G-Forces and SS1 Passengers

It's been mentioned in other threads that the SS1 pilots Mike Melvill and Brian Binnie have been experiencing g-forces of 5 to 8 G's. They have prepared their bodies for such an experience by flying the alphajet to high G's, and must generally be pretty fit from their life as test pilots.

When SpaceShipOne, or VSS Enterprise, or A.N.Other-SS1-derivative takes non-test-pilot passengers to space, there will be similar forces on them also. How much will the G-forces affect these people, who do not have the same experience as the test-pilots, and who have had perhaps just a week's training (as suggested by Branson).

Are there mechanisms that can be used to 'take the strain' - will g-suits such as military pilots use be enough?

well i think most people who'd be willing to try a ride to space can already take 5 gs for a few minutes. that's a significant amount, but it's not going to knock you out or give you brain damage. 8gs, on the other hand, is a ton (not literally, unless you weigh 250 pounds), and not many people can take that for more than a very brief period. i wouldn't be suprised if the rolls ss1 suffered on the first flight put 8gs of stress on melvill, but i remember reading that the maximum on a normal flight is 5gs, and that on reentry. In other words, any decently fit person should be able to take the ride with no negative effects and not too much pain.

Ive experienced as much as 3 - 5g's, it wasnt too bad, but them G's werent for long at all. Howlong would they experience 5g's for?.. I also think healthy fit People will handle it pretty well tho. And there will be a process that people will go through for a few days before they take the flight right?

I imagine space training is included in the ticket price.

Given that SS1 is a developmental craft, maybe the ship designed for passengers will have some sort of design feature that would reduce the gees on descent?

I have no idea how that would be possible. Anybody got some clues for me? Larger feathering surface area? Would that make any difference at all?

DKH

What about deriving a proposition for "What's next?" under "XPRIZE in General" or for Centennial Challenges of these questions?

...



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin

My suggestion would be to look for any data that the roller coaster/amusement park ride industry might have. I'm reasonably sure that they'd be the ones to have extensive data on what the "average" human can endure with little to no preparation.

It would make sense for them to (continue to, if you take into account the prior tourist excursions) go the route of including training with all the initial tourist flights until they figure out ways to compensate technologically. Perhaps a few "vomit comet" rides are in order.

Roller coasters don't subject the passengers to anything more than 6 gs. Caused damage due to the way that a roller coaster works otherwise. Also, aren't the 5-8 gs sustained gs, unlike those of a roller coaster?

yeah. Rollercoasters like Aerosmith Rock n Roll rollercoaster pulls a few 5g's . So you can experience what its like, but Very Briefly. its not sustainted as it would be with SpaceShipOne

The point was, if anyone's likely to have data on what "average" people can handle, they'd be it. (one source, anyway.. if you can think of others, feel free to share) Exceeding those limits could cause them problems anywhere from a bad rep for their rides to possible lawsuits. Yet, it's one of the few industries I can think of (before I've had my coffee.. ha) where they try to push those limits.

Of course, they tend to hit those G limits only for short periods of time, as you say.. but if someone like the original poster is interested in answering their own questions, I'd think that would be a good start. Might lead into other sources of information. I *could* have just said "it's probably out there, look it up".

Oh, come on, why are you guys looking at roller coaster rides? There are very few that even momentarily reach anything like 5 g's. What you wanna look to is Fighter Pilots, and how they deal with intense 9+G manuevers.

They wear G-suits, which pump air into your legs and stomache to sqeeze blood back into your head (which, at high g's, is forced and sinks to your lower body). Actually, I got put in one of these with the helmet on an Air National Guard recruiting event, was pretty sweet. Also, when pulling high sustained g's, pilots are trained to 'groan' - sqeeze their stomache and leg muscles to push even more blood from their legs back into their head. And if this wasn't enough, there coming out with a new G-suit that uses water instead of air, which will push human performances up to I'd guess 12 G's.

This may weed out a few real old rich people, but my guess is that there would still be quite a large population fit enough (and rich enough) to supply a market for these spacecraft.

Not really wild about your attitude in this quote, but I'll respond anyway: Because it's a start. Doesn't mean it's the ONLY data they'd look into. Please don't pretend it would be.

EDIT: While I'm thinking about it, here's what devalues fighter pilot data in the context of this discussion: Fighter pilots train regularly and extensively, as far as I know. The roller coaster data was mentioned to see what UNtrained people could handle, and go from there.

I remember repeated having read articles about researches that initially used data like those you mentioned, Strategery71, because of the lack of other data.

This researches used such data to get a first glance to evaluate wether further research would be interesting, to get ideas how to do the research and so on.

If you restrict your proposal to that it's a quite good idea - and as you write you are restricting your proposal.

This way statistical data will be collected and all circumstances of gettiing the data have to be noticed in reports and protocols to see how far they are comparable and how far they are not.

This will contribute to the development of serious scientific and medical research which will result in practical use.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)