Is a suited astronaut on EVA a spacecraft?

[Wishbone]

* was covertly overloaded...

 

[Topper]

but still an astronaut in a spacesuit is not a spacecraft, is a human called a vhicle?? No, hes called a human!!:facepalm:

I i havn't notuced that the answer is
"Yes- an astronaut on EVA is a spacecraft."

I prefer to say that the susite is the spacecraft, not the astronaut ON the EVA!

 

[statickid]

the difference i see between the diver and the space suit is that the diver is still in an open system type environment.

The other guy is in a tiny spaceship, just barely big enough to fit a little boy or girl inside.

 

[Nazban]

Urwumpe, how the hell did i forget that!?!?!?:facepalm:

I i havn't notuced that the answer is"Yes- an astronaut on EVA is a spacecraft."I prefer to say that the susite is the spacecraft, not the astronaut ON the EVA!

How can you cal it a spacecraft, does it haveany mode of transport, the way the astronaut moves is with his limb(holding on to the station bars) or attached to the robotic arm. The suit doesnt move him, the suit protects him, thats why the suit was made, it wasnt made as a transport.

 

[Topper]

Urwumpe, how the hell did i forget that!?!?!?:facepalm:How can you cal it a spacecraft, does it haveany mode of transport, the way the astronaut moves is with his limb(holding on to the station bars) or attached to the robotic arm. The suit doesnt move him, the suit protects him, thats why the suit was made, it wasnt made as a transport.

Yes of course it protects him, like each spacecraft does it.
And like in any spacecraft, an action of the pilot is required to move. (The pilot can also be a CPU)

 

[Kyle]

Lets go over the requirements for a manned spacecraft.

Does it hold people/persons? (check)
Does it hold oxygen? (check)
Does it have propulsion? (check)
Can it carry payloads? (check)
Will it blend? (not check)

I'd think you could count a EVA suit as a manned spacecraft

 

[Loru]

...Will it blend? (not check)...

Let's try:

 

[Keatah]

An eva-suited astronaut is a spacecraft. A spacecraft with a very tiny cabin.

 

[Nazban]

Yes of course it protects him, like each spacecraft does it.
And like in any spacecraft, an action of the pilot is required to move. (The pilot can also be a CPU)

Yes, but in an EVA suit, there is no 'propulsion' system, its his limbs that are moving it physically. In a spacecraft, he does an action, which a computer inteprets and moves the spacecraft which makes it a vehicle.

---------- Post added at 02:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:52 PM ----------

Lets go over the requirements for a manned spacecraft.

Does it hold people/persons? (check)
Does it hold oxygen? (check)
Does it have propulsion? (check)
Can it carry payloads? (check)
Will it blend? (not check)

I'd think you could count a EVA suit as a manned spacecraft

How does a spacecraft have propulsion?? thats only with the MMU, but a shuttle or station astronaut dont use any propulsion units, only thier limbs.
(and please dont call thier limbs as propulsion, otherwise we can call any living thing a vehicle.)

 

[wehaveaproblem]

I was going to vote no because I like to disagree/debate with T.Neo for one, but also because, for me, a spacecraft requires the need to be able to reach 'space'.

However, by all the definitions I can find, a spacecraft is simply a 'a device that is designed to operate outside the Earth's atmosphere'. There is no requirement for getting into space or for having propulsion specifically, and cargo is not a defined requirement either. So on that front, it seems that an astronaut in a suit is a spacecraft.

 

[JEL]

EVA is EXTRA-vehicular activity... 'extra' is latin for outside, thus it's not activity IN the spacecraft. If the suit is a spacecraft itself then it's not an EVA by definition. Then it would be an IVA (INTRA-vehicular activity

)

 

[Nazban]

EVA is EXTRA-vehicular activity... 'extra' is latin for outside, thus it's not activity IN the spacecraft. If the suit is a spacecraft itself then it's not an EVA by definition. Then it would be an IVA (INTRA-vehicular activity )

perfect!!:tiphat:

 

[wehaveaproblem]

EVA is EXTRA-vehicular activity... 'extra' is latin for outside, thus it's not activity IN the spacecraft. If the suit is a spacecraft itself then it's not an EVA by definition. Then it would be an IVA (INTRA-vehicular activity

That's a clever argument, however I don't think the assigned EVA definition prohibits the EVAer itself from being a vehicle. The term EVA is used in relevance/reference to the Shuttle or Station, so is 'extra' in that regard only.

I think the real point here comes to semantics. By definition an EVA can be considered a spacecraft, but for all practical intents and purposes it is not really.

 

[tblaxland]

That's a clever argument, however I don't think the assigned EVA definition prohibits the EVAer itself from being a vehicle. The term EVA is used in relevance/reference to the Shuttle or Station, so is 'extra' in that regard only.

Like an extra-terrestrial being doesn't need to live in space? He can live on a [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrestrial_planet"]terrestrial planet[/ame] and still be an extra-terrestrial. He is just "extra-" to the point of reference, in this case the Earth. In the case of an EVA, the point of reference is the host vehicle - ISS, Shuttle, etc.

 

[JEL]

@wehaveaproblem; but then you could also say the spaceshuttle is doing an EVA when it approaches or departs the ISS
As far as I understand it's not the suit that does the EVA, but the man or woman inside it.

@tblaxland; an extra-terrestrial defines someone not of this earth. If you google "define:terrestrial" then you will get this:

planetary: of or relating to or characteristic of the planet Earth or its inhabitants

I'm not sure the wiki's definition of "terrestrial planet" is fully accurate when they talk of other planets than earth itself. But then again, "terre" means land so... maybe

But then again, think about it... an extra-terrestrial... what would that exactly be if it meant "out of a planet" or "out of land"? Wouldn't all astronauts then be extra-terrestrials? (They're not on the planet while on ISS, they're 'out from' earth so to speak )

Food for thought

 

[tblaxland]

@tblaxland; an extra-terrestrial defines someone not of this earth. If you google "define:terrestrial" then you will get this:

"define:terrestrial animal":

Terrestrial animals are animals that live predominantly or entirely on land

That said, you win the googlefight

Wouldn't all astronauts then be extra-terrestrials? (They're not on the planet while on ISS, they're 'out from' earth so to speak )

You could say they are engaging in extra-terrestrial activity (but then so would I be if I was swimming ), but not that their origins are extra-terrestrial.

 

[ZombiezuRFER]

if an extra terrestrial is something that doesnt live on the land, then we have fish who are ETs. :rofl:

 

[JEL]

"define:terrestrial animal"

:lol: good one

"define:terrestrial animal":

Definitions of terrestrial animal on the Web:

Terrestrial animals are animals that live predominantly or entirely on land, as compared with aquatic animals, which live predominantly or entirely in the water (e.g., fish, lobsters, octopuses), or amphibians, which rely on a combination of aquatic and terrestrial habitats (e.g., frogs).

Animal which lives on land.

This would make all fish extra-terrestrials in a way. They're off land
(I think that could work though... take this guy for instance, judging by looks alone:

That's a real fish... but certainly looks more like the general scary-movie concept of a little green alien :lol: )

But then... "define:Extra-Terrestrial":

Definitions of Extra-Terrestrial on the Web:

Extraterrestrial life is defined as life which does not originate from planet Earth. The word "extraterrestrial" is derived from the Latin extra ("outside", "outwards") and terrestris ("earthly", "of or relating to the Earth").

A form of life assumed to exist outside the Earth or its atmosphere.

This excludes fish from being extra-terrestrial... which is obviously contradictory to what they say about terrestrial animals.

Funny thing

You could say they are engaging in extra-terrestrial activity (but then so would I be if I was swimming ), but not that their origins are extra-terrestrial.

Yeah, I think we can fairly safely assume that the ISS crew is "A form of life assumed to exist outside the Earth or its atmosphere.", so that fits the definition
Or wait a second... "exist outside ... its atmosphere"? Is the atmosphere on ISS; Earth-atmosphere? Or just Earth-LIKE atmosphere? If it's not Earth-LIKE but actual Earth-atmosphere, then we're no longer outside it's atmosphere and then we may've broken the definition. But then again, when they're doing work on the outside of the hull, then that would be activity outside Earth's atmosphere and so therefore constitute extra-terrestrial activity... I think :uhh: (I love definitions, it's about the most nit-picking thing humans have ever invented I think :lol: No wonder lawyers earn so much money twisting words down to the single letter)

---------- Post added at 03:11 ---------- Previous post was at 03:10 ----------

Ding it, I got pwned by ZombiezuRFER :ninja:

 

[ZombiezuRFER]

Ninja'd. Anyone wanna go down to the crab shack and eat some aliens?

 

[wehaveaproblem]

Battered alien with chips for me please...


This page of posts has largely been about definitions and semantics. Do you think then that the definitions will have to be re-thought or re-defined as our space exploration and so forth increases? To better reflect the objects and techniques used?