On 12/04/2014 08:03, Martin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 22:42:49 +0100, Spider wrote:

On 11/04/2014 21:31, Martin wrote:

No eye problems wearing this
http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/i...?1397248152188

Tis true, but I'm not sure we all want to go out into the garden looking
like Michael Jackson. Safe I like, but that's a safeness too
far. Not sure I liked the greenhosue in that link, either ;~).

A gold fish would be happy in the helmet. I'd never thought of an
astronaut having to sit in a vacuum chamber to test the suit. What
happens if the test fails? Desiccated astronaut?

It is much easier to let the air back into a test chamber than to get
air into space.
--
Phil Cook

On 12/04/2014 09:50, Martin wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 09:27:44 +0100, Phil Cook
wrote:

On 12/04/2014 08:03, Martin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 22:42:49 +0100, Spider wrote:

On 11/04/2014 21:31, Martin wrote:

No eye problems wearing this
http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/i...?1397248152188

Tis true, but I'm not sure we all want to go out into the garden looking
like Michael Jackson. Safe I like, but that's a safeness too
far. Not sure I liked the greenhosue in that link, either ;~).

A gold fish would be happy in the helmet. I'd never thought of an
astronaut having to sit in a vacuum chamber to test the suit. What
happens if the test fails? Desiccated astronaut?

It is much easier to let the air back into a test chamber than to get
air into space.

How about testing the suit for leaks in a vacuum chamber with the astronaut not
in the suit?

They might be testing for other things as well as airtightness.

Indeed they are. Have a look at the Samantha Cristoforetti Log Book
post that the picture comes from.

https://plus.google.com/+SamanthaCri...ts/fgjpxxSwB9E
--
Phil Cook

On 12/04/2014 08:03, Martin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 22:42:49 +0100, Spider wrote:

On 11/04/2014 21:31, Martin wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:00:41 +0100, Spider wrote:

On 10/04/2014 22:47, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 22:20:33 +0100, Spider wrote:

On 10/04/2014 14:28, wrote:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2014 13:08:45 +0100, Spider wrote:

On 08/04/2014 22:51, Martin wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2014 22:31:53 +0100, Spider wrote:

On 08/04/2014 22:12, Martin wrote:



I can imagine. Even the slightest irritation is painful enough. I
don't think I'd make a very good patient.

The solution?
http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Ima...Space_eye-wash




I'm sure it's very efficient, but it gives me 'the squeams'. Might be
an idea for Bob, though ;~)

Reckon I've got enough bits in the shed to knock something like that
up, two relatively recent deaths of elderly relatives has left a pile
of unused catheter bags and tubing. loathe to throw them away,
occasionally one is put into use to drip feed a plant or two if we go
away for a few days.
Now where have I put those safety goggles and special solvent plastic
glues.

G.Harman




Oh yuk! Double yuk! You're welcome to it. Hope the plants enjoy it. I
don't fancy it at all.

Ideal for DIY crocodile tears.



And the real sort, too! (Makes me feel sorry for crocodiles).

No eye problems wearing this
http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/i...?1397248152188




Tis true, but I'm not sure we all want to go out into the garden looking
like Michael Jackson. Safe I like, but that's a safeness too far. Not
sure I liked the greenhosue in that link, either ;~).

A gold fish would be happy in the helmet. I'd never thought of an astronaut
having to sit in a vacuum chamber to test the suit. What happens if the test
fails? Desiccated astronaut?




In spite of the fact that goldfish bowls are still sold on that round
'helmet' format, they're apparently not good for goldfish, so I doubt
one would be happy.


As to the other matter, I think I prefer dessicated coconut.
--
Spider.
On high ground in SE London
gardening on heavy clay