General Electric MOOSE orbital emergency descent project......

Caravellarella

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
30 November 2007
Messages
1,088
Reaction score
419
Dear Boys and Girls; please don't ask as I really don't know. Here is an article in French of the General Electric MOOSE (Manned Orbital Operations Safety Equipment) "project" (which could even be a "concept") for an orbital emergency descent system; whereby the Astronaut appears to be encased in a sponge, foam or mousse cocoon which gives protection against the heat of atmospheric re-entry. The Astronaut climbs inside a plastic suit which is then filled with a foam and is fitted with a small retro-rocket......

The picture comes from the 1st November 1967 issue of Aviation Magazine International......

Terry (Caravellarella)......
 
A recently posted video of a Moose ground release test: https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3fa_1489387498




April Fools!
 
Hi Folks,

I wonder if you might be able to help me, I am sure on this forum somewhere I saw a project that was proposed to be used to revover astronauts from orbit. It involved the astronaut getting inside a inflated ball an it being filled with foam and that would allow the astronaut to re-enter the atmosphere where upon they would jump out and deploy a parachute. Does that ring any bells, am sure it was pre- shuttle, I think it was built and perhaps tested but never used.

Does this ring any bells? Are my memories playing tricks on me?

If anyone can direct me or give me a name for this I would be really grateful.

Mark
 
Folks,

Outstanding thanks the moose one was exactly what I was looking for. I knew I had seen it somewhere

Reading those articles it got me thinking it would be intresting to see if it would have worked for real.

Regards

Mark
 
Reading those articles it got me thinking it would be intresting to see if it would have worked for real.

"Would"? Maybe. "Could?" Sure. The beauty is that the ideas are relatively simple and straightforward enough that if SpaceX can get space launch cheap enough so that rich folks can go to orbit with some regularity, Extreeeeeeme!!! Sports wackos will soon demand to go space diving. What would be a terrifying last-ditch effort to stay alive for an astronaut in the 1960's will now be a thrill-packed adventurer for people with more dollars than sense. YouTubers and Instagrammers and TikTokers or whatever is the clout-chasing rage of ten years from now will be clamoring to throw themselves out of perfectly good spacecraft to come crashing to Earth in chunks of styrofoam.
 
YouTubers and Instagrammers and TikTokers or whatever is the clout-chasing rage of ten years from now will be clamoring to throw themselves out of perfectly good spacecraft to come crashing to Earth in chunks of styrofoam.
You make it sound like an unwelcome development.
But it would be a useful Darwinian contribution to saving the planet by limiting the overproliferation of humans, especially the useless variety...
 
YouTubers and Instagrammers and TikTokers or whatever is the clout-chasing rage of ten years from now will be clamoring to throw themselves out of perfectly good spacecraft to come crashing to Earth in chunks of styrofoam.
You make it sound like an unwelcome development.
Incorrect. As with all technologies, this sort of thing would start out being hideously expensive; only by actually doing it, and popularizing it, would "spacediving" drop in price to the point where those who aren't billionaires can engage in it.
 
YouTubers and Instagrammers and TikTokers or whatever is the clout-chasing rage of ten years from now will be clamoring to throw themselves out of perfectly good spacecraft to come crashing to Earth in chunks of styrofoam.
You make it sound like an unwelcome development.
Incorrect. As with all technologies, this sort of thing would start out being hideously expensive; only by actually doing it, and popularizing it, would "spacediving" drop in price to the point where those who aren't billionaires can engage in it.
No one except an astronaut in extremis would want to try it if it failed in its first use, and the user was incinerated...and there's a good chance that would occur.

There would have been, and still will be if the idea is resurrected someday, plenty of ways to die in the process, and a narrow pathway to survival involving a long concatenation of uncertain and to some extent uncontrollable sub-process outcomes.

The initial-deceleration rocket couldn't be both part of a small rescue system, and large enough to provide much deceleration. There just isn't a practical way to decelerate 150 kg the rest of the way from 30 km/sec to 100 m/sec, without converting all that kinetic energy to heat...and the minimal-materials, minimal-volume nature of the escape system doesn't provide many options for how to keep the small ablative shield correctly oriented while being buffeted.
 
No one except an astronaut in extremis would want to try it if it failed in its first use, and the user was incinerated...and there's a good chance that would occur.

They wouldn't chuck it out the hatch with a billionaire strapped in on the very first try. Several drops would be conducted with dummies of various types; once those had demonstrated reliability and safety, testing should be continued with a series of "volunteers" harvested from death row. Once *those* tests - which would include intentional testing-to-destruction and various flavors of planned malfunctions - have demonstrated the desired performance, *then* you can start selling seats.

There just isn't a practical way to decelerate 150 kg the rest of the way from 30 km/sec to 100 m/sec, without converting all that kinetic energy to heat...

That's how heat shields work.

and the minimal-materials, minimal-volume nature of the escape system doesn't provide many options for how to keep the small ablative shield correctly oriented while being buffeted.

You don't need many options; you only need one: proper location of the center of gravity. It has worked well for capsules back to Gagarin.
 
once those had demonstrated reliability and safety

I'm under the impression from the idea's historical reception that neither the Air Force nor NASA thought there was a practical likelihood that that could be achieved.

Astronauts of course accept major risks, and understand that emergency systems may be very dangerous and still better than the alternative. Apparently both the Air Force and NASA thought this system couldn't be effective enough to be better than the alternative.

That's how heat shields work.

But no one...in the 1960s, and even today...has ever demonstrated a foldable, perhaps-flexible heat shield that can do what would be needed. The buffeting forces on reentry heat shields are prodigious; this one would have fold-seams, because none of the 1960s candidate thermal materials were flexible. All of the structure would be plastics with thermal-softening behavior. Pyrocerams and carbon-carbons are excellent insulators for separating plasma temperatures from high-temperature-metal structures, and could be faced with (pre-PICA-and-SIRTA) ablators, but how would you instead support such a system using only flexible plastics?

proper location of the center of gravity

Very hard to achieve when the device is to be shaped by the expansion of reactive polymer foams around the suit of an astronaut who will do his or her best to "assume the specified position", but likely will be in a hurry and perhaps will be injured.

A starting design technique for making an aero vehicle stable in the reentry environment is to make it longer than it is wide and tall. This object doesn't have that option, because it must store in so small a volume.

An alternate option is control surfaces. This object doesn't have that option either.

And, rotation and tumbling must be avoided. Tumbling in the reentry environment generates human-unsurvivable forces.
 
But no one...in the 1960s, and even today...has ever demonstrated a foldable, perhaps-flexible heat shield that can do what would be needed.

In large part because what's needed for the development program is cheap spaceflight... and what's needed to *justify* the program is a *lot* of manned space flight. neither of these existed in the 60's, though when MOOSE was dreamed up that was foreseen. Now with SpaceX, both of those *might* actually come to pass.

Very hard to achieve when the device is to be shaped by the expansion of reactive polymer foams around the suit of an astronaut who will do his or her best to "assume the specified position", but likely will be in a hurry and perhaps will be injured.

And thus the busy development program. Made all the more effective by using San Quentin residents as test subjects; some might not wish to go, so they will be sent up in a "lightly distressed" condition. This will demonstrate how - or if - the system deals with an astronaut who has been moderately battered and tased. Always an important datapoint to have.
 
Last edited:
And thus the busy development program. Made all the more effective by using San Quentin residents as test subjects; some might not wish to go, so they will be sent up in a "lightly distressed" condition. This will demonstrate how - or if - the system deals with an astronaut who has been moderately battered and tased. Always an important datapoint to have.

Honestly, I don't think you'll have any trouble finding willing volunteers without going to those extremes.. Plenty of skydivers who regularly take huge calculated risks would happily take that one in return for a free spaceflight.. better qualified and suitable candidtaes too..

Although there is something bizarrely post-apocalyptic about someone being sentenced to low earth orbit.
 
And thus the busy development program. Made all the more effective by using San Quentin residents as test subjects; some might not wish to go, so they will be sent up in a "lightly distressed" condition. This will demonstrate how - or if - the system deals with an astronaut who has been moderately battered and tased. Always an important datapoint to have.

Honestly, I don't think you'll have any trouble finding willing volunteers without going to those extremes..

Maybe, but which would be a better demonstrator of an emergency bailout system? Someone who wants to be there, or someone pitching a fit?

Another suggestion: next time someone glues themselves to a van Gogh, clear out the room and say "hands up anyone who wants to volunteer for the 'does a 1978 Ford Pinto make a good re-entry vehicle' program." Shazam! Everything instantly gets better. Space programs, museums, gene pools...
 
What would be a terrifying last-ditch effort to stay alive for an astronaut in the 1960's will now be a thrill-packed adventurer for people with more dollars than sense.
In much the same way, one imagines, that what was a terrifying last-ditch effort for an aeronaut to stay alive in the 1910s has now become a thrill-packed adventure for anyone with modest funds, or the ability to convince others that it's a fundraising opportunity for homeless guide dogs with cancer.
Apparently both the Air Force and NASA thought this system couldn't be effective enough to be better than the alternative.
The alternative in their case being to use the money and/or weight to improve reliability so that bailing out isn't necessary. That's a perfectly viable option to 'stop astronauts dying'.

For extreme sports, which is what this would be, all it needs is enough people with enough money to think that it's something they really want to do. It doesn't need to make sense.

As far as testing goes, I'd expect a qualification regime similar to ejection seats. Which, OBB's views on penal reform notwithstanding, does not include live testing, whether with animals, convicts or volunteers: instrumented dummies serve the purpose quite adequately.
 
What would be a terrifying last-ditch effort to stay alive for an astronaut in the 1960's will now be a thrill-packed adventurer for people with more dollars than sense.
In much the same way, one imagines, that what was a terrifying last-ditch effort for an aeronaut to stay alive in the 1910s has now become a thrill-packed adventure for anyone with modest funds,

Exactly. That seems to be how *most* "fun" sports-things evolve: foot racing, for example, was originally a way to either catch your dinner or avoid becoming dinner.


As far as testing goes, I'd expect a qualification regime similar to ejection seats. Which, OBB's views on penal reform notwithstanding, does not include live testing, whether with animals, convicts or volunteers: instrumented dummies serve the purpose quite adequately.

Yeah, but "volunteers" are cheap. Instrumented dummies are expensive.
 
Whale wrangling probably has a higher chance of becoming a sport than "spacediving" tbh.
 
Exactly. That seems to be how *most* "fun" sports-things evolve: foot racing, for example, was originally a way to either catch your dinner or avoid becoming dinner.
Some, maybe. Others, like lugeing, hammer throw, and curling I think were alcohol fueled.

Curling has evolved from ancient Scottish defensive strategies against the depredations of vicious ice turtles.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom