Jim - 27/2/2007 3:15 PMCEV room is not at a premium
nacnud - 27/2/2007 1:20 PMGoggles or some other light weight external display might be worth looking at for extra redundancy if the fewer screens/larger area approach is taken.
nacnud - 27/2/2007 3:20 PMGoggles or some other light weight external display might be worth looking at for extra redundancy if the fewer screens/larger area approach is taken.
renclod - 27/2/2007 9:16 AMQuoteJim - 27/2/2007 3:15 PMCEV room is not at a premiumhttp://www.thefreedictionary.com/roomroomA space that is or may be occupied: That easy chair takes up too much roomhttp://www.thefreedictionary.com/at+a+premiumIdiom: at a premiumMore valuable than usual, as from scarcity: Fresh water was at a premium after the reservoir was contaminatedCEV MASS certainly is "at a premium". CAPSULE MASS even more so. "at a premium" = precious, too expensive to wasteWhy fill the capsule with old style consoles and seats.
renclod - 27/2/2007 9:35 AMQuotenacnud - 27/2/2007 3:20 PMGoggles or some other light weight external display might be worth looking at for extra redundancy if the fewer screens/larger area approach is taken.Cutting edge engineering would reserve the redundancy role to classic consoles and go with wearable HMI (Human Machine Interface) mainware. Make the CEV true 21st-centuryish .
airausquin - 21/11/2007 9:25 AMHello, I am doing some research on spacecrafts hand controllers, and the only reference I have found regarding the Orion CEV are the sample slides on the Private Jet Control Panels/Display Layout thread/article. These show an Apollo CM's type rotational and translationals hand controllers.
airausquin - 21/11/2007 4:25 PMThe only "spacecraft" I have seen with a different arrangement is the SAVER,
DaveS - 21/11/2007 11:27 AMIt's SAFER(Simplified Aid For EVA Rescue).
airausquin - 21/11/2007 11:56 AMQuoteDaveS - 21/11/2007 11:27 AMIt's SAFER(Simplified Aid For EVA Rescue).Writting from memory, my mistake! Thanks for the correction.I am astonished that I have not keep up with the MMU replacement by SAFER. Just learned about it about two weeks ago...Alejandro
Jim - 21/11/2007 2:12 PMSAFER is not an MMU replacement.
STS Tony - 27/2/2007 10:19 AMSure are beautiful jets, especially the Gulfstream.
Big Al - 19/1/2008 11:55 PMWill HUD (Head UP Displays) be part of their system? It could reduce the area required for plat panels.
Thomas - 25/1/2008 10:48 AMWhat makes a piece of electronics vacuum friendly? I know cooling has a lot to do with it. The Soviets apparently never invested much in vacuum-proofing electronics, they just kept everything pressurized for the most part, even unmanned satellites. How vacuum-proof is most off the shelf, solid-state electronics. Being able to evacuate the entire capsule sure seems like a good way to save the enormous weight of an airlock, especially if EVA's are relatively few and far between.
Nate_Trost - 27/2/2007 4:57 PMAnybody know what those Honeywell units cost in the standard aviation flavor? Do they have to be modified for thermal/vacuum parameters, or are they good as-is?
- 27/2/2007 5:24 PMQuoterenclod - 27/2/2007 9:35 AM...reserve the redundancy role to classic consoles and go with wearable HMI (Human Machine Interface) mainware. ....Not required. Also the displays are not just for when the crew is "flying" the vehicle. This is the 'whole" control center for the vehicle during all phases of the mission. Don't want to have to put on something just to look a one gauge or to adjust the cabin temp. Especially when an alarm goes off, trying put on a headset to see the displays.This is NOT like a fighter cockpit. The pilot in a fighter does only one thing, fly the plane. The CEV does many other things. Ascent, entry, and docking are like flying but most of the time in the mission is not spend at the "flight deck" Maybe an occasional glance at the status of the vehicle The displays have to work with ISS launch and entry suits, no suits and eventually EVA suits. Having a traditonal displays is best for this
renclod - 27/2/2007 9:35 AM...reserve the redundancy role to classic consoles and go with wearable HMI (Human Machine Interface) mainware. ....
renclod - 25/1/2008 4:02 PM1. They could all interact with the avionics - no sitting at the "flight deck" is required. Just what you say: the CEV does many things, this is not a "fly the plane" paradigm.2. As with integrating a monocular display with the EVA suit, there should be solutions. Right now I wonder, why didn't Dan Tani had one to help him quickly identify tags for all those SARJ parts. The spacecraft computers are always in close proximity so high speed comm is not an issue..3 Let them all crew members have some 'net access (and some degree of privacy with it) during the long hours of coasting between critical events.4. I think wearable human-machine-interfaces should play a big role for Orion and Altair.
Jim - 26/1/2008 6:09 AM1. Laptops will be everywhere2. The suit is not made for it. 3. Laptops again4. Minor role, if any it would be on the new EVA suits
simonbp - 24/2/2008 8:43 PMQuoteJim - 26/1/2008 6:09 AM1. Laptops will be everywhere2. The suit is not made for it. 3. Laptops again4. Minor role, if any it would be on the new EVA suits"Laptops everywhere" is going to messy, and frankly unnecessary. I agree with renclod that augmented reality (head-mounted, networked displays) will be extremely useful for both Orion and Altair. Simon
simonbp - 24/2/2008 8:43 PMQuoteJim - 26/1/2008 6:09 AM1. Laptops will be everywhere2. The suit is not made for it. 3. Laptops again4. Minor role, if any it would be on the new EVA suits"Laptops everywhere" is going to messy, and frankly unnecessary. I agree with renclod that augmented reality (head-mounted, networked displays) will be extremely useful for both Orion and Altair. They will be especially useful for lunar EVAs, providing the astros with life-support, location, and mission goals data. Basically, a better and higher-tech version of Bean and Conrad's wrist checklists...Apparently JSC and LM are already looking at augmented reality for DEXTER: http://www.primidi.com/2007/10/14.htmlSimon
William Barton - 25/2/2008 4:37 AMtechnogeezer
- 23/2/2008 8:18 AMIt seems to me that the Flat panel/ glass cockpit is the only way to go.
renclod - 29/4/2008 8:15 AMhttp://procurement.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/eps/bizops.cgi?gr=D&pin=22#129695NASA/GRC is hereby soliciting information about potential sources for an Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Helmet Mounted Display (HMD). :cool:
1. Shall mount inside of the ILC Dover Mark III technology demonstrator suit. The Mark III suit uses a 330 mm diameter hemispherical helmet bubble tilted at an angle of 55° The helmet bubble is approximately 6 mm thick. Available volume TBD. The Mark III suit is the closest available analogous suit for testing a head-mounted display. 2. The display system shall be helmet-mounted and decoupled from the user’s head. Decoupling the display from the head will eliminate the possibility of the display becoming misaligned from the user’s eye. Also, crewmembers have expressed a strong desire to keep head-mounted systems to an absolute minimum. 3. Shall be monocular - right eye. A monocular helmet-mounted display is lighter, less expensive, and simpler to align than a binocular display. They are also best suited for an informational display where there is intermittent viewing of the display. 4. Shall be a see-through display with external transmission >80%. This will allow the display not to obstruct the view of the user when the display is not in use. 5. Shall be positioned out of direct line of sight, approximately 30-45° below the horizontal line of sight. The display shall also be able to be positioned 30-45° right of the vertical center of the right eye. This will place the display out of the direct sight of the user. 6. Shall have as a minimum a monochrome display with at least 32 levels of grayscale; color is highly desirable. A minimum of 64 gray levels for color systems. HMD should be capable of displaying crew procedures and instructions, caution and warning system display, navigational information, and video display. 7. Shall have either a VGA or DVI input.(Video Graphics Adapter or Digital Video Interface) This will allow the display to be connected to a standard PC for testing. 8. Shall have a cubic eye box 35 mm on each side minimum; 50 mm cube on each side desired. This will allow for the display system to be tolerant of head movement and also allow the display image to be easily located. 9. Shall have an apparent Field-of-View (FOV) - 40° diagonal desired, 30° diagonal minimum. A large field of view, when combined with the other system specifications, will allow for an easily readable display. 10. Should have an adjustable focus over a range of 1 m to infinity. If a fixed focus display is used, the display shall have a focused distance of approximately 1.5 m. Having an adjustable focus will allow the user to tailor the display for their most comfortable viewing distance. At a minimum, the display shall be focused slightly beyond arm’s length. 11. The final display optic shall project no more than 15 mm from the inner surface of the helmet bubble. Keeping the display optics close to the helmet bubble will prevent the display from impeding upon the suit volume. 12. Shall have an eye relief of 70 mm minus the amount which final display optic protrudes from the inner helmet surface. A large eye relief is needed to allow the display to be mounted on the helmet bubble and viewed with the user’s head at the back edge of the suit. 13. The display system’s electronics and optics that must reside in the helmet bubble shall not protrude any more than 25 mm from the surface of the helmet bubble. Electronics that must be located in the helmet volume must retain at least 90% of Inferior FOV and 60% of Temporal FOV. Keeping the display system close to the helmet bubble will prevent the display from impeding upon the suit volume. 14. Any external associated display support electronics shall be less than 230 cc, and less than 1.5 kg. Initial phase prototype may have external support electronics, but must be portable enough for field-testing. 15. Shall have a high contrast ratio of greater than or equal to 10:1. A high contrast ratio, when combined with the other system specifications, will allow for an easily readable display. 16. The display shall be able to increase its contrast ratio to a minimum of 100:1 by use of a variable, absorptive filter, or via increased source brightness as specified in Item 21. 17. Power < 15W desirable. On-suit power is extremely limited, especially during lunar EVAs. 18. Helmet-mounted mass < 200 g. 19. Resolution of 640 by 480 minimum; 1280 by 1024 desired. A high-resolution display, when combined with the other system specifications, will allow for an easily-readable display. 20. The apparent brightness of the display shall be adjustable from 50 to 200 fL minimum; 100 to 1800 fL desired. A bright display will allow it to be viewed in a variety of lighting conditions. 21. The display shall be able of short periods of higher apparent brightness at a minimum of 1000 fL. The display shall be able to operate at this higher brightness level for a minimum of five minutes. Sunlight readability is an important capability for EVA HMD. In lieu of high constant brightness, a short duration capability will allow more precise determination of readability in real-world conditions.
Have all the augmented reality displays, suit mounted controls and virtual keyboards you want, but when that (those) systems don't work or have glitches in them for whatever reason (BSOD anyone?) I'll take levers and light bulb indicators for critical systems anyday. Those systems being mentioned would probably be great for efficiency and saving time, but you'd still need a good amount of tried and true legacy components to make it safe. I don't think having a virtual cockpit rules out a fully functional one, or vice versa come to think of it.
I think neural induction is just a little 'way out' at the moment. I suspect it will turn a lot of test subjects into vegetables before it manages to project high resolution displays into peoples minds. I look forward to the day when it works, but I'm not holding my breath.There is good reason why speech recognition technology has not taken over everyone's desktops - it doesn't work that well and it's more tiring versus typing at a keyboard. Hand motion detection devices are not going to replace keyboards any time soon because they are not as versatile and they are an ergonomic nightmare (there is a reason why good keyboards are sprung). While I don't think keyboards are anywhere near optimal at the moment (e.g. Qwerty vs. Dvorak), they are the most versatile input devices we currently have.
The multi touch flat screen shown in the video (click image on first link) would seem to offer many benefits to the crew, including the speech recognition of the second link.Note the virtual keyboard about 80 seconds into the first video from the first link.http://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2007/01/super_touch_screen_f.htmlhttp://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2006/08/speech_and_gest.html
The concern I'd have with a touchscreen is 1) can it take hard blows either from small metal objects or things like kicking feet, and 2) if you break it, what is the backup plan?