Astronaut Koichi Wakata didn't change underwear for a month

Re:Astronaut Koichi Wakata didn't change underwear for a month by emontero1 on Saturday August 01, 2009 @12:40PM (#736401)

The reason I consider this article HN worthy is this:

"Designed to resist the rigours of lengthy space travel, the anti-static, flame-resistant, odour-eating, bacteria-killing, water-absorbent smalls have been put through their paces as part of a project aimed at ensuring that future space travellers will need only minimal space in their suitcases."

Now imagine the myriad of different uses such underpants could have here on Earth. And? Precisely!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Astronaut Koichi Wakata didn't change underwear for a month by Tichy on Saturday August 01, 2009 @05:27PM (#736694)

Certainly hours of time for hacking could be gained by eliminating the need to change underwear.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Astronaut Koichi Wakata didn't change underwear for a month by ErrantX on Saturday August 01, 2009 @01:41PM (#736453)

I am intrigued though as to why flame-resistance was tested... one imagines that if a fire breaks out the last thing on their minds will be "at least my underwear wont catch"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Astronaut Koichi Wakata didn't change underwear for a month by michael_dorfman on Saturday August 01, 2009 @02:03PM (#736480)

Call me old-fashioned, but I think having one's underwear not catch fire is almost always better than the alternative.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Astronaut Koichi Wakata didn't change underwear for a month by kyochan on Saturday August 01, 2009 @01:54PM (#736465)

feature creep?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Astronaut Koichi Wakata didn't change underwear for a month by xanados on Saturday August 01, 2009 @07:01PM (#736801)

What they didn't mention is that the bloat made them 1/4 inch thick.

[ Parent | on HN ]