Talk:Space suit/Archive 1

Archive 1

The cost of NASA's suits?

Quoted from the article: "The suit weighs 47 pounds, and costs only a fraction of the standard $22 million cost for a NASA spacesuit."

They really cost 22 mil? Wow....Shadowrun 18:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Reverts of 3 Feb 2007

I have reverted numerous edits by User:Anthony Appleyard. These edits consisted of the addition of technically inaccurate information, reformatting and changing of existing text to be less accurate and more poorly worded and ordered, and moving the top image below the opening text, contrary to standard style and with no reason. After reviewing the series of edits, I reverted them in one edit automatically, which resulted in an edit summary with no explanation, so I am explaining my revert here. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 17:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

---

Thanks for all your useful information about spacesuits.

These edits consisted of the addition of technically inaccurate information,

This presumably refers to me starting a new section about spacesuits' life-support systems, which there was nothing about before. If there are errors in it, please correct them.

reformatting and changing of existing text to be less accurate and more poorly worded and ordered,

In the existing types-of-spacesuits part, I provided more subsection titles to make the contents list more comprehensive, but I did not change the text wording. But there was no section about the ordinary all-flexible pressurized spacesuit, so I added one. I also moved the "alligator head" paragraph without altering it.

and moving the top image below the opening text, contrary to standard style and with no reason.

Having the big image in the big blank area alongside the contents list, is nearly at the top and makes it so the reader does not need to scroll so far down to find the start of the first titled section.
Anthony Appleyard 17:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The "ordinary, all-flexible" suit you refer to doesn't exist. The suits used by NASA are of the mixed variety which is listed, with soft lower torso and arms, and a hard fiberglass upper torso. Even in suits with a "soft" upper torso, like ILC Dover's I-Suit, the torso is still rigid, despite being made of fabric. Even then, numerous suit components are hard, including the waist seal, shoulder bearings, and in the case of ILC's suit, the rear entry hatch. Virtually all spacesuit designs incorporating soft components are mixed suits. The article was technically accurate and complete without your addition, and I am removing it again. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 17:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Your life support systems section is innacurate as well, and adds nothing to the article. Life support systems are described accurately at PLSS, which this article links to already. Open circuit systems are never used in space suits, this does not belong here. Liquid breathing is a science fiction concept which has never seen application in real space suits. I am removing the section, as there is nothing there to improve and keep. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 17:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The image at the top of the article belongs at the top of the article, next to rather than below the text, as it is in every other article. Please stop changing this for no good reason. For examples of this formatting with a longer ToC than this one, see Tree, Brain, Steel, etc. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 17:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The use of "as of year" links is very important to keeping WIkipedia up to date. By looking at which pages link to the year redirects "as of year", an editor can see what pages have particularly old or potentially out of date information. Please do not remove these links. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 17:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussions about the Primary Life Support System

Alterations of Feb 2007

• Discussion moved from User talk:Anthony Appleyard#Primary Life Support System:-

Again, I have removed several of your changes, this time to Primary Life Support System. Firstly, according to the manual of style, prose is preferable to lists where possible. In addition, you removed important text and made the quality of the writing frankly poorer. I really recommend that you take some time to carefully look over the manual of style and its subpages, and read Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles before arbitrarily changing articles around for the worse. Not only have I had to correct numerous innaccuracies, wording problems, and style deviations from you on several articles, but I have read several complaints about your editing style from other editors. If you want to contibute helpfully to the project, you should consider taking this as constructive criticism, read over the relevant policies, and try to edit more carefully and deliberatively in the future. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 18:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

• The big deletion that you complained about was not deliberate but an editing mishap. Sorry. Apart from that, I do not see that I have removed any information from Primary Life Support System.

I have read several complaints about your editing style from other editors.

Please, what complaints?

What need is there to keep this article as closely as possible to as it was apparently copied from http://www.snds.com/ssi/ssi/Applications/SpaceSuits/LSS.html ?

I put the list of parts into list format to make it clearer which parts the gas passed through.
Your revert took out two items of information that I inserted, that I found from http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/plss100.jpg:-

The absorbent canister is surrounded by a circulating water jacket to remove the heat produced as the absorbent works.

The spacesuit has a plug-in point for an external oxygen feed to flush out atmospheric gases such as nitrogen after sealing the spacesuit before use.

Anthony Appleyard 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

That information was not cited. The source you're giving now refers to the Apollo PLSS, whereas this page primarily discusses the EMU PLSS. That information would belong in a section on the A7L PLSS. — Swpb ^{talk contribs} 22:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

How is the oxygen stored?

• I can't tell from the cutaway if the O2 canisters are pressure vessels or cryogenic dewars. The article doesn't say, either. Did the LEM have cryogenic dewars, or also only pressure vessels? I presume the suit vessels could be re-charged from the LEM system for multiple moonwalks, as on Apollo 17. How did that work? SBHarris 18:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

SI Units Missing

• Currently this article gives measurements only in imperial units. Someone needs to add equivalent measurements using SI units. R160K 19:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
• I have now added °C alternative to °F temperature. It was 12.77777 recurring. 19:57, 23 July 2007 User:R160K

Related science and technology

• Seems to me this could do with a lot more relating and linking to the science and similar technologies of life support systems generally. Rexparry sydney 05:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Nie Haisheng gets out of reentry.jpg

The image File:Nie Haisheng gets out of reentry.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --17:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Blood boiling in space?

Blood doesn't boil in space. The elastic nature of the blood vessels can maintain the 1 atmosphere needed to keep the water in blood liquid. Human adaptation to space#Unprotected effects - unsigned user

Ignore my edit. Armstrong Limit concurs. - Ageekgal (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Need to include link/information about the Astronaut Glove Challenge(Both 2007, 2009 and the next one)

The glove contest is part of the Centennial challenges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigboy (talk • contribs) 06:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Past (American) Prototypes Section

It might complement the emerging technologies section we have now

Litton RX Hard Suit line

Mark I hard suit (1957) http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mark_I_Extravehicular_and_Lunar_Surface_Suit.jpg

RX-1 hard suit (1964) http://quest.nasa.gov/space/teachers/suited/images/12a.jpeg

RX-2 hard suit (1964)

RX-2A hard suit (1964)

RX-3 hard suit (1966)

RX-4 (1967)

RX-5 hard suit (1968)

RX-5 Soft suit (Advanced Extravehicular Suit –AES, 1967?, 1969-1970?)

RX-5A Soft suit (1969-1970) - Fireproof

In 2001 Litton was bought by the Northrop Grumman.

AiResearch

LAAP Hard suit (intended for Apollo 18 -> 21)

AiResearch is now a part of Honeywell.

Ames Experimental Hardsuit line

AX-1 (1966 or before) http://ails.arc.nasa.gov/CumulusImages/Previews/PCD1630/Photos/768%20x%20512/08.jpg

AX-2 (mid 60s) http://www.archive.org/details/AILS_AC-42272-13

AX-3 (late 70s) http://www.archive.org/details/AILS_AC77-0893-3

AX-4

AX-5 (1980s) http://www.archive.org/details/AILS_AC85-0468-154

Some bare bones info http://www.astronautix.com/craft/axseries.htm

ILC Dover

Mark III (1985-1990)

M-Suit (Late 90s)

Sources:

Astronautix

ILC Spacesuits & Related Products —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigboy (talk • contribs) 20:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

U.S. Space Gear by Lillian Kozloski

US Spacesuits by Kenneth S. Thomas & Harold J. McMann

--Craigboy (talk) 10:36, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Sequence of NASA spacesuit photos

There is a seemingly excellent sequence of 15 NASA photos showing the evolution of the NASA spacesuit here. Is this a useful source to extend the article a bit? Space suits are not my thing, so I cannot be sure. Rwendland (talk) 12:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Here's the source of the article --Craigboy (talk) 08:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Appropriate Picture

This image is both beautiful and appropriate. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Piers_Sellers_spacewalk.jpg --Iankap99 (talk) 21:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Space suit stamp

To craigboy: -- Admit "need" for this iamge is not great which is why the image is placed at the bottom of page where curiosity and misc items are placed. Included stamp image because this issue is a very famous stamp with accurate depiction of space suit used on Gemini missions. Image will also bring new readers to this well done page, as Wikipedia has 1000's of users who are stamp collectors. Hope image will be welcomed. GWillHickers (talk) 18:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late response. In response to Space Suits in Fiction that section at least links to an article entirely about spacesuits, U.S. Exploration as Depicted on Stamps is about a much broader topic so it's less relevant and your first edit really took up more space than relevance dictated. If anything the paragraph should be removed and a page link (not a paragraph) should be added to the NASA and Space Exploration pages but not this one.--Craigboy (talk) 17:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

external link to video

An external link to this video from the NASA Behind the Scenes series has been removed several times by an editor. The reason given is that the video is specific to the ACES suit and is not appropriate for this more generic article on space suits. I disagree and think that the video is appropriate to link here as well. The gives an excellent insight into the preparation and operational testing that happens before spaceflight. Visitors coming to this article aren't likely to care that the video talks mostly about the ACES suit. Also this video is shot in the same room where all Apollo and shuttle astronauts donned their suits and makes brief mention of how some preparations have changed. I see no issue with this link remaining here as well as in the ACES article but would like to hear opinions from other editors as well.--RadioFan (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

It gives insight to the preparation and operational testing of only the ACES spacesuit which makes the link too specific since the article covers over 17 different suits. Even though the room was used for Apollo "the configuration of [it] was very different". The video makes no mention of the Mercury, Gemini, LES and EMU suits.--Craigboy (talk) 06:57, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

While the video is mostly specific to the ACES suit, I see far more benefit in leaving the link here than harm. I understand your point that this article is about the topic of space suits as a whole, but consider that the ACES suit is one of the most prominent suits in the most active program current. It's representative of the topic as a whole as a result. Think about kids or others coming to Wikipedia to learn more about space suits, are they likely to click through to the ACES article and on to the link there? Probably not. If the video were all about how different the ACES suit is from other suits, I'd agree with you that the link is too specific to include in this article, but it's not. The procedure and functionality it discusses is common to many suits mentioned here.

If they want to see what NASA currently uses, than they would go to American suits and than click on both the EMU and ACES page links (the short description on the main page tells them that they're the ones we currently use). How is the procedure and functionality common to many of the listed suits?--Craigboy (talk) 11:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

You are still assuming that readers have the same level of knowledge and interest in space suits that you do. Very few readers coming to this particular article have little any familiarity with the topic, that's why they picked this article.--RadioFan (talk) 12:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I just don't think the video covers enough information nor I'm I even sure that the procedures (besides the leak test) used for this suit are the same for any of the others.--Craigboy (talk) 09:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Pictures

Need to get some of the suits without their outerlayer (right now it's like trying to figure out how an engine works with the hood down) and I will also try to contact Zvevda and see if we can use some of their on-file images.--Craigboy (talk) 10:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Managed to get apollo A7L and A7LB suits.--Craigboy (talk) 22:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Need to add a tether page

In my opinion tethers (used to keep the astronaut from floating away) deserve a page more than the MAGs.--Craigboy (talk) 17:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Apparently tethers were used on Gemini --Craigboy (talk) 01:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Orlan

EMU

--Craigboy (talk) 01:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Reverted edits

For organizational purposes there's only one image per suit (despite their variations). The Shuttle flight suit is never claimed to be a spacesuit, but is shown and described because of it significance. Removed the Gemini Block I suit because it was one of the many prototype suits worn only for training and never intended for an actual mission.--Craigboy (talk) 14:27, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

No, you are mistaken about the Apollo Block I suit (a deriviative of the Gemini suit). It was not a "prototype worn only for training". Grissom, White and Chaffee died wearing the very suits in which they were intended to fly less than a month after the accident. (And originally, Schirra, Cunningham and Eisele were also intended to make a second flight in the same suits; there is a picture of them wearing them in Canceled Apollo missions. Perhaps you persist in the misunderstanding of the Apollo 1 fire being a "training accident"? They were testing the spacecraft and rehearsing for their upcoming flight. The suit certainly was "intended for an actual mission".

If it was meant for a flight, than it should stay. But please mention it was an IVA suit and also replace the current image with a full profile one as seen in the majority of the other spacesuit images.--Craigboy (talk) 13:17, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I also think your arguments about "organizational purposes" and significance of the Shuttle flight (non-space) suit don't hold much water. And the Gemini 7 suit was so significantly different from the others (with its huge, soft-bubble helmet) that I believe its picture merits inclusion. JustinTime55 (talk) 16:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Previous formatting convention was one image per article, having three per article mixes the whole thing up. Gemini 7 suit was only worn for one mission, the blue flight suit was what the Shuttle was designed to use (the LES and ACES suits were introduced after Challenger accident) was used for twenty and explains what was worn in the absence of pressure suits. --Craigboy (talk) 13:17, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Images of the suit. http://www.archive.org/details/S67-20524 http://www.archive.org/details/S66-58023 http://www.archive.org/details/S67-20528 --Craigboy (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

http://www.archive.org/details/S66-58168

Russian inventions category

Since the SK-1, the first spacesuit, was invented in Russia, Space Suit can be categorised as a Russian invention. Just like Tank is categorised British invention. Shpakovich (talk) 23:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Very-high-altitude full pressure suits were around for some time before that. And the idea of a spacesuit and details of their design were around in fiction LONG before that. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The pressure suit was also invented by a Russian but never mind that. This article is specificly about space suit. Theoretical things and sciense fiction doesn't count. The tank was first theoraticaly written about by Mendeleyev, but that wont change the fact that the British were the first to really invent it. Same story. If i wrote a fiction story about a flying house, and someone will invent it in many years, would that be considered i invented it? No. Shpakovich (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I think theoretical things do count as well and need to be in the article. Fiction doesn't really; there's not solid engineering behind it.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 17:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

And still it stayes as Russian inventions. But your right. Shpakovich (talk) 18:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Spanish Colonel D. Emilio Herrera created the first totally functional prototype in 1935. True fact, recognized by NASA, whose spacesuits were based in Herrera's investigations. I think the "individual inventors" referred in the article's prologue ("The first full pressure-suits for use at extreme altitudes were designed by individual inventors as early as the 1930s") should have a proper name. Am I the only one surprised enough about finding the name of Emilio Herrera not even once in such an extense article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.53.211.84 (talk) 13:12, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

To space, or not to space, "space suit"

Given discussion of the corresponding category's name, it is time to look at this again. I am not seeing a lot of guidance out there. Searching NASA's website discloses that they are as likely to use "space suit" as "spacesuit". Searching books is maybe slightly more illuminating: with-space produces twice the hits as no-space, but there's a distinct pattern that the with-space hits tend to be older. That said, Google's searching on this is not entirely trustworthy, as their "did you mean" second-guessing may be producing false hits even with double-quotes. I would at this point slightly prefer "spacesuit" but not with a strong sense of confidence in that preference. Mangoe (talk) 14:06, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

• I agree that "Space suit" seems to be an older form which has been largely replaced by "spacesuit". The latter seems far, far more common in recent sources, and the recent discussion regarding bringing Category:Spacesuits in-line with this article showed a preference to move the article not the category, so I would strongly support moving this article. --W. D. Graham 17:44, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

You might try checking the relative frequencies in the Google Books NGram Viewer. It shows that while "space suit" isn't as popular as it once was, it's still a bit more popular than "spacesuit", even today. And I don't think it suffers from the problem of "did you mean" false hits. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 18:13, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Would that produce false matches? (such as usage for "xyz rental space suit" lawsuits, etc) -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 22:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

It might, in principle. Whether they would be a significant fraction of the total is another matter. For instance, taking the example you gave, I found no hits at all for "rental space suit" either within the NGram Viewer or within Google Books. So while there is a real possibility for a phrase to produce false matches from combinations of words which contain it but have a completely different meaning, and one can contrive such situations for "space suit", it seems likely that they are rare enough not to matter. If they weren't, you'd expect a significant frequency of occurrence for the phrase before 1930, which is not what we actually see. I did find a few false matches when looking before 1940, but even that early, most were entries in science fiction magazines and such. So you have to devise a phrase which contains "space suit", doesn't refer to space flight, and was rare in English before 1940, yet common later. That's a tall order. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 09:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Mangoe, just one note, for google searches you can use quotes and the intext: operator to better restrict a google search, e.g.:

• intext:"space suite": About 18,900,000 results.
• intext:"spacesuite": About 4,950,000 results.

Further refining to include the term EVA (for example):

• intext:"space suite" intext:EVA: About 421,000 results
• intext:"spacesuite" intext:EVA: About 379,000 results

-- Tony Mach (talk) 09:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

• Limiting results to the last five years, and eliminating Wikipedia, it gives 8,840 hits without a space and 9,460 hits with a space. Note that search results for "space suit" are heavily influenced by the use of that term here. --W. D. Graham 13:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

  I think you have that backwards... -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 15:52, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

  Yeah, he does. Thankfully the point remains made though. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:42, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

• Support renaming the article to Spacesuit per WP:COMMONNAME. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:42, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
• Support. Spacesuit is certainly the modern form. If it's good enough for NASA, it's good enough for me.--Mike Selinker (talk) 04:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
• Support renaming to Spacesuit, per above and such common examples as wetsuit (though I note that we do have dry suit). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
• Support renaming the article to Spacesuit per WP:COMMONNAME. - N2e (talk) 13:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 October 2012

In this sentence is an error in Gagarin's name, should be Gagarin and is Gargarin.

The first space suit worn by a human in space was the Soviet SK-1 suit worn by Yuri Gargarin in 1961.

78.62.116.219 (talk) 17:07, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Done The error must be common, since there is a redirect and the link wasn't red-linked. JustinTime55 (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 January 2014

The different materials which are used to make spacesuit are:

Nylon tricot Spandex Urethane-coated Nylon Dacron Neoprene-coated Nylon Mylar Gortex Kevlar (material in bullet-proof vests) Nomex All of the layers are sewn and cemented together to form the suit. The space suit consists of the following parts:

Maximum Absorption Garment (MAG) – During almost seven hours of space walking, it is difficult for astronauts to relieve themselves of the urine produced by their body For this reason, every astronaut space walking, wears a large, absorbent diaper, which collects urine and feces while in the spacesuit. The MAG is disposed off after the completion of the space walk.

Liquid Cooling and Ventilation Garment (LCVG) – LCVG is a set of Nylon tricot and spandex "long underwear" that is laced with thin plastic tubes through which, cool water flows which eliminates the excess body heat produced by the astronaut. The cooling water comes from the spacesuit's backpack unit or from the spacecraft through an umbilical cord.

EMU Electrical Harness (EEH) - This is a set of communications wires and bio instruments worn by the astronaut inside the suit. It connects to the radio and bio instruments in the suit's backpack. It helps in communication and monitors the astronaut's vital signs such as respiration rate, heart rate, temperature, etc.

Communications Carrier Assembly (CCA) - The CCA is a fabric cap worn by the astronaut, which contains microphones and earphones enabling hand-free communication with the radio.

Lower Torso Assembly (LTA) - The LTA is a single unit, which includes pants, knee and ankle joints, boots and lower waist. A metal connect ring facilitates its fitting.The LTA has loops to join the tools preventing them from floating away in space.

Hard Upper Torso (HUT) - The HUT is a hard fiberglass shell that resembles a vest and supports numerous structures such as the arms, lower torso, helmet, life-support backpack and control module. Arms - Arm unit holds shoulder, upper arm and elbow joint bearings enabling the astronaut free movement of his arms in any direction. The arm units are of various sizes so that they can be fitted to different astronauts.

Gloves - Gloves aid easy movement of the wrist bearings. They are attached to the arms by quick-connect rings. For a proper grip on things, gloves have rubberized fingertips. Astronauts also wear fine-fabric gloves inside the outer glove units for comfort. The outer gloves have loops on them to tether tools.

Helmet - The helmet is made of clear, impact-resistant, polycarbonate plastic, and is attached to the HUT by a quick-connect ring. The helmet is padded in the rear for comfort; it has a purge valve to eliminate carbon dioxide if the backup oxygen supply has to be used. In the helmet, oxygen flows from behind the astronaut's head, over the head and down his or her face. The inside of the helmet is treated with an anti-fog compound before the space walk

Extravehicular Visor Assembly ( EVA) – It protects the astronaut from bright sunlight.

In-suit Drink Bag (IDB) – It provides drinking water to the astronaut during the space walk. It is a plastic pouch placed inside the HUT and can hold 32 ounces (1.9 liters) of water and has a small tube something like a straw that is placed next to the astronaut's mouth.

Primary Life Support Subsystem (PLSS) – The PLSS is the backpack worn by the astronaut. It contains oxygen tanks, carbon dioxide scrubbers/filters, cooling water, radio, electrical power, ventilating fans and warning systems

Secondary Oxygen Pack (SOP) – It provides emergency oxygen supply and fits below the PLSS on the backpack frame

Display and Control Module (DCM) - The DCM is a chest-mounted unit. It holds all the switches, gauges, valves and LCD displays essential for operating the PLSS. The astronaut, with the help of a sleeve-mounted mirror, can view the DCM.

They are made in a bunch of layers.

The innermost layer is a cotton/poly garment in which small tubes carrying water are threaded. This is to cool the astronaut.

The pressure-bearing layer is made of Neoprene, with some elements made of aluminum and composites. Its job is to hold in the oxygen while still allowing movement.

The outer protective layers are made of alternating films of a glass-fiber cloth called Beta cloth and aluminized Mylar. This provides protection from puncture, and from micrometeoroids, and also reflects away sunlight. It's excellent thermal insulation too, helping the astronaut retain the right amount of heat. 42.98.242.227 (talk) 00:26, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --ElHef (Meep?) 03:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2014

Please fix the broken link in the "Requirements" section:

Theories of space suit design

Should be:

Theories of space suit design

Alternatively, please edit the title to match the link.

Mdsquire (talk) 00:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Done RudolfRed (talk) 03:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 April 2014

I've done X to Y format. What is wrong with the request?

Section on exposure to space without a spacesuit is incorrect. In particular, the part that says the blood (and sweat, tears, saliva, urine, etc.) would not boil because it would be pressurized in the body is completely incorrect. It would indeed boil. This did occur to three men: Georgiy Dobrovolskiy, Vladislav Volkov, and Viktor Patasyev. Also the article makes no reference to the instant deafness caused by bursting eardrums, and little reference to ruptured lungs. Please correct this.

Change this paragraph: The human body can briefly survive the hard vacuum of space unprotected,[2] despite contrary depictions in some popular science fiction. Human flesh expands to about twice its size in such conditions, giving the visual effect of a body builder rather than an overfilled balloon. Consciousness is retained for up to 15 seconds as the effects of oxygen starvation set in. No snap freeze effect occurs because all heat must be lost through thermal radiation or the evaporation of liquids, and the blood does not boil because it remains pressurized within the body. The greatest danger is in attempting to hold one's breath before exposure, as the subsequent explosive decompression can damage the lungs. These effects have been confirmed through various accidents (including in very-high-altitude conditions, outer space and training vacuum chambers).[2][3] Human skin does not need to be protected from vacuum and is gas-tight by itself. Instead, it only needs to be mechanically compressed to retain its normal shape. This can be accomplished with a tight-fitting elastic body suit and a helmet for containing breathing gases, known as a space activity suit (SAS).

to this:

The human body can briefly survive the hard vacuum of space unprotected,[2] despite contrary depictions in some popular science fiction. While such exposure is immediately harmful, it is not immediately fatal. Some immediate effects are instant deafness caused by the eardrums bursting from the lack of pressure, and damage to the lungs as they ruptured. Most notably, the boiling point of water; and water based liquids; is significantly lower in a vacuum than it is on Earth. This means when a human is exposed to the space vacuum; that person’s blood, sweat, saliva, tears and urine will instantly come to a boil. This causes damage to internal organs. Human flesh expands to about twice its size in such conditions, giving the visual effect of a body builder rather than an overfilled balloon. Exposure to space is eventually fatal because blood cannot transmit oxygen to the brain in a gaseous state. Loss of consciousness occurs 10 to 15 seconds into the exposure due to oxygen starvation. Death occurs few minutes later.

Sources:

An astronaut's guide to life on Earth. -- Chris Hadfield. Page 88.

Lost moon (later republished as Apollo 13) -- Jim Lovell, Jeffry Kluger. Page 1.

Dragonfly : NASA and the crisis aboard Mir. -- Bryan Burrough. Page 57.

Sincerely, Alissa Hickox. 24.138.64.175 (talk) 23:34, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 01:12, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: The change removes a source which disagrees with the content which you would like to add. That source is a NASA Q and A section, so the reliability in this area is high. Your sources also seem reliable. Could you provide the actual text in those sources which supports each of the claims which you make? If there is a difference of opinion in different reliable sources, the way to address that is to add more content which presents the disagreement, not to remove well sourced content. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 05:26, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

What kind of space suits may be available in the future?

Layered weave of Carbon_nanotube between layers of Graphene with Piezoelectric hairs for padding and a little extra energy if I happen to move, with computer embedded in integrated-crystal-circuits including some existing components in holes exactly that shape near its surface, sprayed with something all over to make sure no holes were left, coated with solar circuits, and Quantum_annealing in the factory where they build the machines that bend space using electricity so anyone wearing it would be able to get back to their ship or look around for a while. It may be comfortable enough to wear near any time except for the stiffness that holds up to vacuum of enough weaved layers of nanotube, except the head cover of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.89.104.85 (talk) 04:55, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Remove Helmet Oddity Youtube link

First let me say this is an excellent article and kudos to all the fine editors who wrote this. I just wonder about the value and purpose of the last external link to some "comical" representation of space suit helmet in movies. I dont believe the "Helmet Oddity" video is funny, nor appropriate. It seems unencyclopedic to me and I would like to remove it but was hoping to build consensus first. All feedback welcome & thanks. Beakermeep^(talk) 03:22, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Delete I don't see how it adds to the article in any way. Does not show many real nor prototype examples. I would say remove it. Jim1138 (talk) 07:52, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Spelling

There is a discussion at Extra-vehicular activity about the proper spelling of the first word, which is at odds with both the Merriam-Webster spelling and with the Wikipedia article Extravehicular Mobility Unit. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Since it's always spelled properly (without the hyphen) here, I don't think that's much of an issue here (even the wikilink is move-ready).

What about the spelling of "space suit"? Many places in wikipedia spell it "spacesuit". I see Merriam-Webster spells it with a space, so this article is correct. (I see it apparently was moved back in 2005.) I think editors should help correct the "spacesuit" references in the cross-referenced articles. JustinTime55 (talk) 15:39, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Info

Step Inside the Russian Spacesuit Factory - http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/rockets/step-inside-the-russian-spacesuit-factory?src=spr_TWITTER&spr_id=1457_27748742#slide-1

Spacesuit Knowledge CaptureLaunch, Entry & Abort, Intra-Vehicular Spacesuits (April 10, 2013)--Craigboy (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150013807.pdf (Page 8)--Craigboy (talk) 02:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2016

I find some dead links of the Chinese suit, I want to replace it with good ones Endlesscheng (talk) 02:10, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

• Not done: We are not mind readers. Please tell us which ones you found and we can replace them for you. Or you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and do it yourself. --Majora (talk) 02:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Boeing Ascent/Entry Suit (AES)

IVA suits. Weighs 20 pounds (9 kilograms) or 12 pounds (5 kilograms) without accessories. Manufactured by David Clark.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/new-spacesuit-unveiled-for-starliner-astronauts http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2017/jan/?sf52733516=1 --Craigboy (talk) 18:18, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Nik1718 (talk · contribs) seems to be Nikolay Moiseev, co-founder of Final Frontier Design. I see no declaration of COI. JustinTime55 (talk) 18:59, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Space suit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20130624190103/http://www.oewf.org/cms/mars-2013-press-information.phtml to http://www.oewf.org/cms/mars-2013-press-information.phtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131207171721/http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/engl/index.html to http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/engl/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:10, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

History

Anyone know who made the first space suits? Any pictures?

Bob — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halifax734 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

@Halifax734: That would probably be Siegfried Hansen. No photos that I know of. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Space suit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150214220807/http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/nasa_spacesuit/ to http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/nasa_spacesuit/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130522143849/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/escutica.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/craft/escutica.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130530174458/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/aces.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/craft/aces.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080125005254/http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-06/01/content_6182498.htm to http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-06/01/content_6182498.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150220013042/http://techland.time.com/2012/11/01/best-inventions-of-the-year-2012/slide/nasas-z-1-space-suit/ to http://techland.time.com/2012/11/01/best-inventions-of-the-year-2012/slide/nasas-z-1-space-suit/
• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/61DN80vZh?url=http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/histor.html to http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/histor.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:15, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Space suit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140329003404/http://jscfeatures.jsc.nasa.gov/z2/ to http://jscfeatures.jsc.nasa.gov/z2/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20132200083000/http://www.astronautix.com/fam/spasuits.htm to http://www.astronautix.com/fam/spasuits.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Space suit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150218045538/http://srag.jsc.nasa.gov/Index.cfm to http://srag.jsc.nasa.gov/Index.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:26, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2019

just want to add a picture!

EVA and Moon suit Replica at the Euro Space Center in Belgium

SpaceMusk (talk) 11:38, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. IMO the current images are better, and given how prominently they appear on the page this should be discussed first. DannyS712 (talk) 17:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I totally agree with the exclusion of this picture, which looks like a cheap knockoff, of much less quality than the actual Moon suit, of which plenty of photos are available. It does not add any value to this or any other Apollo article. Also, as displayed it looks bizzarely short, as if it were made for a dwarf. JustinTime55 (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

"Ripley" should be mentioned as wearing the SpaceX spacesuit

It's an additional, well cited mention of the suit's usage as part of SpX-DM1. In this case the suit is filled with sensors as well as being a mannequin. 16:59, 4 March 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipwhiuk (talk • contribs)

There is a section already dealing with SpaceX suit. Unlike Starman on the Tesla Roadster, Rippley is a true test and it does have sensors, however it is WP:RECENTISM. Maybe a mention of the first human use in July 2019 will be appropriate. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 01:34, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Quality scale

Does anyone else think this article merits a rating beyond start-class on the quality scale? Azx2 05:21, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Weaknesses on SpaceX suit section

1. Multiple refs are missing.
2. A lot of puff about the fashion design and little about the protection features. Currently, from the section, it seems as if wearing a pair of mechanics' coveralls would achieve the same function.
3. Nothing about the materials.

Frankly, the section needs to be either enriched or significantly trimmed down. XavierItzm (talk) 09:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

CO2 level in suits

I've just added a citation request - I note that the suggested pressures in a suit include ~5kPa of CO2. That's the equivalent of about 5% in sea level air. The level permitted in workplaces is about a tenth of that... I think 5.3kPa might well kill you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Number774 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Spacex costume is not a space suit

Some of the costumes worn by Spacex astronauts are not space suits. Some are. Some do not have pressure containment. They do not have fire protection. They do not even connect the helmet to the suit. While the helmet looks like a motorcycle helmet it is 3d printed, and has not passed crash testing. By any protective criteria these costumes are not space suits. 98.164.81.147 (talk) 18:59, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

CO2 composition

Back in May 2020 I put in a citation request for the stated CO2 composition. The article says "Generally, to supply enough oxygen for respiration, a space suit using pure oxygen must have a pressure of about 32.4 kPa (240 Torr; 4.7 psi), equal to the 20.7 kPa (160 Torr; 3.0 psi) partial pressure of oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere at sea level, plus 5.3 kPa (40 Torr; 0.77 psi) CO2 and 6.3 kPa (47 Torr; 0.91 psi) water vapor pressure" I queried the CO2 level. Atmosphere_of_Earth gives the composition of normal air as "78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen, 0.93% argon, 0.04% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases". It also quotes the pressure as 101325 pascals. 0.04% * 101kPa is a partial pressure of about 40Pa, so it seems odd to me that a spacesuit should have 5.3kPa - over 100 times higher. This citation request was removed by user:Erkinalp9035 with the comment "earth's atmospheric composition is a primary school level common knowledge" and no further explanation. I have replaced the citation request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Number774 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

New NASA Suit

in late 2019 NASA held a dog and pony show with a festively red white and blue colored space suit alongside the orange orion flight suit. it appears to be derived from the Z-series but has the unfortunate name of "xEMU" which is easily confused with EMU, an older generation of suits with little commonality. there is also the PXS which redirects to this page but the page makes no mention of it.

what is the heritage of these suits and their specs? how are they related? really, nobody has started a page on this after a whole year has passed?! 157.131.250.246 (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Space Suit vs. Spacesuit

OED lists space suit and space-suit, but not the compound word. Google returns 159,000 results for "Space Suit" and 128,000 results for Spacesuit. In my personal experience, I've seen the word in both forms from NASA sources, and the NASA Technical Style Guide does not specify.

I think there is a good case for either name, but personally think that space suit as two words is more common and proper, and should therefore be the main page, with spacesuit as a redirect. Skylark 22:01, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It should possibly be at "Space suit", but certainly not at "Space Suit". Fredrik | talk 22:21, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Very true. Opps  :-/ Skylark 23:29, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2021

Please change this external link: "EVA Space Suits (Extravehicular Activity)" Archived February 24, 2014, at the Wayback Machine at ILC Dover

To this external link: Current ILC Dover Space Suits AlexSagefrog (talk) 20:04, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done PianoDan (talk) 20:51, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Space suit Wiki

L 171.5.220.230 (talk) 06:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 October 2018 and 5 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lensaticflare.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Spacesuit vs Space suit

Many articles use both spacesuit and space suit. Wikipedia should standardize one or the other. NASA very prominently uses "spacesuit" in their documentation and articles. Despite this page about spacesuits being "space suit", the Apollo 11 moon landing suit page uses "spacesuit" so I will be changing a couple minor spacesuit pages and will leave this page alone for now. RainbowCardboard (talk) 05:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

"spacesuit" seems the more modern and up-to-date form in common writing today. Six+ decades ago, when human spaceflight was novel & new, and only two hegemon nations states even made such suits, it was "space suit"—a suit for the unusual & harsh environment of space. Now, with many more makers of spacesuits, and with US private spaceflight companies even regularly taking non-government astronauts to space, it is spacesuit.

Similarly, in the same 6+ decades, SCUBA became scuba. Things start, and are new descriptive terms. Over time, as linguistics and language evolves, they become "just words." N2e (talk) 14:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Seals and getting into suits

Some information on how the suits are put on and taken off, and the types of seals used would be worth having. Are the airtight zippers developed by BFGoodrich still used anywhere? · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 11:32, 6 October 2023 (UTC)