Though in the specific case of micrometeorites, IIRC the sort of impact you're thinking of would punch right through a modern space suit anyway. They do have micrometeorite protection layers, but they're built for smaller/lighter impacts that are much more common (most stuff I've read compares it to very gradual sandblasting rather than bullets). Bullet-like impacts are basically "shark attack" rare, so they don't armor for those as a standard precaution.
Oh, the ones I was thinking of were sand-grain sized, but they still move at 12-20 km/s. They'd nick but not pierce a properly-made fused-quartz visor or spacecraft window.
But to be fair, that's recent enough that I'd be really surprised if the designs weren't inspired by the IRL R&D suits, so IDK if it counts as a legit "reminds me of...".
The concept of a mechanical pressure suit has been around since the fifties IIRC, so it's not surprising that it would show up a lot in sci-fi art (especially given its flattering looks when worn by someone attractive). There's probably no end to the amount of fictional designs that bear an incidental resemblance to the R&D suits, just because "bodysuit with lines on it" is a pretty straightforward image.
Yeah I don't see that. See... when did anyone say "full range of motion"? :P
Extant space suits don't even come close. Your proposal doesn't go that far either. this material may flex but I don't think it can twist. thus your helmet idea would prevent the wearer from looking left or right at all.
I think the best solution would be to size the helmet so that it's just large enough that you can rotate your head inside it. It wouldn't require much more bulk than the size required to get your head to fit. True, this approach requires you to practice turning your head without tilting it to the side, but it can be done. Er... actually.... that one seen in the first picture looks about right.
The suit has to be able to twist in order to work at all. Too many joints throughout the body involve either twisting, or motions which would be synonymous with twisting in terms of how they'd act on a sheet material laid over the body. The only "special" things about the neck are the need to avoid constricting the trachea and jugular, and there's no shortage of places on the other limbs with easily constricted major veins like that. So again: if they can solve for the rest, they can solve for the neck. If you can solve for the neck, there's no reason to use a helmet design that'd then be entirely made of disadvantages.
"Full" range of motion is not necessary: that's just the moon you aim for in order to hit the fence (improved mobility is the primary pitching point of these suits, so expecting them to settle for the standards of current suits if they don't have to is false). That's why I said "or enough to capitalize on the globe's visibility range enough to make it worthwhile". Meaning a non-globe only has to be better than a globe to any degree. In fact it really only needs to match it given all the other advantages a non-globe has.
The only advantage a globe has is a simplified neck. In all other respects it is an inferior concept. There's no reason to think that advantage won't be completely eliminated by a suit like this, but it technically doesn't have to: it only has to reduce the margin enough so it no longer overshadows literally everything else about the design.
I think you're reaching for reasons to believe globes will win out because you like how they look.
The suit has to be able to twist in order to work at all. Too many joints throughout the body involve either twisting, or motions which would be synonymous with twisting in terms of how they'd act on a sheet material laid over the body. The only "special" things about the neck are the need to avoid constricting the trachea and jugular, and there's no shortage of places on the other limbs with easily constricted major veins like that. So again: if they can solve for the rest, they can solve for the neck. If you can solve for the neck, there's no reason to use a helmet design that'd then be entirely made of disadvantages.
"Full" range of motion is not necessary: that's just the moon you aim for in order to hit the fence (improved mobility is the primary pitching point of these suits, so expecting them to settle for the standards of current suits if they don't have to is false). That's why I said "or enough to capitalize on the globe's visibility range enough to make it worthwhile". Meaning a non-globe only has to be better than a globe to any degree. In fact it really only needs to match it given all the other advantages a non-globe has.
The only advantage a globe has is a simplified neck. In all other respects it is an inferior concept. There's no reason to think that advantage won't be completely eliminated by a suit like this, but it technically doesn't have to: it only has to reduce the margin enough so it no longer overshadows literally everything else about the design.
I think you're reaching for reasons to believe globes will win out because you like how they look.
Um... what? I have no idea what half of your post is trying to say.... Going by what is comprehensible....
There is only one joint on the human body that could require rotation. the shoulder. All of the others are essentially fancy hinges. Flexing and twisting are very different here due to how the ribs work. This fabric can't crumple, which is what your neck design would need to do in order to work.
I'm pretty sure that the article was talking more about how the arms and legs move when discussing mobility and not the head. Their suit design, if functional, is about as bulky as the UNDERSUIT worn with the old space suits.
Besides, I think you're underestimating how bulky your helmet design would end up being. :P Especially when you factor in all the tubes and hoses and stuff that'd be needed for the wearer to breathe. The globe design has those at the base of the neck, thus reducing the weight of the helmet.
Also, the globe design can wobble from side to side, it's not completely fixed. That adds more range of movement than you probably think. Part of why I like the globe design is that with it you can simply look sideways. That's not something most other helmet designs can do.
Comments
Oh, the ones I was thinking of were sand-grain sized, but they still move at 12-20 km/s. They'd nick but not pierce a properly-made fused-quartz visor or spacecraft window.
But to be fair, that's recent enough that I'd be really surprised if the designs weren't inspired by the IRL R&D suits, so IDK if it counts as a legit "reminds me of...".
The concept of a mechanical pressure suit has been around since the fifties IIRC, so it's not surprising that it would show up a lot in sci-fi art (especially given its flattering looks when worn by someone attractive). There's probably no end to the amount of fictional designs that bear an incidental resemblance to the R&D suits, just because "bodysuit with lines on it" is a pretty straightforward image.
The suit has to be able to twist in order to work at all. Too many joints throughout the body involve either twisting, or motions which would be synonymous with twisting in terms of how they'd act on a sheet material laid over the body. The only "special" things about the neck are the need to avoid constricting the trachea and jugular, and there's no shortage of places on the other limbs with easily constricted major veins like that. So again: if they can solve for the rest, they can solve for the neck. If you can solve for the neck, there's no reason to use a helmet design that'd then be entirely made of disadvantages.
"Full" range of motion is not necessary: that's just the moon you aim for in order to hit the fence (improved mobility is the primary pitching point of these suits, so expecting them to settle for the standards of current suits if they don't have to is false). That's why I said "or enough to capitalize on the globe's visibility range enough to make it worthwhile". Meaning a non-globe only has to be better than a globe to any degree. In fact it really only needs to match it given all the other advantages a non-globe has.
The only advantage a globe has is a simplified neck. In all other respects it is an inferior concept. There's no reason to think that advantage won't be completely eliminated by a suit like this, but it technically doesn't have to: it only has to reduce the margin enough so it no longer overshadows literally everything else about the design.
I think you're reaching for reasons to believe globes will win out because you like how they look.
There is only one joint on the human body that could require rotation. the shoulder. All of the others are essentially fancy hinges. Flexing and twisting are very different here due to how the ribs work. This fabric can't crumple, which is what your neck design would need to do in order to work.
I'm pretty sure that the article was talking more about how the arms and legs move when discussing mobility and not the head. Their suit design, if functional, is about as bulky as the UNDERSUIT worn with the old space suits.
Besides, I think you're underestimating how bulky your helmet design would end up being. :P Especially when you factor in all the tubes and hoses and stuff that'd be needed for the wearer to breathe. The globe design has those at the base of the neck, thus reducing the weight of the helmet.
Also, the globe design can wobble from side to side, it's not completely fixed. That adds more range of movement than you probably think. Part of why I like the globe design is that with it you can simply look sideways. That's not something most other helmet designs can do.
My character Tsin'xing