NASA G2

[Xavier]

I may be being a bit hyperbolic for effect, but at bottom I'm not joking at all. Standard/Imperial units are based on things in the real, tangible world surrounding man (even if they are arbitrarily sized in some sense). A gallon is a volume that is easy enough to visualize. A pound is a weight equally easy to sense (not to big to pick up, not too small to be meaningless to a human's gross sensory perception). Quarts, pints, and ounces are all easily understood subdivisions of the larger measures.

 

Everything metric is based on powers of ten subdivisions of a single theoretical line that stretches further than a man can see unless he's several thousand miles out in space. While that may be neat and clean mathematically, it doesn't relate man to the world around him. I just don't think that things necessarily should be judged -- or measured -- based on pure utility. Aesthetics do count.

trust me, metric is way more practical to use and to convert between length, weight, volume than any of the olde systems, be they imperial, french or whatever, it's not coincidence that everyone uses metric, except the us, and even that is changing in science

[Guest aevans]

trust me, metric is way more practical to use and to convert between length, weight, volume than any of the olde systems, be they imperial, french or whatever, it's not coincidence that everyone uses metric, except the us, and even that is changing in science

 

I reiterate -- I don't think that things necessarily should be judged -- or measured -- based on pure utility. Aesthetics do count.

[Juan Sosa]

I reiterate -- I don't think that things necessarily should be judged -- or measured -- based on pure utility. Aesthetics do count.

 

Tony, I grew up with the metric system and have since gotten used to the US system. I have no more difficulty visualizing a litter than a gallon, or a meter than a foot. Isn't it just a matter of being used to one system or the other?

 

While the Imperial units have an origin in easily quantifiable objects or concepts, does an average person in the US today define a lb any different than a German a kg?

 

I don't know the answer, but my perception from being very familiar with both systems is that they don't.

[Guest aevans]

Tony, I grew up with the metric system and have since gotten used to the US system. I have no more difficulty visualizing a litter than a gallon, or a meter than a foot. Isn't it just a matter of being used to one system or the other?

 

While the Imperial units have an origin in easily quantifiable objects or concepts, does an average person in the US today define a lb any different than a German a kg?

 

I don't know the answer, but my perception from being very familiar with both systems is that they don't.

 

Metric is sterile. I don't think humans should have to live in a sterile world. Just my $0.02.

[Jeff]

US snubs Russian request for joint moon exploration: space chief

Apr 29 12:07 PM US/Eastern, AFP

 

The head of Russia's space agency Sunday said the US has rebuffed an offer from Moscow to jointly explore the moon, while announcing a separate contract with NASA for nearly one billion dollars for the International Space Station.

 

Roskosmos chief Anatoly Perminov was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency that Russia had proposed pooling resources to explore the moon.

 

"We were ready to cooperate but for unknown reasons, the United States have said they will undertake this programme themselves," he said.

 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in December said it envisaged setting up a manned base, possibly on the moon's south pole, by around 2020, powered by sunlight and perhaps hydrogen and oxygen, with astronauts cruising over the lunar surface in pressurized rovers.

 

Perminov said Roskosmos had meanwhile signed with NASA a "contract for nearly one billion dollars" -- an unprecedented sum -- to supply cargo shuttles between now and 2011 for the US segment of the International Space Station.

 

The US-led ISS draws upon the scientific and technological resources of 16 nations: Canada, Japan, Russia, 11 nations of the European Space Agency and Brazil.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=07...;show_article=1

[SCFalken]

No large-scale NASA projects should be international. Ever.

 

 

Falken

[Gregory]

It'd be nice if we could go to decimal time, but I don't see that happening any time soon (no pun intended).

[SCFalken]

It'd be nice if we could go to decimal time, but I don't see that happening any time soon (no pun intended).

 

 

That would be good, too.

 

 

Falken

[Ivanhoe]

It'd be nice if we could go to decimal time, but I don't see that happening any time soon (no pun intended).

 

It'll still take women 5 more minutes to get ready.

[Doug97]

I may be being a bit hyperbolic for effect, but at bottom I'm not joking at all. Standard/Imperial units are based on things in the real, tangible world surrounding man (even if they are arbitrarily sized in some sense). A gallon is a volume that is easy enough to visualize. A pound is a weight equally easy to sense (not to big to pick up, not too small to be meaningless to a human's gross sensory perception). Quarts, pints, and ounces are all easily understood subdivisions of the larger measures.

Yes, easy for YOU. No doubt easy for anyone else used to the imperial system. But a pint or a pound or a mile is no more aesthetically pleasing than a litre or a kilogram or a kilometre. YOU might think it is, but that's the nature of aesthetics, isn't it? Surely you must see that aesthetics is a question of personal taste, and not an absolute quality.

 

Just because the word kilometre literally means '1000 metres' does not mean that people who have a true grasp of what a kilometre is visualise it by laying 1000 imaginary metres end to end. They don't think of it as 1000 metres, only a kilometre. That's solely a result of familiarity.

 

I personally use micrograms, grams and kilograms in the lab, and am able to visualise each without reference to the other. But don't ask me for my weight in kilos ... but don't ask me for my weight in pounds either. Being from the UK I'm used to body weight coming in STONES (much to the hilarity of my Canadian friends), and I guess you could say that I feel that stones are more aesthetically pleasing when measuring body weight. But I fully understand that others might not think so.

[Jim Martin]

NASA rethinking death in mission to Mars

[Doug97]

NASA rethinking death in mission to Mars

 

"One topic that is evidently too hot to handle: How do you cope with sexual desire among healthy young men and women during a mission years long?"

Well, one or two ideas do suggest themselves ...

[Guest aevans]

Yes, easy for YOU. No doubt easy for anyone else used to the imperial system. But a pint or a pound or a mile is no more aesthetically pleasing than a litre or a kilogram or a kilometre. YOU might think it is, but that's the nature of aesthetics, isn't it? Surely you must see that aesthetics is a question of personal taste, and not an absolute quality.

 

Just because the word kilometre literally means '1000 metres' does not mean that people who have a true grasp of what a kilometre is visualise it by laying 1000 imaginary metres end to end. They don't think of it as 1000 metres, only a kilometre. That's solely a result of familiarity.

 

I personally use micrograms, grams and kilograms in the lab, and am able to visualise each without reference to the other. But don't ask me for my weight in kilos ... but don't ask me for my weight in pounds either. Being from the UK I'm used to body weight coming in STONES (much to the hilarity of my Canadian friends), and I guess you could say that I feel that stones are more aesthetically pleasing when measuring body weight. But I fully understand that others might not think so.

 

Oh, come off it. You can't use the human body to demonstrate metric measures the way you can Standard. Volumes and weights are a bit more arbitrary in Standard, but they are based on containers amnd masses that were oringinally sized based on what a man could lift. Metric may be more intellectually pleasing to pedants, but it's also arbitrary and dehumanizing. Ease of use isn't an excuse. And what's really funny is that a lot of standard weights and measures are pretty easy to use if you understand them. Many of the heirarchies are purposely designed to be calculated easily by powers of two, and those that aren't are mostly designed to be easily divisible by 2, 3, and 4. That makes them more versatile in everyday use, because it's more natural to think in discrete terms (integers or at least rational numbers) than it is continuous ones (decimals).

[SCFalken]

Oh, come off it. You can't use the human body to demonstrate metric measures the way you can Standard. Volumes and weights are a bit more arbitrary in Standard, but they are based on containers amnd masses that were oringinally sized based on what a man could lift. Metric may be more intellectually pleasing to pedants, but it's also arbitrary and dehumanizing. Ease of use isn't an excuse. And what's really funny is that a lot of standard weights and measures are pretty easy to use if you understand them. Many of the heirarchies are purposely designed to be calculated easily by powers of two, and those that aren't are mostly designed to be easily divisible by 2, 3, and 4. That makes them more versatile in everyday use, because it's more natural to think in discrete terms (integers or at least rational numbers) than it is continuous ones (decimals).

 

 

Metric (metre-kilogram-second system) is how we describe the Observable Universe. A single basic unit is used for each fundamental quantity. Secondary units (multiples and submultiples) are used which convert to the basic units by multiplying by powers of ten (i.e., by simply moving the decimal point). A distance of 1.234 m is 1234.0 millimetres, or 0.001234 kilometres.

 

Try doing that with Imperial units. You can do it, but it's a giant pain in the ass.

 

 

Secondly, other than you favouring your own culture, what makes Imperial/Customary Units better than, say, Chinese chi-sheng-jin Units? Both are equally artificially "organic".

 

When's the last time you used a Furlong, and weren't watching horses?

 

Hogsheads? Rods? A Square Chain?

 

Gill/Dram/Minim?

 

Your "measure of man" units are dying off. Mostly from natural selection.

 

Falken

Edited May 3, 2007 by SCFalken

[Corinthian]

NASA rethinking death in mission to Mars

 

"How do you get rid of the body of a dead astronaut on a three-year mission to Mars and back?"

 

 

 

Operation Soylent Green

Edited May 3, 2007 by TomasCTT

[Doug97]

Oh, come off it. You can't use the human body to demonstrate metric measures the way you can Standard. Volumes and weights are a bit more arbitrary in Standard, but they are based on containers amnd masses that were oringinally sized based on what a man could lift. Metric may be more intellectually pleasing to pedants, but it's also arbitrary and dehumanizing.

Once again, you may think so, but those who are familiar with the units do not. They would also not agree that metric is any less 'natural' (quite the contrary, in fact). And I doubt they see themselves as 'pedants'.

 

Just because litres, metres and kilograms are not based on what a man can lift does not mean they are any less easy to use. To those who are familiar with them they are completely intuitive, and the fact that these units have nothing to do with the the amount of land a pair of oxen can plough in a single year or the length of a corn of barley is totally irrelevent.

 

I still think you are not acknowleding the importance of subjectivity and familiarity in this matter. Decrying a system as 'sterile' (whatever that means) just because you are not familiar with it doesn't make sense.

[SCFalken]

Now THIS is progress:

 

 

One giant leap for space fashion: MIT team designs sleek, skintight spacesuit

Anne Trafton, News Office

July 16, 2007

 

 

In the 40 years that humans have been traveling into space, the suits they wear have changed very little. The bulky, gas-pressurized outfits give astronauts a bubble of protection, but their significant mass and the pressure itself severely limit mobility.

 

Dava Newman, a professor of aeronautics and astronautics and engineering systems at MIT, wants to change that.

 

Newman is working on a sleek, advanced suit designed to allow superior mobility when humans eventually reach Mars or return to the moon. Her spandex and nylon BioSuit is not your grandfather's spacesuit--think more Spiderman, less John Glenn.

 

Traditional bulky spacesuits "do not afford the mobility and locomotion capability that astronauts need for partial gravity exploration missions. We really must design for greater mobility and enhanced human and robotic capability," Newman says.

 

Newman, her colleague Jeff Hoffman, her students and a local design firm, Trotti and Associates, have been working on the project for about seven years. 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.

 

Newman anticipates that the BioSuit could be ready by the time humans are ready to launch an expedition to Mars, possibly in about 10 years. Current spacesuits could not handle the challenges of such an exploratory mission, Newman says.

 

A New Approach

Newman's prototype suit is a revolutionary departure from the traditional model. Instead of using gas pressurization, which exerts a force on the astronaut's body to protect it from the vacuum of space, the suit relies on mechanical counter-pressure, which involves wrapping tight layers of material around the body. The trick is to make a suit that is skintight but stretches with the body, allowing freedom of movement.

 

Over the past 40 years, spacesuits have gotten progressively heavier, and they now weigh in at about 300 pounds. That bulk -- much of which is due to multiple layers and the life support system coupled with the gas-pressurization -- severely constrains astronauts' movements. About 70 to 80 percent of the energy they exert while wearing the suit goes towards simply working against the suit to bend it.

 

"You can't do much bending of the arms or legs in that type of suit," Newman says.

 

When an astronaut is in a micro-gravity environment (for example, doing a spacewalk outside the International Space Station), working in such a massive suit is manageable, but, as Newman says, "It's a whole different ballgame when we go to the moon or Mars, and we have to go back to walking and running, or loping."

 

Another advantage to her BioSuit is safety: if a traditional spacesuit is punctured by a tiny meteorite or other object, the astronaut must return to the space station or home base immediately, before life-threatening decompression occurs. With the BioSuit, a small, isolated puncture can be wrapped much like a bandage, and the rest of the suit will be unaffected.

 

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.

 

The MIT researchers are focusing on the legs and arms, which are challenging parts to design. In the Man-Vehicle Lab at MIT, students test various wrapping techniques, based on 3D models they've created of the human in motion and how the skin stretches during locomotion, bending, climbing or driving a rover.

 

Key to their design is the pattern of lines on the suit, which correspond to lines of non-extension (lines on the skin that don't extend when you move your leg). Those lines provide a stiff "skeleton" of structural support, while providing maximal mobility.

 

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.

 

Staying in Shape

The suits could also help astronauts stay fit during the six-month journey to Mars. Studies have shown that astronauts lose up to 40 percent of their muscle strength in space, but the new outfits could be designed to offer varying resistance levels, allowing the astronauts to exercise against the suits during a long flight to Mars.

 

Although getting the suits into space is the ultimate goal, Newman is also focusing on Earth-bound applications in the short term, such as athletic training or helping people walk.

 

The new BioSuit builds on ideas developed in the 1960s and 1970s by Paul Webb, who first came up with the concept for a "space activity suit," and Saul Iberall, who postulated the lines of non-extension. However, neither the technology nor the materials were available then.

 

"Dr. Webb had a great idea, before its time. We're building on that work to try to make it feasible," says Newman.

 

The project was initially funded by the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts.

 

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/biosuit-0716.html

 

 

Falken

[Corinthian]

Now THIS is progress:

 

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/biosuit-0716.html

 

One giant leap for space fashion: MIT team designs sleek, skintight spacesuit

 

They should've used a bustier model:

 

 

 

I wonder when tech will advance to the point that female astronauts will look this:

 

[Guest aevans]

Now THIS is progress...

 

I know you were talking more about the model than the suit, but keeping it technical, it's not really that much progress. Despite what the article claims, they've had mechanical resistance pressure suits since the Fifties, for emergency use in high altitude aircraft that became depressurized. They were man rated up to something like 200,000 feet, and were certainly worn in the ambient environment up to 100,000 feet, which is close enough to a vacuum for science fiction writers of the day to commonly extrapolate the use of such suits in space.

[SCFalken]

I know you were talking more about the model than the suit, but keeping it technical, it's not really that much progress. Despite what the article claims, they've had mechanical resistance pressure suits since the Fifties, for emergency use in high altitude aircraft that became depressurized. They were man rated up to something like 200,000 feet, and were certainly worn in the ambient environment up to 100,000 feet, which is close enough to a vacuum for science fiction writers of the day to commonly extrapolate the use of such suits in space.

 

 

In the article, they admit that it's based off of work done (mostly) in the 70's. It's the convergence of materials and techniques that is new, allowing a (prototype) skinsuit.

 

Wonder how they will handle the neck/shoulder interface?

 

Also, how will they handle the temperature fluctuations present in Space and Lunar (but not really Martian) environments? The cooling/heating and insulation apparatus could easily bulk it back up again...

 

It's likely that they will go for a hardshell torso. Even so, the greater ROM in the limbs and increased manual dexterity will be a massive improvement.

 

Still, good progress (especially for Martian missions).

 

Falken

[Guest aevans]

Wonder how they will handle the neck/shoulder interface?

 

A tight gasket around the neck on both the suit and helmet mating ring. These things are only going to be pressurized up to 5 psi max, so all you really need to keep a seal is decent constriction, not a vice-like grip.

 

Also, how will they handle the temperature fluctuations present in Space and Lunar (but not really Martian) environments? The cooling/heating and insulation apparatus could easily bulk it back up again...

 

Insulated outerwear, suplemented by active cooling/heating where required. Joe Kittinger, in his 100,000+ ft balloon bailout wearing a partial pressure suit, was clothed in standard USAF arctic gear for thermal control.

[Jeff]

What happens when you've had that extra piece of chocolate cake for dessert and the darn thing doesn't fit anymore?

[Guest aevans]

What happens when you've had that extra piece of chocolate cake for dessert and the darn thing doesn't fit anymore?

 

Depends on your technology. The old David Clark partial pressure suits were semi-adjustable and tensioned with inflated "capstan" tubes. Other designs you may have to be on a rigid diet and exercise program for the entire mission.

[SCFalken]

Astronauts tend to work like dogs when on mission. Plus, they exercise a couple of hourse daily (likely to be de riguer until we are able to artificially generate gravity via a spin habitat). Plus, they are on a fairly controlled diet.

 

Falken

[Guest aevans]

Astronauts tend to work like dogs when on mission. Plus, they exercise a couple of hourse daily (likely to be de riguer until we are able to artificially generate gravity via a spin habitat). Plus, they are on a fairly controlled diet.

 

Falken

 

They also, however, have a habit of retaining fluid and changing shape in other ways due to being unable to work all parts of the body equally as well in microgravity as on Earth. Not a show stopper, but something to take into consideration when designing operational margins into pressure suits of any type.