Can you tell what this is ?

Can you tell what this is ?

Author
Discussion

MartG

Original Poster:

21,245 posts

211 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
...without reverse image lookup wink



Hint - it's spaceflight related

callmedave

2,686 posts

152 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
You say space related but its obviously not been to space due to its size and dimensions

So it could be an apparatus for transporting something (its on wheels)
Or maybe its a kind of practice/demonstration rig?

the way its built makes me think its pressurized in some way.


No idea, got any more clues?

MartG

Original Poster:

21,245 posts

211 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
callmedave said:
No idea, got any more clues?
It was used for manned spaceflight research, but never flew

schmunk

4,399 posts

132 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
Space Suit pressure tester - to check for leaks?

MartG

Original Poster:

21,245 posts

211 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
Guy gets in it, then it's filled with water to test G-tolerance while submerged

"Nicknamed the Iron Maiden Used only once by research scientist R. Flanagan Gray. After donning a special mask and goggles designed for high-g’s Gray submerged himself in the water that filled the tank and inserted a breathing tube in his mouth. He took a deep breath and held it. With a nod of his head, he signaled that he was ready for his research associates to take the world renowned Johnsville Centrifuge to it’s maximum. The ride eventually took Gray to 31.25 Gs sustained for approximately 5 seconds. By the time the run was over, Gray was exhausted, quite worse for wear and a world record holder. Since then, none has attempted to match his extraordinary feat."

boyse7en

7,124 posts

172 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
MartG said:
Guy gets in it, then it's filled with water to test G-tolerance while submerged

"Nicknamed the Iron Maiden Used only once by research scientist R. Flanagan Gray. After donning a special mask and goggles designed for high-g’s Gray submerged himself in the water that filled the tank and inserted a breathing tube in his mouth. He took a deep breath and held it. With a nod of his head, he signaled that he was ready for his research associates to take the world renowned Johnsville Centrifuge to it’s maximum. The ride eventually took Gray to 31.25 Gs sustained for approximately 5 seconds. By the time the run was over, Gray was exhausted, quite worse for wear and a world record holder. Since then, none has attempted to match his extraordinary feat."
I thought it might be designed to hold a person. It looks a lot like an old-style diving helmet in places.

XM5ER

5,094 posts

255 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
MartG said:
Guy gets in it, then it's filled with water to test G-tolerance while submerged

"Nicknamed the Iron Maiden Used only once by research scientist R. Flanagan Gray. After donning a special mask and goggles designed for high-g’s Gray submerged himself in the water that filled the tank and inserted a breathing tube in his mouth. He took a deep breath and held it. With a nod of his head, he signaled that he was ready for his research associates to take the world renowned Johnsville Centrifuge to it’s maximum. The ride eventually took Gray to 31.25 Gs sustained for approximately 5 seconds. By the time the run was over, Gray was exhausted, quite worse for wear and a world record holder. Since then, none has attempted to match his extraordinary feat."
Imagine trying to fill in a risk assessment for that now!

Bebee

4,697 posts

232 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
Hoover hanging below?

Einion Yrth

19,575 posts

251 months

Wednesday 18th January 2017
quotequote all
MartG said:
G 31.25 Gs [ ... ] quite worse for wear
No st.

Simpo Two

87,095 posts

272 months

Thursday 19th January 2017
quotequote all
There was a curious obsession in the early days of the space race to subject astronauts to a bazillion G.

MitchT

16,235 posts

216 months

Thursday 19th January 2017
quotequote all
Judging by the seated position I'd say it's a "straining suit" to assist people with extreme constipation.

Eric Mc

122,858 posts

272 months

Thursday 19th January 2017
quotequote all
Maybe they could resurrect the project as part of NASA's "Poop Challenge".

callmedave

2,686 posts

152 months

Thursday 19th January 2017
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
There was a curious obsession in the early days of the space race to subject astronauts to a bazillion G.
There is a reason behind this:

there is a big difference in fuel required from the launch pad depending on the speed at which the rocket will accelerate. a non manned flight (a satellite for example) can be launched at a much higher G force as the components inside can be made to withstand the force. therefore requiring less fuel there fore easier/cheaper to get up there.

Humans however are more squishy and need to be delivered to space more gently. this in turn uses more fuel.

- Hope i explained that well enough! smile

Einion Yrth

19,575 posts

251 months

Friday 20th January 2017
quotequote all
callmedave said:
Simpo Two said:
There was a curious obsession in the early days of the space race to subject astronauts to a bazillion G.
There is a reason behind this:

there is a big difference in fuel required from the launch pad depending on the speed at which the rocket will accelerate. a non manned flight (a satellite for example) can be launched at a much higher G force as the components inside can be made to withstand the force. therefore requiring less fuel there fore easier/cheaper to get up there.

Humans however are more squishy and need to be delivered to space more gently. this in turn uses more fuel.

- Hope i explained that well enough! smile
Added to that that in the really early days they were using repurposed ICBMs as boosters; they were not designed to hang about, the Redstone on Ham's flight nearly killed the poor sod.

Eric Mc

122,858 posts

272 months

Friday 20th January 2017
quotequote all
The Americans have used three ballistic missiles as part of their manned programmes. The Redstone was an Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM) and was used for the very earliest suborbital Mercury missions.

The more powerful Atlas ICBM was used for the orbital Mercury missions.

The Titan II ICBM was sued for Gemini missions.

The Saturn family was intended to be a family of manned launchers from the start so were designed to impart lower overall G loads during ascent. The same went for the Space Shuttle and will also apply to the Space Launch System (if it ever gets off the ground).

The Soviets/Russians started with the R7 ICBM and still use a derivative of it today to launch the Soyuz.

Simpo Two

87,095 posts

272 months

Friday 20th January 2017
quotequote all
callmedave said:
- Hope i explained that well enough! smile
That's interesting; from first principles I'd have thought that to get X mass to Y height would use Z energy, regardless of acceleration. But not being a rocket scientist stand to be corrected.

NNH

1,543 posts

139 months

Friday 20th January 2017
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
callmedave said:
- Hope i explained that well enough! smile
That's interesting; from first principles I'd have thought that to get X mass to Y height would use Z energy, regardless of acceleration. But not being a rocket scientist stand to be corrected.
Essentially, the longer you spend fighting gravity, the more fuel you use. You can imagine the extreme case of a rocket with only just enough power to hover without accelerating upwards, which would need an infinite amount of fuel!

Simpo Two

87,095 posts

272 months

Friday 20th January 2017
quotequote all
Fair point. Does it hold true for cars? In other words if you want to go from 0 to 60, do you use less fuel acclerating hard for a shorter time, or vice versa?

NNH

1,543 posts

139 months

Friday 20th January 2017
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
Fair point. Does it hold true for cars? In other words if you want to go from 0 to 60, do you use less fuel acclerating hard for a shorter time, or vice versa?
I guess it's still true, but in a car you're fighting drag. If you fire a car from a huge spring to 60mph (don't try this at home), there's virtually no time for air resistance to be relevant, while a slow acceleration over 30 seconds would allow lots of time for drag to be fought.

callmedave

2,686 posts

152 months

Friday 20th January 2017
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
Fair point. Does it hold true for cars? In other words if you want to go from 0 to 60, do you use less fuel acclerating hard for a shorter time, or vice versa?
Yes. Imagine driving in top gear but at idle revs, how much fuel would you use to get 100 miles.

Now same gear but do 60 mph. you would have used less fuel after 100 miles. - its not rocket science! wink