SpaceX Astronauts Begin Spacewalk, Putting New Spacesuits to Test

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Spacesuit design and EVA execution

  • Many commenters focus on the new SpaceX EVA suits: some think they look sleek and sci‑fi; others find them “bad” or over-designed compared to Apollo/ISS suits.
  • Observations that the suits appear rigid and less flexible; tradeoff noted between higher pressure (shorter airlock time) and reduced mobility and task range.
  • Thermal limits discussed: astronauts had to stay in the spacecraft’s shadow and reported suit temps around 33–34°C, suggesting early‑stage (“v0.1 beta”) constraints.
  • Some debate whether this counts as a full “spacewalk,” since crew were constrained at the hatch rather than free-floating on a long tether.

SpaceX capabilities and vertical integration

  • Mission seen as evidence SpaceX operates like a “commercial space agency,” providing rockets, capsules, ground ops, and even suits as a single package.
  • Vertical integration partly attributed to high legacy vendor pricing and slow timelines; SpaceX reportedly builds many components in‑house to cut cost and iterate quickly.
  • Contrast drawn with “big classical aerospace” seen as slow, over-regulated, and oriented toward pork and legacy contractors.

Costs, competition, and monopoly concerns

  • Disagreement on whether SpaceX’s dominance will eventually make space access more expensive.
  • One side: monopolies raise prices; Boeing struggles and limited US launch alternatives are worrying.
  • Other side: reusability already cut costs vs Soyuz/Shuttle; higher prices would attract competitors (Blue Origin, ULA, Rocket Lab, Chinese firms); companies optimize annual profit, not price per launch.

Environmental impact and ethics of space tourism

  • Initial claim that a Falcon 9 launch emits ~28,000 tons CO₂‑equivalent sparked pushback; critics note this exceeds the rocket’s mass and violates conservation of mass.
  • OP later clarifies this is CO₂‑equivalent and sourced from a Starship analysis, but others provide papers and NASA documents suggesting Falcon 9 and Starship emissions are ~1–2 orders of magnitude lower.
  • Broader debate: whether billionaire space tourism is justifiable given climate impact. Some argue space tourism funds R&D and is negligible vs cars, jets, and power plants; others worry normalization now will make future curbs politically impossible.

NASA, regulation, and public vs private roles

  • Some say NASA should focus on science and advanced tech (reactors, engines, ISRU) rather than expensive, politically driven launchers like SLS.
  • Others emphasize that fundamental research and much of SpaceX’s success build on publicly funded work; private firms rarely fund deep, long‑term basic research alone.
  • Discussion of regulation: necessary for safety and environment, but also blamed for bloated costs and slow progress in aerospace, medical devices, and nuclear power.

Definitions and space law

  • Dispute over:
    • “Spacewalk” = merely going outside the vehicle vs free‑floating.
    • “Space” = above the Kármán line.
  • Debate about future Mars ownership: treaties ban national sovereignty in space, but some argue that de facto control (“only one who can get there/resupply”) is equivalent to ownership; others note vulnerability to blockades if not self‑sufficient.

Other technical notes

  • SpaceX’s Starlink laser links were tested during the mission for video calls, surprising some who thought this hardware was still years away.