US astronaut moon landing 'not feasible,' by 2024, NASA's inspector general finds

Billion dollars for a new space suit?!@ Wow!

We have had working spacesuits for over 50 years. Why force the delay of the entire Moon program when existing suit technology, and cheaper, will work? Or is too much of the design process centered around spacesuits (e.g. seats)?

Let's get up there with the hand-me-downs if need be. That would suit me! :)
 
Apr 15, 2020
14
9
4,515
Visit site
That would suit me!

Haha. Oh boy, that's some gentle comedy. :)

_____

I believe that there are only 4 currently available/flight ready space suits, and those were made in 1974 and are now approaching 50 years old.

Also, $1 billion for development and production is not too dissimilar from the current iteration, which cost about $10million (adjusted for inflation, $56,379,654) each. NASA ordered 17, which comes to $958,454,118 in today's dollars.
 
Jul 30, 2020
59
14
4,535
Visit site
Par for a government organization. If SpaceX can launch a Falcon 9 for $62 million and our Shuttle launch cost over a Billion dollars per launch then they can do a suit for 10 times less at least. I used to work for the gov, I never saw so much waste and incompetence.
 
Apr 15, 2020
14
9
4,515
Visit site
SpaceX is incredible, there's no doubt about it. The things they are doing with Starship and especially the speed at which they are being done are nearly unfathomable. The routine-ness of the F9 landings and reuse are unquestionably awesome and groundbreaking.

However, they are not immortals.

-the first launch of F9 (v1.0) was 3 years behind schedule (The Falcon 9 V1 to Block 5 cost well over $1 billion to develop (per Elon)). [https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-teases-new-falcon-9-block-5-reusability-milestones/] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9]
-first launch of Crew Dragon to ISS, 3 years behind schedule at a cost of over $2.6billion [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_Crew_Program]
-First launch of Falcon Heavy was 5 years behind schedule and cost more than $500 million in initial development, however, these costs continue to climb as they're looking to recertifiy with a larger fairing. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_Heavy_test_flight]
[https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/02/09/spacex-wins-contract-to-launch-first-two-elements-of-nasas-gateway-lunar-outpost/'][https://spaceflightnow.com/2021/02/09/spacex-wins-contract-to-launch-first-two-elements-of-nasas-gateway-lunar-outpost/
]

I have no doubt that SpaceX would be able to make a space suit capable of the mission objectives. I even wouldn't doubt that they'd probably make it for less. However, thinking that they will make something that they've never made (flight suits and EVA suits are not the same thing) "on time" in just 3 years (assuming a contract could be handed out immediately) with NASA cert and come in at a much lower price than $1 billion is not likely.

If Artemis was shooting for a JFK-like 10-year plan, I'd be totally on board. But giving a contract to SpaceX to try and develop a space suit slightly quicker at a slightly lower price to make up for a 6 month delay in a 14-year development cycle seems a bit reactionary and counter-productive.
 
I believe that there are only 4 currently available/flight ready space suits, and those were made in 1974 and are now approaching 50 years old.
Yet, it's highly likely they could take their last working design and, without too much extra expense, make more suits to get back in the saddle. Every contractor knows that delays can be very expensive, so it would be interesting how much more money the program will cost as it must alter its schedule to accommodate the suit issues. For contractors, delays can bring suits -- law suits. [Ok, last pun. ;)]
 
  • Like
Reactions: sam85geo
Apr 15, 2020
14
9
4,515
Visit site
Yet, it's highly likely they could take their last working design and, without too much extra expense, make more suits to get back in the saddle.
Maybe?

I assume there would be some overlap with the arguments made here [
View: https://youtu.be/mhIfeS3OumY
] regarding the Saturn V.

I would assume that the people who made the suits 50 years ago are retired. The information, materials, and production lines are at best scattered and would be exceedingly expensive to replicate or reassemble . All for a suit that has some limitations when compared to the (admittedly not yet completed) new suits.

Apollo-gies on the naysaying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helio
I would assume that the people who made the suits 50 years ago are retired. The information, materials, and production lines are at best scattered and would be exceedingly expensive to replicate or reassemble .
I doubt we would need the oldest of space suits. The suits used for EVAs today might be adequate until the new suits arrive. The specification data is likely easy to get for the more recent suits, especially. There may even be a few useable suits lying around.

All for a suit that has some limitations when compared to the (admittedly not yet completed) new suits.
I would enjoy getting the opinion of astronauts on whether they think it best to wait for whatever new features are offered on those new suits. I would bet real money on their response. ;)

Apollo-gies on the naysaying.
Nice. ... 9.2! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: sam85geo
Apollo era spacesuits were made for a few days of use, not for months of 100% reliable hard use. The activities they were intended for were very limited and they can't be considered suitable for doing significant amounts of manual work. But I'm not convinced crewed moon missions and moon bases offer any real opportunities for science that cannot be done better by remote operated machines. They are not a good use of Earth resources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helio
Apollo era spacesuits were made for a few days of use, not for months of 100% reliable hard use. The activities they were intended for were very limited and they can't be considered suitable for doing significant amounts of manual work. But I'm not convinced crewed moon missions and moon bases offer any real opportunities for science that cannot be done better by remote operated machines. They are not a good use of Earth resources.
Agreed, except when human involvement does become valuable (e.g. HST repairs). So some sort of strong robotics program makes sense, but with the ability for local, indoor operations, especially for ops on the farside of the Moon or in the ice craters. The EVA suits were used up to about 70 hours by one person, so they might serve as a temporary measure while the new suits are completed.
 

Latest posts