. I guess I have a self-esteem problem.
  69. My first thought as well. by Glytch · · Score: 1

    That was a funny show. The SSA was hilariously incompetent at times.

  70. vs. codpieces by overshoot · · Score: 1
    Joke as you will, but ain't no way they're going to be able to fit a skintight codpiece. Which means that the suit for women will be a lot simpler and more comfortable than the one for men (ever thought of how to pressurize a codpiece? How hard does the cup have to be applied to keep a seal?)

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  71. no problem by r00t · · Score: 3, Funny

    The suit's pressure takes care of that. Everyone's dick looks the same, a paper thin wrap around your entire torso.

  72. Re:The future is now! And, by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Humping will be easier too, or more, umm, fullfilling. Less grapplifying but more gratifying. And using the vacuu-toilet might be easier, too.

    Anyway, I suppose these suits will make it easy to pass each other in tubular corridors during times a newly implemented "readiness condition" could be useful. Imagine the conditions they have now: either the protective gear is worn or not worn. Now, imagine needing to grab only the helmet and a mini bottle of air....

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  73. Old news... by Apollyon2833 · · Score: 1

    This story was carried in PopSci a few years ago. It looks as though they have made little progress. I imagine they are trying to stir up publicity to get some more funding. P.S. Every 300lb suit you carry to space means 300lbs less cargo/supplies you get to take. At >$10,000 a kilo, cutting a hundred or two pounds is a big deal (especially for numerous suits).

  74. NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by r00t · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's sex appeal.

    Remember, we could be sending robots everywhere for the price of this. Science is not what NASA cares about. NASA cares about their budget. Going to Mars sells well. Going to Mars in skin-tight suits sells better.

    1. Re:NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NASA going to mars in skin tight suits - $4,000,000,000

      NASA going to mars in skin tight suits with built in webcams and strategically placed access panels, so they can bump uglies in space.

      PRICELESS

    2. Re:NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by weber · · Score: 1

      Remember, we could be sending robots everywhere for the price of this. Science is not what NASA cares about. NASA cares about their budget. Going to Mars sells well. Going to Mars in skin-tight suits sells better. I know what you're saying, and you're so wrong!

      Robots have their uses but don't think that they can substitute humans in space. If you take Mars, we've learned a lot using robots in the last few years. But if we send a handful of geologists and other relevant scientists up there and let them loose we'll learn a hell of a lot more and a lot faster than just using robots. Don't underestimate the trained eyes and skilled hands of humans.

      Robots and humans complement each other, but one can not replace the other.

      I won't comment on your remarks on what NASA "cares" about, other than it sounds way too generalizing to be taken seriously.
    3. Re:NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do people always have to argue about this robot vs. humans in space thing? Give me one argument that shows me how it is more reasonable to do science in space with whatever instruments than to send humans to the moon (without considering costs). If we send humans we get scientific results and maybe space economy. If we only send robots, we'll only get science. I fail to see a reason why we need to know the geological composition of mars or the origin of the universe other than due to our curiosity.

    4. Re:NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      It's sex appeal.

      Remember, we could be sending robots everywhere for the price of this. Science is not what NASA cares about. NASA cares about their budget. Going to Mars sells well. Going to Mars in skin-tight suits sells better. Seriously. Look at any sci-fi novel. If you can't see the leading lady's tits in all their skintight glory, what's the fucking point? Ref: Voyager's 60 of 9 and X-Men's Mystique and for the gay scifi fans, the Batman and Robin nipplesuits.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    5. Re:NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So a goal of making a suit that gets in the way less (I've tried the present ones on, they're a bitch to move in UNpressurized), works better, and happens to be more attractive to look at is entirely a publicity stunt on NASA's part?

      You're more bitter and jaded than I am about the space program, and that's saying something. How about letting the geniuses up at MIT make useful shit first and prove it before passing judgement on it as strictly a publicity stunt and knocking it? Or are you just pissy that you didn't think of it first?

      Jesus, give people a little credit. I can't see anyone that's ever worn the present spacesuits not being quite happy if these work out well. If that's "selling" space flight to the public, then I sure hope we do it a lot more.

    6. Re:NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by Miseph · · Score: 1

      Do we need a better reason?

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    7. Re:NASA learns marketing from sci-fi by blackbear · · Score: 1

      Remember, we could be sending robots everywhere for the price of this.

      In the 19th century it was commonplace for gentlemen scientists to send their hirelings to gather scientific data, rather than be bothered with making the trip themselves. Some of the data gathered were valuable, others not so much. This had to do, in large part, with the scientific experience of the dispatched collector. Few people ever knew who these data collectors were or what they did. The explorers who went in person, however, are remembered for their contributions to science and discovery even today.

      In light of this, I would not be so quick to dismiss the importance of sending a human being on a voyage of exploration. After all, the public at large was fairly excited that the Mars rovers made it to their destination intact, and dramatically exceeded their expected lifespan. Few members of the general public, however, are as excited about the pictures and data collected by these same rovers.

      The point is that if people aren't enthusiastic about exploration, then even your budget for robotic expeditions will dry up, as people loose interest. Human space exploration is both expensive and dangerous, but it's also damned exciting. Also, it's not just about getting the budget funding. It's about getting the public interested in being a part of something greater than themsleves.

  75. GUNDAM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow!!! looks kinda like the "Normal Suit" space suit in Mobile Suit Gundam. Heck its almost the correct color scheme for some of the series. Seila Mas Kaki next maybe?

  76. Dear NASA by Comatose51 · · Score: 1

    Please allow Jeri Ryan to become an astronaut. She looks good in something skintight.

    --
    EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
  77. bleeding: been done by r00t · · Score: 1

    On of the early astronauts, in the Gemini program I believe, punctured his glove. There was a metal part in his glove that got lose and poked a hole. He got a hole too; Earth now has little blood drops orbiting it.

    He didn't notice until he got inside.

  78. Larry Niven - MIT link by anonymous_echidna · · Score: 1

    Niven is also on record saying that it was criticisms from MIT students chanting "The ringworld is unstable" which at least partly inspired him to fix engineering problems in Ringworld in Engineers of Ringworld.

    --
    In most times, most places, by most people, liars are considered contemptible. - Ursula Le Guin
    1. Re:Larry Niven - MIT link by Belacgod · · Score: 1
      This is as good a time as any to ask a question I've long wondered about:

      Say you have a dyson sphere, and for one reason or another it's drifting around its sun (perturbations in the sun's orbit around the galaxy, say). The sun is coming closer to one side and farther from the other. How could the inhabitants get the sphere back in the right place/avoid that happening at all?

    2. Re:Larry Niven - MIT link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Niven solves this in ring world with rocket thrusters on the outside. (Spoiler, unfortunately, various other races made off with the thrusters)

    3. Re:Larry Niven - MIT link by 1u3hr · · Score: 1

      Same as on the Ringworld: rockets attached to the outside to push it. Or if you're at the level of tech to build a solid Dyson sphere, you probably have gravity control. Slightly less magical, you could control the sun magnetically and make it flare more on one side, producing more solar wind which would push the sphere away on that side.

    4. Re:Larry Niven - MIT link by Power_Pentode · · Score: 1

      How could the inhabitants get the sphere back in the right place/avoid that happening at all
      Radiation pressure? Solar wind?
    5. Re:Larry Niven - MIT link by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Why not just do culture style rings? Basically, make a ring with a radius of about 1000km composed of multiple slabs. Spin for gravity. You could make them with current materials and they'd be a hell of a lot easier to build wherever you want to put them.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    6. Re:Larry Niven - MIT link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Slightly less magical, you could control the sun magnetically and make it flare more on one side, producing more solar wind which would push the sphere away on that side."

      It would suck to live on the area of the Dyson sphere the flare was aimed at.

  79. Radiation by reeherj · · Score: 1

    I wonder if they can incorporate some sort of radiation shielding into the fabric? If they can, I wonder if it would be adequate to protect humans on long-duration space flights?

  80. feels like i'm wearing... by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Funny

    nothing at all, nothing at all!, NOTHING AT ALL!

    Stupid sexy Flanders!

  81. Blood has clotted in space before by bigtrike · · Score: 2, Informative

    On STS-37, the palm restraint in one of the astronaut's gloves came loose and migrated until it punched a hole in the pressure bladder between his thumb and forefinger. The astronaut bled out into space, but the skin of the astronaut's hand partially sealed the opening. His coagulating blood sealed the opening enough that the bar was retained inside the hole.


    While this isn't the best scenario, it's not as scary as you would think.
  82. But... by Monkey_Genius · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does it come in velour?

    --
    I've got your sig, right here.
  83. Anime-style? by Megane · · Score: 1

    So these new suits look something like this?

    Are they going to start using high school girls for astronauts too?

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  84. Mmmmmm... by TheRealPhilKenSebben · · Score: 0

    that's got a nice feel to it.

  85. Old Idea by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    I remember reading about this idea a long time ago, perhaps even in Analog magazine. Because the skin is gas tight, all you need is a suit to provide the counter pressure to prevent blowouts. So the idea is finally being tried out.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  86. Good Start by glwtta · · Score: 1

    Can they make this yet?

    I want mine now.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
  87. Not a space suit, only a pressure suit by ishmalius · · Score: 1

    They say themselves in the article that it is not a space suit, but a pressure suit. There are other considerations, like Alpha radiation or esp Beta.

    1. Re:Not a space suit, only a pressure suit by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 1

      "There are other considerations, like Alpha radiation or esp Beta."

      What? Alpha particles are stopped by a few feet of air and Beta particles can be stopped by skin.

      Granted, you don't want chunks of matter emitting either Alpha or Beta particles lodged in your lungs or sinuses or gut.

      But come on, the particles themselves will all but bounce off sheer pantyhose, let alone a multi-layer suit like this.

      --
      Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
  88. Wedgie? by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 1

    Getting a wedgie while floating in Space just doesn't seem right.

      I wonder how well these new suits would work during a Canadian winter.

  89. Slugs aren't the only option by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 1

    Has everyone forgotten the poundal? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poundal

    --
    a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
  90. 40 year old idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_activity_suit

    History:
    Original research was done by Paul Webb, who in 1968 published a paper titled "The Space Activity Suit: An Elastic Leotard for Extravehicular Activity" in the April 1968 issue of Aerospace Medicine. Research was funded by NASA.

    NASA warming up 40 year old ideas and praising themselves is so lame...

  91. A perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Sorry but every fact you cite is 100% wrong.

    Obviously I don't understand how this thing works or can work.

    I think it's just that you don't understand how lungs work.

    When you inhale you don't inflate your lungs by increasing their volume, like opening a bellows.

    The way you inhale is by lowering the pressure in your chest cavity by means of the diaphragm, which contracts downwards, increasing chest volume. As the pressure in your chest (outside your lungs) decreases, air forces itself into your lungs and inflates them.
    Wrong, it's a well known fact that you can't operate that diaphram at more than a few pounds of pressure differential. The classic example of this is that you cannot breath air in through a tube from the surface when on the bottom of a pool. Essentiall every school kid has been taught this by grade 10.


    It seems to me that if this thing is mechanically applying 16 PSI in vacuum then it must apply 32 PSI when inside the capsule.

    Yeah, but there's air inside your body pushing out, too, remember. That's what the 16 PSI is there for, in fact - to restrain the gases within your body. That's why the suit has to be pressurized - to push back on the pressures within your body that, normally, the atmosphere will push back against.
    Wrong. THere's a 16 pound difference you can't over come with your lungs. See above answer.


    So, inside the capsule, you're facing 32 Psi minus the 16 psi pushing out from inside you, so you're only against the 16 psi tension of the suit. I imagine it's like breathing with an ace bandage (or, like, a bra) around your chest - more difficult but certainly not impossible.
    wrong. It's ridiculously well know it's impossible to breath under such strain.


    And secondly even if you solved that, then you still have the problem of the 32 psi pressure making it harder to dissolve gas in your blood, so your cells cant get air or release CO2.

    Higher PSI makes it easier, not harder, to dissolve gases in fluids.
    Wrong. basic chemistry at work. the energetic cost for a cell to break a covelently bound CO and transfer it to the blood will be higher if the blood is pressurized. Likewise the energetic cost of transfering gas o2 into the pressurized blood will be higher when the blood is pressurized higher.


    Finally, I can't see how this works around your head. If the suit is not pressurized then how do you maintain 16psi pressure on the face?

    Big bubble helmet pressurized to 16 psi, like always. I don't see the problem. You are correct that you don't see the problem. This however simply means you don't see the problem. It's there, so look harder. (how do you seal the bubble without crushing your neck, for example.)
    1. Re:A perfect by crashfrog · · Score: 2, Informative

      The classic example of this is that you cannot breath air in through a tube from the surface when on the bottom of a pool.

      Yeah, but it's not from a failure to operate your diaphragm; it's from the fact that 14.7 psi of air pressure (from the open end of the tube) is less than the 19 psi pushing in on your lungs. They can't inflate because the air you're breathing in doesn't have enough pressure to inflate them.

      Wrong. THere's a 16 pound difference you can't over come with your lungs. See above answer.

      And, yet, there's a model, wearing the suit and (presumably, since we're not reading her obituary) breathing completely normally.

      People breath all the time with mechanical pressure across their chest, for instance, women who wear bras. You don't have to overcome the 16 psi because it's not pushing on your lungs, it's pushing on your ribcage.

      Wrong. basic chemistry at work.

      Yeah. Basic chemistry. That's how you dissolve gasses in liquids - by increasing the pressure. That's why divers get the bends; the high-pressure air they're breathing forces nitrogen gas into their body fluids. Because it's under high pressure, there's more gas in their fluids at the bottom of the sea than there would normally be at 1 atm; as they return to the surface and the pressure decreases, the nitrogen begins to come out of solution. As it does it can create dangerous bubbles in the body.

      The reason that divers have to return slowly is to give that nitrogen time to escape through the body's regular mechanisms - because the high pressure has super-saturated their blood and fluids with it.

      Likewise the energetic cost of transfering gas o2 into the pressurized blood will be higher when the blood is pressurized higher.

      Blood oxygenation relies a lot more on osmotic gradient than on bond enthapies. Maybe you're problem is that chemistry is all that you know.

      (how do you seal the bubble without crushing your neck, for example.)

      A neck seal, like they've used for ages. Again, with a working prototype right there in the article, all you people saying "that's impossible" are wrong from the outset.

      --
      I never have frustrations, the reason is, to wit:
      If at first I don't succeed, I quit!
  92. combining articles by tha411 · · Score: 1

    Maybe since they're having so much trouble with the stretchy joints, they could use the properties of carbon nanotubes as mentioned in another slashdot article from today to their advantage.

  93. Toight by MarkoNo5 · · Score: 1

    Toight like a tiger

  94. Nooks and crannies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That gell will be a little hard to remove.

    Unless you're Bararella in which case, you need the lube...

    1. Re:Nooks and crannies by salec · · Score: 1

      I don't know exactly what kind of gel do you have in mind, but I thought gelatinous paste or very viscous fluid would tend to leek less than, e.g. water, in case the suit gets damaged. Just in case you had an actual objection on the subject of space hygiene and not just tried to pull a joke which I missed, I propose following method for changing into something more comfortable after getting home from space work:

      1. remove suit
      2. take a shower to wash off the rest of the filler
      3. dry
      4. put on space station casual clothes
      5. have suit washed (change filler after each use to prevent unwanted microbe farming) and store it away.

    2. Re:Nooks and crannies by pragma_x · · Score: 1

      The gel could have some anti-microbial chemicals in it (alcohol?) akin to that hand-sanitizer stuff. Actually, you could probably get away with using just that, seeing as it's pretty viscous already.

      Since this stuff is likely to be applied around the 'diaper region' anyway, this might be moving toward a kind of 'liquid diaper' kind of thing - seriously. Like a very tight pair of rubber underwear that is filled with sanitary gel prior to donning a suit (yea I know, gross). It would keep the suit clean, and would also help with that much needed trip to the john after your spacewalk.

      I'm glad I'm not testing this stuff.

    3. Re:Nooks and crannies by NeilTheStupidHead · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons that current space suits need waste storage systems is that the acts of donning or removing the suit takes several hours by itself. If you've got a 3 hour job to do and it takes 3 hours to put the suit on and take it off, that's 9 hours. Most people can go 9 hours without using the bathroom, but it's not likely to be very comfortable by the end. If this suit takes only minutes to put on or remove, you don't need to plan spacewalks as extensively because it's not a major inconvenience to come inside for a few minutes to take a break and in the case of a real emergency, well, suck it up like the rest of us have to do on the ground.

      --
      Lose: misplace or fail || Loose: not bound together
  95. Spacesuit for "junior" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with that is getting junior ready for entry in to the suit.

    Luckily, there's this hot space-chick in a skintight outfit to give you a "hand"...

    "Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

    It's been 31 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment"

  96. Looks like some anime by junglee_iitk · · Score: 1

    I couldn't find Cowboy Bebop screenshots of the episode Bohemian Rhapsody, but this looks just too similar :) Even the helmet with colors and all..

  97. What if they fart? by elementik · · Score: 1
    --
    --- Stop the world! I want to get off!
  98. Geez! More coffee plz by Psyjack · · Score: 1

    I thought the title said swimsuit. Then I thought "It figures MIT guys would be interested in THAT!"

  99. No ability to scratch itch = insane astronaut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This spacesuit design, and any other skintight spacesuit design, lacks the ability for an astronaut to scratch an itch and would drive them mad. This happens every time some bimbo thinks "but my figure just doesn't look good in those big ugly space suits".

  100. Great line after the butt shot by tehcyder · · Score: 1

    The back of the suit can accomodate an oxygen tank.
    It makes having air to breathe sound like a fairly minor optional extra, like leather arm rests in your car.
    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  101. A good looking women makes a fine spacesuit by TheBigDuck · · Score: 1

    Dr. Dava isn't too bad herself. A hot chick who is ALSO an MIT Professor? Nice! Why can't I meet a brilliant gorgeous blonde?

  102. The Next Step... by Tempest451 · · Score: 1

    In the creation of an Iron Man armor.

  103. Justice League? by KiwiCanuck · · Score: 1

    Can I get the outside airbrushed? If so, I call the Superman spacesuit!

  104. Exciting "news" by VAXcat · · Score: 1

    This design is exciting news. It was even more exciting when I read about this sort of design before...in 1968, in one of John W. Campbell's editirials in the science fiction magazine "Analog".

    --
    There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
  105. I foresee this going to the dogs by Avatar8 · · Score: 1
    Literally.


    If we can form fit it to ourselves, then we can form fit it to animals as well. Imagine training a dog or chimpanzee wearing one of these suits to fetch tools, packages, etc. on the moon or Mars.

    Also if it works in space, it will likely provide a major improvement for deep sea diving as well.

  106. Diving suits had a similar evolution by barwasp · · Score: 1
  107. Mod Down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Parent is ignorant BS.

  108. Just in time..... by PPH · · Score: 1

    .... for a remake of Amazon Women on the Moon.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  109. I call BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A neck seal, like they've used for ages. please show me an example of a neck seal that can sustain a differential pressure of an atmosphere.

    First you claim that higher pressures do affect the solvency of the gas and then you claim they don't matter because of osmotic gradients. Pick one please. Free energy is free energy and that's what drives chemistry And this rubbish about osmotic gradients is silly and inconsistent restatement of that. If you pressurize something you affect the solvency.

    And the question was, how does it work when there's these fundamental issues that are hard to see how it overcomes? not "see it must work there's a model in a mock up". No one is even denying it might be possible. It's just hard to see how.
    1. Re:I call BS by crashfrog · · Score: 1

      please show me an example of a neck seal that can sustain a differential pressure of an atmosphere.

      Well, here's one here.

      http://www.subtechsystems.ca/genesis.html

      You'll notice that it includes a neoprene neck seal. Seriously - it's not that hard. Go down to the drug store and buy a pair of swim goggles - you'll see a seal around the edge that's more than sufficiently effective to hold back a pressure difference of several PSI when held against human skin.

      First you claim that higher pressures do affect the solvency of the gas and then you claim they don't matter because of osmotic gradients. ...wha? Are you even reading my posts? I said bond enthalpy didn't have anything to do with it, and it doesn't.

      If you pressurize something you affect the solvency.

      Yes, abundantly. Specifically, if you increase the pressure of an enclosed container containing both a fluid and a gas, more of the gas dissolves into the fluid.

      Simple chemistry. "Covalent bonds of CO", whatever you thought you meant by that, has nothing to do with it - the reactions occur spontaneously according to osmotic gradient.

      And the question was, how does it work when there's these fundamental issues that are hard to see how it overcomes?

      If you'd start by correcting your incredible misunderstandings of science, physics, and human physiology, you might understand how. It's not hard to maintain a seal against the human body - the gasket around a $2 pair of swim goggles does just that - and it's not hard to understand how increased gas pressure means more gas dissolved in solvent. It's why deep sea divers worry about the bends.

      The parent's whole misconception was that a higher pressure in your lungs meant a decreased amount of oxygen entering your blood, but that's not true at all - an increased pressure of oxygen means more oxygen in your lungs - think back to the idea gas law - and because lung gas exchange is based on osmotic gradients, an increased amount of oxygen means your blood oxygenates even more thoroughly.

      --
      I never have frustrations, the reason is, to wit:
      If at first I don't succeed, I quit!
  110. Here it comes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The Slashdotters who would look like Bibendum (the Michelin Man) in this suit are going to make cracks about the suit designer modelling the prototype. Typical pathetic geeks.

    http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/images/b ibendum.jpg

  111. thing suit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it just me or does this remind anyone of the spacesuit pewee got from the things in 'Have spacesuit, will travel'??