They have some work to do on the segments to prep them.

What preparatory work do they have to do on them? The only segments that I can think of that need prep work are the aft-segments where the aft-skirt is attached and then the nozzle inserted in place.

I believe that stacking operations are supposed to start around February.

That's not that far off now that October is starting in a few days.
 
ehh is that some kind of Joke ?

Did you read the article? Prada has been involved in America's Cup sail boat racing for some time, including developing techniques for working with the advanced textiles used in sailmaking.

And remember that the Apollo suits were stitched by seamstresses whose past experience was largely in making bras, girdles, and other undergarments for Playtex.
 
This was entirely predictable (see posts in relevant thread).

As a significant portion of early Civil astronauts will be wealthy individuals, space suits will invariably be trimmed according to their preferences wherever possible. I used to make the comparison with diving suits. We will see the same.
 
View: https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1711813390018978298


The second Core Stage for SLS, set to launch the first crew on Artemis II, is now scheduled to be ready for shipping by mid-December.

NSF's Philip Sloss spoke with Jonathan Looser, NASA SLS Core Stage Design Team Lead, on the latest status:

 
Here's a video from TheSpaceBucket about the newly unveiled full-scale mockup of BO's Moon Lander:


Earlier this year we got a first look at Blue Origin’s new lunar lander designed to transport Artemis astronauts to the Moon’s surface and back to orbit. Just yesterday the company revealed a full physical lander demonstrator named Mk1.
In addition, Blue Origin gave out quite a bit more info including the plans for this initial lander, how it evolves into Mk2 which is made specifically for Artemis, its operations on the Moon, and even some of the mission goals. At the same time, we are also hearing more about SpaceX’s Starship lunar lander and timeline concerns in particular, which NASA brought up before.
The agency is now looking at both companies and options to determine what will be complete and by when. Here I will go more in-depth into Blue Origin’s lunar lander progress, NASA’s schedule concern for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, the future plan, and more.
 
It certainly looks bigger than the Apollo lunar lander. I take it that this is not the final design yet?
 
Strange that the spacesuit comes with a HUD, wonder why they decided to put one in now?
 
Strange that the spacesuit comes with a HUD, wonder why they decided to put one in now?
Doing that has been talked about for at least a couple decades. The 'now' may simply be a function of generating the required technology and getting the hardware bits made.
Anyway,
here's a 2016 reference,
Our solution suggests the use of controlled spacesuit which includes Automated Thrust, Augmented HUD Display, Self-Healing, Custom Fit Suits (Shape Memory alloys), 3D-Printed Protective Shell, Improved Insulation, Artificial Gravity, Adhesive Footing (Gecko Feet) and Movement Generated Power (Zinc Oxide Nano-wires) to revolutionize the current spacesuit and make previously impossible space exploration missions possible in the near future. Automated thrust will make the space walks easier, safer and more enjoyable for the astronauts on few clicks. Automated system includes a control system and hardware to control the movement of astronauts and engineers in space to make their work easier and harmless. Augmented HUD Display displays the necessary information in digital form on Helmet like the one used by F-16 Pilots. Self Healing material have the potential of replacing the multiple layers to defend against damages to suit, which can be fatal in space. Shape memory alloys can be used in EMUs for ...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the link southwestforest. I did not realise that it had been on going for two decades, obviously the technology would have been for the Constellation program had that not been cancled. At least it is getting used for the Artemis mission instead.
 
I did not realise that it had been on going for two decades,
Have some earlier NASA references back to 1989, mostly all PDF, but Google or other favorite search engine will find the download links for you,

"
A helmet mounted display demonstration unit for a Space ...
NASA (.gov)
https://ntrs.nasa.gov › citations
by CG Gernux · 1989 · Cited by 5 — Under NASA guidance an advanced development helmet mounted display (HMD) has been designed and fabricated. Delivery has been made of an ....
"
EDIT: have a quote from above web page, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19900040488
A helmet mounted display demonstration unit for a Space Station applicationUnder NASA guidance an advanced development helmet mounted display (HMD) has been designed and fabricated. Delivery has been made of an extravehicular mobility unit (EMU) HMD demonstration unit as an alternative to the current low-resolution, chest-mounted display, and cuff-mounted checklists. Important design goals achieved with this HMD include the use of transmissive liquid display image sources with fairly high resolution (text, graphics, and video compatible), binocular viewing with total image overlap, virtual image projection, low profile packaging, low power design, and demonstration of voice control of the HMD data. Test results showed that the HMD program successfully demonstrated the feasibility of the concept and operated as designed, meeting the necessary program requirements.
Document ID
19900040488
Document Type
Conference Paper
Authors

Gernux, Carolyn G. (United Technologies Corp. Windsor Locks, CT, United States)

Blaser, Robert W. (United Technologies Corp. Hamilton Standard Div., Windsor Locks, CT, United States)

Marmolejo, Jose (NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, TX, United States)
Date Acquired
August 14, 2013
Publication Date
July 1, 1989
"
Raster Graphic Helmet-Mounted Display Study
NASA (.gov)
https://ntrs.nasa.gov › api › citations › downloads
PDF
nasa helmet display from ntrs.nasa.gov
by WS Beamon · 1990 · Cited by 2 — on a helmet mounted display (HMD) currently being delivered to NASA LaRC. ... will be displayed with imagery in helmet ...
"
"
Helmet-Mounted Display Design Guide
NASA (.gov)
https://ntrs.nasa.gov › api › citations › downloads
PDF
by RL Newman · 1997 · Cited by 21 — J. M. Naish, ~ e v i e w of Some Head-UP Display Formats, NASA TP-1499, 1979. R. L. Newman, CH-3t (MARS) Head-Up Displav Evaluation, ..
"
"
Flat panel displays in the helmet-mounted display
NASA/ADS
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu › abs › abstract
by CT Bartlett · 2002 · Cited by 8 — The Helmet Mounted Display has been in development for over 25 years and with few exceptions those systems in service have incorporated a ...
"
"
 
Last edited:
True, not all of them are for spacesuits, but if NASA is involved then they are learning things which can be applied to spacesuits ...


Evaluation of Helmet Mounted Display Alerting Symbology
Proposed helicopter helmet mounted displays will be used to alert the pilot to a variety of conditions, from threats to equipment problems. The present research was performed under the NASA Safe All-weather Flight Operations Research (SAFOR) program supported by a joint Army/NASA research agreement. The purpose of the research was to examine ways to optimize the alerting effectiveness of helmet display symbology. The research used two approaches to increasing the effectiveness of alerts. One was to increase the ability of the alert to attract attention by using the entire display surface. The other was to include information about the required response in the alert itself. The investigation was conducted using the NASA Ames Research Center's six-degree-of-freedom vertical motion simulator (VMS) with a rotorcraft cockpit. Helmet display symbology was based on the AH-64's pilot night vision system (PNVS), cruise mode symbology. A standardized mission was developed, that consisted of 11 legs. The mission included four tasks, which allowed variation in the frequency of alerts. The general trend in the data points to a small benefit from both the full-screen alert and the partial information alert.
Document ID
20010047013
Document Type
Technical Memorandum (TM)
Authors
DeMaio, Joe
(Army Aviation and Missile Command Moffett Field, CA United States)
Rutkowski, Michael

Date Acquired
September 7, 2013
Publication Date
September 1, 2000

Subject Category
Behavioral Sciences
Report/Patent Number
NAS 1.15:209603
AFDD/TR-00-A-009
A-000023
NASA/TM-2000-209603
Funding Number(s)
PROJECT: RTOP 581-31-22
Distribution Limits
Public
Copyright
Work of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.
 
Given this is a generalized thread about the Artemis program which by definition includes the new SLS rocket, I'm going to post here that "Merry Christmas to myself" arrived in the mail & has even been begun - AMT's 1/200 scale SLS/Orion Artemis 1 model kit.
:D
It is in same scale as AMT's 1960s "Man in Space" kit which has Mercury/Redstone, Mercury/Atlas, Gemini/Titan, Saturn 1b, Saturn 5.
Also Hasegawa, a Japanese model kit company well known for their aircraft, offers a Shuttle with tanks and SRBs in the same 1/200 scale.

AMT's new Artemis 1 kit is nicely done, including the box.
With my health the mess it is now I no longer bother checking the fine details for point by point accuracy; it is obviously an Artemis SLS and that satisfies me.

My 1 complaint is that I do wish the kit included an Orion capsule to hide under the launch shield or to display alongside.
But, hey, it is an SLS, it goes with those other kits, it has nice decals, it has a well done informational booklet ...
,,, I'll take the kit!
(sells for right around $30 US)

(here's about the Man in Space kit, https://www.scalemates.com/kits/amt-700l-06-man-in-space-five-complete-nasa-rocket-kits--100484)


IMG_6190.JPG IMG_6191.JPG IMG_6192.JPG IMG_6193.JPG IMG_6195.JPG
 
And while I'm here at the PC and in the mood to post, let's make sure this reference gets in the thread,

Space Launch System​


NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) is a super heavy-lift rocket that provides the foundation for human exploration beyond Earth orbit. With its unprecedented capabilities, SLS is the only rocket that can send the Orion spacecraft, four astronauts, and large cargo directly to the Moon on a single mission.

Encyclopedia Updated Mar 7, 2023

https://www.nasa.gov/reference/space-launch-system/

Download SLS Factsheet (PDF)


America’s Rocket for Deep Space Exploration​

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) is a super heavy-lift rocket that provides the foundation for human exploration beyond Earth orbit. With its unprecedented capabilities, SLS is the only rocket that can send the Orion spacecraft, four astronauts, and large cargo directly to the Moon on a single mission.
Offering more payload mass, volume, and departure energy than any other single rocket, SLS can support a range of mission objectives, while reducing mission complexity. The SLS rocket is designed to be evolvable, which makes it possible to increase its capability to fly more types of missions, including human missions to the Moon and Mars and robotic scientific missions to other deep space destinations like the Moon, Mars, Saturn, and Jupiter.
On Nov. 16, 2022, SLS launched from NASA Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Complex 39B in Florida, making history as the most powerful rocket NASA has ever launched. The successful Artemis I mission ushered in a new era of exploration, as NASA prepares to send astronauts to the Moon as a prelude to human exploration of Mars. Post-flight data reviews determined that SLS met or exceeded performance expectations, and the rocket is ready to support a crewed flight on Artemis II and future crewed missions.


The Power to Explore Beyond Earth’s Orbit

To fulfill America’s future needs for deep space missions, SLS will evolve into increasingly more powerful configurations. Hardware is currently in production for the next four SLS flights, and development is underway on the more powerful Block 1B and Block 2 variants that will succeed the current Block 1 variant.
more at site
 
NASA delay Artemis 2 flight to September 2025
for safety reasons

the Artemis 1 mission itself revealed technical issues, such as the heat shield on the Orion crew capsule eroded in an unexpected way, and the ground structure used to launch the giant SLS rocket sustained more damage than expected.

Note, Artemis 1 Orion Capsule had NO life support and it subsystems aboard

 
In today's email from America Space. Neat illustrations in it. (now, where are the model kits of those?):)


Living on the Moon: Inside Artemis’ Foundation Habitat​

about 5 hours ago by Alex Longo

NASA’s flagship Artemis program aims to return humans to the lunar surface and to ultimately build a permanent lunar outpost. The first crewed missions of the program, Artemis 2 and 3, were recently delayed by nearly one year in order to address technical challenges impinging upon crew safety. Artemis 3 might slip further due to the long development roadmap for the Starship lunar lander. However, these setbacks have not diminished NASA’s ambitions for the long-term future of its lunar program. A recent paper by three aerospace engineers provides the first details on the interior of the Foundation Surface Habitat, which will become humanity’s first permanent home on the Moon.
lots more text on webpage
 
@Flyaway : I am sad that Artemis mission schedule got pushed on the right. I would like to see that earlier.
Today, I also learned that Orion is unstable in subsonic, something I wasn't [anymore] aware of, making tricky the release of landing chutes. A bit more depressing after all the bad news with that capsule.
 
Last edited:
So what will NASA do to make Orion more stable in subsonic TomcatVIP? Clearly NASA has more work to do with Orion before it is cleared for launch.
 
Today, I also learned that Orion is unstable in subsonic, something I wasn't aware of, making tricky the release of landing chutes.
So what will NASA do to make Orion more stable in subsonic TomcatVIP?

The Apollo CM was also unstable below M2 so it used its' RCS thrusters to keep it stable till the drogue-parachutes deployed, it would be the same thing for the Orion CM.
 
Today, I also learned that Orion is unstable in subsonic, something I wasn't aware of,
Well, NASA was aware of it at least since 1967 for Apollo and 2011 for Orion - it is a fundamental function of the shape.
You can either have the blunt end required for efficient aerodynamic braking and the even more important heat distribution OR have a shape giving stable sub-mach flight, physics won't let you have it both ways.
And it is more than the capsule, even the launch abort configuration was/is unstable, see Orion page.

Screen shots below come from these PDF,
Apollo
Orion

Apollo 1.jpg Apollo 2.jpg Orion 1.jpg Orion 2.jpg
 
Mike Griffin's idea:


Now if both shuttle pads had been set up for SLS--that would have been fine...But Falcon Heavy has one of those pads and New Glenn will come on line before too very much longer.

I imagine the plethora of rockets coming up gives us options even if Starship doesn't pan out.

The boo-birds:
 
Last edited:
View: https://twitter.com/nasaspaceflight/status/1753773945738727711


With Artemis II now scheduled for no earlier than September 2025, NSF's Philip Sloss spoke with Cliff Lanham, NASA EGS senior vehicle operations manager, regarding preparations for the first crewed launch of SLS/Orion from KSC's 39B.

 
Mike Griffin's idea:


Now if both shuttle pads had been set up for SLS--that would have been fine...But Falcon Heavy has one of those pads and New Glenn will come on line before too very much longer.

I imagine the plethora of rockets coming up gives us options even if Starship doesn't pan out.

The boo-birds:
The SLS can’t saturate one pad, having two means they’d both sit empty the majority of this decade and the next. Leasing one to industry was the right decision. You’re right that all the new rockets under development means we’ll have many options; though your fears about Starship panning out are putting the cart before the horse. Who’s to say anyone else will do better?

With all the LVs the US will have, it would be nice if NASA could switch to payloads and people instead of paying for the SLS and Orion. Doesn’t seem likely before the end of the decade though.
 
I like SLS in that it is a rocket a pessimist would build.

Two big RATOs, one big core you burn until slap empty…(not totally)—and you’re in space.
 
What’s the point if the cost is exorbitant and the results don’t justify it? Look beyond the specific architecture that is used and think about why it was chosen, and what its ultimate purpose is. Also think about what our primary national goal should be - something very broad and non-specific.

Pretend I’m someone uninterested in space. How do you persuade me that Artemis is worthwhile, and that the SLS and Orion are irreplaceable assets for NASA?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom