🚀 go-pugleaf

-From: mike@starburst.umd.edu (Michael F. Santangelo)
-Subject: DC-1 and the $23M NASA Toilet
-Date: 7 Jan 93 05:11:01 GMT
-Organization: University of Maryland, Chesapeake Biological Laboratory

-Well, it occured to me after being subjected to a little CNN Headline News
-peice this evening regarding the new $23 MILLION DOLLAR toilet that will
-be flying aboard the shuttle Endeavour (GAO is somewhat concerned about
-this btw) that no mention has been made regarding this sort of thing
-with respect to the proposed manned, operational Delta Clipper program.
-Since DC-1(,2,3...) will have the ability to stay in LEO for at least
-some days with astronauts aboard, one wonders what kind of accomodations
-they will have while not engaged in flight activities (i.e. sleeping, eating,
-and what comes as a result of eating).  A great deal of time, effort, and money
-has been spent on STS to accomodate humans living in space during
-week long missions in this regard.

That *does* sound pretty expensive, doesn't it? I understand that this price
includes the development and verification of the design as well as construction
of the first model. Additional copies should be "cheaper" (if you can call it
that).

A few mitigating factors that might be considered:
  * I understand the pre-Shuttle toilet facilities took around an hour
    to use (for solid waste). Depending on how you do the accounting,
    we pay something like half a million dollars per astronaut-hour
    in orbit. (This would be particularly applicable on a Spacelab mission,
    for example, where human activity is the main point of the mission.)
    An hour or more per astronaut per day using a more primitive system
    represents considerable waste of an expensive resource.
  * The new Shuttle toilet is supposed to be considerably better than the
    earlier model, particularly for use on long-duration missions. It can
    be operated in several modes, and thus should be less likely to fail
    completely, making it less likely that the astronauts would have to
    resort to baggies. In addition, it doesn't have to be removed from the
    orbiter between missions, which could help with processing time and costs.
  * The same design is supposed to be usable on SSF, and I suppose could
    be adapted to DC-1. (There are no immediate plans to replace the toilets
    on the other three orbiters.)
  * The baggy system is not as sanitary as the toilet, and the health of
    the astronauts is a valid concern. A sick astronaut can't do as much
    work as a healthy one, and it would be a shame to have to cut short
    a long-duration mission due to health problems.

I watched part of the NASA Select press conference, and taped the rest. 
I'll try to find the time to watch the entire press conference.

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov