Talk:Pressure suit

One of the most interesting little sections I've come across on Wikipedia. However, the section only cites two sources, and one sentence — "These effects have been confirmed through various accidents (including in very high altitude conditions, outer space and training vacuum chambers)" — got me thinking. Weren't there war crimes committed during WWII when (I thought) the Japanese were "testing" people's resilience to extreme pressures and pressure changes? I thought there was a book on it as well, but my memory is drawing a blank, and I can't seem to find anything about it on Google. Well, my question would be, even though some of the information was obtained illegally and sickeningly... it is still information, and could it be used to expand this section further? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 21:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

My understanding is that, given that Wikipedia is not censored, it could be included; see, Wikipedia:Offensive material. Nevertheless, I wouldn't put it up, remembering that primary research articles are not notable and that being offensive does not make something notable. Klbrain (talk) 16:21, 3 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

"Types // Partial pressure // Suits that only pressurize certain parts of the body, they can only provide protection up to a certain altitude." should better dinstinguish between

1) pressure suits for a part of the human body, and

2) pressure suits that deliver only a part of the atmospheric pressure of about 1 bar.

A person in an - not pressurized - aeroplane at a height of 12000 m that is in a suit that supplies the bearer with the pressure of aan atmospheric height of 3000 m needs only 515 - 145 mmHg = 370 mmHg of air pressure difference (gauge), which is only 49 % of 760 mmHg or about 1 bar. So far a "partial oressure" suit.

See: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Barometric_formula2.png shows for h=3000 m, p=515 mmHg and 12000 m : 145 mmHg --Helium4 (talk) 14:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/683215main_DressingAltitude-ebook.pdf

--Craigboy (talk) 06:05, 28 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I fixed a typo. Under "Background" it said "Above 50,000 ft (15,000 m), respiration is not possible because the pressure at which the lungs excrete carbon dioxide (approximately 87 mmHg) is exceeded by the outside air pressure."

This would mean outside air pressure is higher than the pressure at which lucngs excrete CO2. In actuality, the air pressure is lower. I replaced "is exceeded by" with "exceeds."

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pressure suit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727071226/http://ston.jsc.nasa.gov/collections/TRS/_techrep/TP-2004-212068.pdf to http://ston.jsc.nasa.gov/collections/TRS/_techrep/TP-2004-212068.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051024220403/http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/english/03.htm to http://www.zvezda-npp.ru/english/03.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)Reply