×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Russian Vehicle Delivers Spacesuit Repair Kit To ISS

timothy posted about 9 months ago | from the why-didn't-they-pay-the-$4-for-overnight? dept.

ISS 39

A Russian spacecraft has successfully delivered new supplies to the ISS. Crucially, its payload is meant to prevent a repeat of the aborted spacewalk of earlier this month. Says the article:: "The cargo ship is loaded with nearly 3 tons (2.7 tonnes) of food, fuel, hardware and science experiment equipment for the six-person crew of the station's Expedition 36 mission. Among its cargo is a set of tools intended to help the astronauts investigate and patch up the spacesuit that malfunctioned during a July 16 spacewalk outside the orbiting laboratory."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

39 comments

not helpful ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44404867)

"3 tons (2.7 tonnes)". How much metric tons is meant here ?

Re:not helpful ! (2, Interesting)

polar red (215081) | about 9 months ago | (#44404871)

for a geeky site, the continuous use of non-standard measurment units is maddening !

Re:not helpful ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44404921)

What's the conversion rate for tons to donuts?

Re:not helpful ! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44404985)

You worthless piece of trash! You will rue the day you turned your back on The Truth! Why are you cowering? Because The Truth is absent from your pathetic little life!

Your comment is pew pew along the lines of magazine; in other words, it isn't stargazer at all! Your comment reveals your love for decadency and falsehood! I will be the one to put you down! I will be the one to defeat you without a single problem, Slashdot intellectual!

How comical! How comical! Vanish from my sight already! You're an eyesore! A mere eyesore is what you are! Why not vanish? You must vanish! You shall vanish! Vanish, vanish, vanish! Vanish, Slashdot intellectual!

Re:not helpful ! (1)

Kidbro (80868) | about 9 months ago | (#44404917)

2.7. The metric ton is a bit larger than the long ton. Why they decided it was OK to introduce an extra significant in the conversion is beyond me though.

Re:not helpful ! (1)

Kidbro (80868) | about 9 months ago | (#44404927)

Ugh. I got confused. The number "3" would not be a long ton, but a short ton [wikipedia.org]. The point still stands that 2.7 would be the metric number.

Re:not helpful ! (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 9 months ago | (#44404989)

Ugh. I got confused. The number "3" would not be a long ton, but a short ton [wikipedia.org]. The point still stands that 2.7 would be the metric number.

the summary might just mean that it's _nearly_ 3 tons (2.7 is nearly 3). of course typing it out like that sounds fucking stupid, since why not then just say 2.7 because the whole "nearly 3 tons" is a waste, but it wouldn't be the first time.

Re:not helpful ! (4, Informative)

Zocalo (252965) | about 9 months ago | (#44405043)

Assuming that they are not using "ton" as a measure of volume, then take you pick which two out of these three possibilites they mean:
  • 3 US short tons (at ~907kg each), which is ~2721kg
  • 2.7 UK long tons (at ~1016kg each), which is ~2743kg
  • 2.7 metric tonnes (at 1000kg each), which is 2700kg

FWIW, the UK Weights and Measures Act 1985 excludes from use for trade the ton and the term "metric ton" for "tonne" in an attempt to avoid such confusion over ambiguous and incorrect usage of "ton", "tonnes" and "metric tons".

Re:not helpful ! (1)

osu-neko (2604) | about 9 months ago | (#44405173)

It doesn't help that there's over a dozen other definitions of "ton", several of which are measures of volume rather than mass.

Re:not helpful ! (0)

Shavano (2541114) | about 9 months ago | (#44406041)

UK units are irrelevant because the UK has no space program. There is no reasonable interpretation for "3 tons" to mean 3 long tons.

Since those are all within 2% of each other (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44410261)

Since those kg totals are all within 2% of each other, and the tons figure is given with only two significant digits (about 4% accuracy) a true pedant would recognize that in this case it is irrelevant which of those three tons are meant.

Spacesuit repair kit? (2)

lxs (131946) | about 9 months ago | (#44404913)

So is that a little tin with a piece of sandpaper, a tube of rubber cement and some patching material? Do they hold the suit in a tub of soapy water to find the leaks? Must be messy in microgravity.

Re:Spacesuit repair kit? (4, Funny)

GNious (953874) | about 9 months ago | (#44404999)

Person 1 wears the suit
Person 1 farts
Person 2 sniffs out the leak

simples

Re:Spacesuit repair kit? (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 9 months ago | (#44409951)

Person 1 wears the suit
Person 1 farts
Person 2 sniffs out the leak

Except the problem with the suit is water collecting in the helmet.

So not only are you farting in a spacesuit that's keeping the air in, you're going to drown after breathing in your ass-air the entire time.

Re:Spacesuit repair kit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44405747)

Repair kit contents:
1 can of automotive radiator stop-leak
2 bottle of water for refill
3 lucky rabbit foot to tape onto helmet

Re:Spacesuit repair kit? (3, Insightful)

Hognoxious (631665) | about 9 months ago | (#44405899)

Really, all this talk of how primitive the Russians are. Give them some credit.

Half of the kit is a roll of clingfilm; you smooth it onto the suit and watch for the bubble forming.

The other half is a roll of duct tape.

Re:Spacesuit repair kit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44408777)

Just keep in mind that the Russians still maintain a manned launch capability. Ground control to USA.... ????
   

APPLE HAS HELPED IN THIS SOMEWAY !! SOMEHOW !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44404923)

It must be so !! If not TIM COOK !! Then Steve Jobs' Ghost !!

So, what about the repair kit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44404933)

Supplies shipment are pretty routine now... what makes it newsworthy? I suspect the details of the repair kit is the news here, not the rocket delivering it. What's next, Internet transmit scientific data?

nearly 3 tons - so? (1)

scsirob (246572) | about 9 months ago | (#44405167)

How is it relevant to mention a weight of 3 tons in a weightless environment??

Re:nearly 3 tons - so? (4, Insightful)

ThreeKelvin (2024342) | about 9 months ago | (#44405223)

If we're talking metric tons, then they're a measure of mass, not weight. Mass and inertia of an object doesn't go away just because it's in a weightless environment.

Re:nearly 3 tons - so? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 9 months ago | (#44405657)

How is it relevant to mention a weight of 3 tons in a weightless environment??

It didn't start in a weightless environment. There's an approximate cost per pound to orbit somewhere between 5k and 10k USD per. It's relevant so you can do the math

That's why (2, Funny)

JustOK (667959) | about 9 months ago | (#44405205)

That's why I'll never accept a job as an astronaut. Why take a job were you have to wear a suit?

Re:That's why (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44405709)

Well, you have a good point regarding the suit, but considering the circumstances it might not have a lot of weight.

Re:That's why (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44405719)

That's a good point regarding the suit, but considering the circumstances it might not have a lot of weight.

Missing the obvious. (1)

Seumas (6865) | about 9 months ago | (#44405355)

I think we can all safely assume Snowden was onboard and is now safely aboard the ISS, under Russian protection?

Why wasn't it an AFRICAN space vehicle? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44406533)

Could it possibly be because of African DNA? Or is it the land mass that the Russians live on, which magically imbues them with more intelligence than Africans...

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...