4 ms·

I wish these looked more futuristic. They sort of look wrinkly and a lot like the spacesuits we’ve always had. I don’t see what Prada brought to the aesthetics

I wish these looked more futuristic. They sort of look wrinkly and a lot like the spacesuits we’ve always had. I don’t see what Prada brought to the aesthetics of this. That aside, wow NASA paid $228 million for these suits? That seems like a lot to me, but I don’t really know what’s involved either. Are the materials or manufacturing techniques new? I would think you don’t need to tool for this small scale manufacturing but could just make them by hand. But the article also mentions complex electronic systems like CO2 scrubbers and heat management. Are those bespoke or more likely to be off the shelf?

beemo 2y ago
Honestly 228M for something like a space suit doesn’t even seem excessive to me. Extreme security requirements together with extreme conditions make for an expensive combo. Electronics for these conditions are hardly ever off the shelf because of the harsh environment. If these suits fail it’s not only immediately life threatening for the astronauts, it would also be a huge embarrassment for the country. So if you still can pull off something like a moon landing, better do it right.
piyh 2y ago
Each suit is it's own mini spaceship. A lot goes into keeping someone alive and functional where instant death is surrounding you from all sides.
Dalewyn 2y ago
>I don’t see what Prada brought to the aesthetics of this. As a taxpayer whose tax dollars in part went into this, I am happy that precisely none of it went to aesthetics. Form resulting as a consequence of function is amazing, just look at any proper jet fighter or indeed the NASA spacesuits of olde; Bruce McCandless looked amazing in his iconic EVA photo.[1] If even a single tax cent goes directly to form over function, though? I will happily vote to defund such a waste of my tax dollars. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:STS41B-35-1613_-_Bruce_McCandless_II_during_EVA_(Retouched).jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:STS41B-35-1613_-_Bruce_Mc...
- blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  > precisely none of it went to aesthetics Prada? I know they're being pitched as a manufacturing partner but I think it’s similar to others who make spacesuits choosing a design team.

beemo 2y ago

Honestly 228M for something like a space suit doesn’t even seem excessive to me. Extreme security requirements together with extreme conditions make for an expensive combo. Electronics for these conditions are hardly ever off the shelf because of the harsh environment. If these suits fail it’s not only immediately life threatening for the astronauts, it would also be a huge embarrassment for the country. So if you still can pull off something like a moon landing, better do it right.

piyh 2y ago

Each suit is it's own mini spaceship. A lot goes into keeping someone alive and functional where instant death is surrounding you from all sides.

Dalewyn 2y ago

>I don’t see what Prada brought to the aesthetics of this. As a taxpayer whose tax dollars in part went into this, I am happy that precisely none of it went to aesthetics. Form resulting as a consequence of function is amazing, just look at any proper jet fighter or indeed the NASA spacesuits of olde; Bruce McCandless looked amazing in his iconic EVA photo.[1] If even a single tax cent goes directly to form over function, though? I will happily vote to defund such a waste of my tax dollars. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:STS41B-35-1613_-_Bruce_McCandless_II_during_EVA_(Retouched).jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:STS41B-35-1613_-_Bruce_Mc...

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
> precisely none of it went to aesthetics Prada? I know they're being pitched as a manufacturing partner but I think it’s similar to others who make spacesuits choosing a design team.