Author Topic: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2  (Read 706737 times)

Offline punder

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1134
  • Liked: 1635
  • Likes Given: 1288
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1500 on: 08/06/2018 05:37 pm »
You want SpaceX to dump all that automation and go back to a human doing the flying?

Of course not. How did you get there from my post?

Automation is a two-edged sword, obviously. Many pilots have been fooled by their autopilot modes, or focused on the wrong indications in a highly complex and/or highly automated aircraft. Teslas crash for unexpected reasons. I've read NTSB reports that give the impression NO ONE aboard an Airbus flight deck fully understood how the airplane was cascading through the various control modes as things went south. What I don't want to see, and I highly suspect SpaceX doesn't want to implement, is a mostly automated spacecraft that, in weird corner cases, can fool its crew into taking the wrong action. That's all. And I'm concerned because it has happened elsewhere, including Tesla. Here was a chance to ask an experienced ATP what he thinks about that. Is that an instance of "concern trolling"? Sure, okay. My bad.
« Last Edit: 08/06/2018 05:40 pm by punder »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7993
  • Liked: 6527
  • Likes Given: 2926
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1501 on: 08/06/2018 05:37 pm »
The Pilot is not on the ground because there is no pilot. It's all automated.

...
Hmm I dont know how SpaceX does their Dragon...but I bet its not that different than airbus...just the pilot is on the ground.  they could be in an airbus to (except for the gear and maybe flaps) , they could not be in a Boeing aircraft..at least now

no there is a pilot somewhere.  NASA would not allow something that would operate without some positive control

From liftoff to Dragon sep, and again from entry interface until splashdown, there is no person with "positive control". It's 100% computer controlled and there's nothing anyone on the ground or in the capsule can do except mess it up.

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1502 on: 08/06/2018 05:39 pm »
The ground team (more than 1)  have a sequence of events they go through, and issue commands as various points when everyone is in agreement. They don't control the spacecraft. Once commanded the spacecraft does everything from positioning, firing thrusters, changing attitude, roll and so on.

That's called automated in my books.



Kevinof

"You want it to de-orbit, you issue a de-orbit command and it does it. "

 you are hung up on what the word pilot is defined as.  you are stuck on the "Right stuff" definition not the FAA one which is "the person who is manipulating the controls OR the control of the vehicle"

"the pilot" in this case is the person who issues the "de orbit" command.

they may not be called that...but they are doing the same exact thing an Airbus pilot would...he/she is just sitting there

as it would be in Airbus as well. 

an for individual segments of flight it would be in my Triple 7 as well.

the question now is not how the decision is executed...it is simply where the decision is made

thats a hard concept even for a lot of people who operate the new generations of systems from my kids drones, to ships to cars to power plants to airplanes to spacevehicles. It was the subject of our standards meeting today... it is one of the leading causes of "events" these days

sorry I cannot explain it better



Online kevinof

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1433
  • Somewhere on the boat
  • Liked: 1630
  • Likes Given: 1149
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1503 on: 08/06/2018 05:42 pm »
You know what. I never get into long tit for tat exchanges. You want to call it a Piloted spacecraft go ahead. I doubt you'll find many on this site , or in the space business that will agree with you.

I'm done talking about this.

The ground team (more than 1)  have a sequence of events they go through, and issue commands as various points when everyone is in agreement. They don't control the spacecraft. Once commanded the spacecraft does everything from positioning, firing thrusters, changing attitude, roll and so on.

That's called automated in my books.



Kevinof

"You want it to de-orbit, you issue a de-orbit command and it does it. "

 you are hung up on what the word pilot is defined as.  you are stuck on the "Right stuff" definition not the FAA one which is "the person who is manipulating the controls OR the control of the vehicle"

"the pilot" in this case is the person who issues the "de orbit" command.

they may not be called that...but they are doing the same exact thing an Airbus pilot would...he/she is just sitting there

as it would be in Airbus as well. 

an for individual segments of flight it would be in my Triple 7 as well.

the question now is not how the decision is executed...it is simply where the decision is made

thats a hard concept even for a lot of people who operate the new generations of systems from my kids drones, to ships to cars to power plants to airplanes to spacevehicles. It was the subject of our standards meeting today... it is one of the leading causes of "events" these days

sorry I cannot explain it better

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1504 on: 08/06/2018 05:42 pm »
The Pilot is not on the ground because there is no pilot. It's all automated.

...
Hmm I dont know how SpaceX does their Dragon...but I bet its not that different than airbus...just the pilot is on the ground.  they could be in an airbus to (except for the gear and maybe flaps) , they could not be in a Boeing aircraft..at least now

no there is a pilot somewhere.  NASA would not allow something that would operate without some positive control

From liftoff to Dragon sep, and again from entry interface until splashdown, there is no person with "positive control". It's 100% computer controlled and there's nothing anyone on the ground or in the capsule can do except mess it up.

oh yes there is. and at some point that "positive control" transfers to the space station. 

.I dont recall which one it was, but one of the Dragon cargo flights left the second stage "dead" in terms of thruster control. 

it didnt fix itself :)

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1505 on: 08/06/2018 05:45 pm »
Kevinof

"You know what. I never get into long tit for tat exchanges. You want to call it a Piloted spacecraft go ahead. I doubt you'll find many on this site , or in the space business that will agree with you. "

I am done as well...dinner time...but I am not at all referring to Dragon as a piloted spacecraft...the crewed dragon will be...because that is what they will call the person who is doing the mode shifting...

but the uncrewed one has mode shifting done by the folks on the ground

thanks for the great back and forth...its always fun

Offline matthewkantar

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1717
  • Liked: 2039
  • Likes Given: 1838
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1506 on: 08/06/2018 05:47 pm »
It will always be tough for pilots, well trained, talented, elite, to swallow the idea they are redundant, even a waste of valuable space. The key distinction between flying a Dragon and flying a Cessna is that a ten year old could "fly" the Dragon after a brief lesson.

Matthew

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7993
  • Liked: 6527
  • Likes Given: 2926
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1507 on: 08/06/2018 05:54 pm »
The Pilot is not on the ground because there is no pilot. It's all automated.

...
Hmm I dont know how SpaceX does their Dragon...but I bet its not that different than airbus...just the pilot is on the ground.  they could be in an airbus to (except for the gear and maybe flaps) , they could not be in a Boeing aircraft..at least now

no there is a pilot somewhere.  NASA would not allow something that would operate without some positive control

From liftoff to Dragon sep, and again from entry interface until splashdown, there is no person with "positive control". It's 100% computer controlled and there's nothing anyone on the ground or in the capsule can do except mess it up.

oh yes there is. and at some point that "positive control" transfers to the space station. 

.I dont recall which one it was, but one of the Dragon cargo flights left the second stage "dead" in terms of thruster control. 

it didnt fix itself :)

Dragon 2 control will not be transferred to the space station.

CRS-2 had stuck valves. It wasn't fixed until after Dragon sep. Ascent, sep, entry, and splashdown were all entirely without ground interference.

From a safety perspective, yes, you still have to train the ground controllers to make many of the same decisions that a flight crew does in an airliner. However, those decisions will on a nominal mission be made long before hand and run through a simulator, while a flight crew makes them in real time.

In an off-nominal situation, the ground crew will be doing near real-time command corrections (but likely still run through a simulator for most cases), while a airliner flight crew would be directly controlling the vehicle.

In either case, there is an additional layer of abstraction. This only goes away if the Dragon crew take actual control of the vehicle, e.g. for a manual docking attempt.
« Last Edit: 08/06/2018 06:23 pm by envy887 »

Offline rpapo

Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1508 on: 08/06/2018 06:14 pm »
CRS-2 stuck valves. It wasn't fixed until after Dragon sep.
Neither was it fixed automatically.  The ground crew had to discover a solution, and then command the proper steps to resolve the situation.  There's no way the "water hammer" approach was already programmed into the system.

The Dragon is largely automatic, but with back doors through which ground control, or the ISS, can take over under certain circumstances.

The programming, however, keeps on growing.  After CRS-7 they said they would add a parachute opening sequence for that particular corner case (separated from rocket and falling through the atmosphere freely).
An Apollo amazing people by the time Apollo 8 launched.

Offline docmordrid

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6308
  • Michigan
  • Liked: 4187
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1509 on: 08/06/2018 06:19 pm »
>
It's 100% computer controlled and there's nothing anyone on the ground or in the capsule can do except mess it up.

Speaking to that point,

CBS News...

Quote
>
SpaceX's first crewed launch of its human-rated Dragon spacecraft will feature former chief astronaut Bob Behnken, veteran of two shuttle flights, and Douglas Hurley, Ferguson's co-pilot for the final shuttle mission.
>
>
Behnken said he looked forward to flying the more automated Dragon, a welcome relief compared to the complexity of the space shuttle.

"There were about 3,000 switches inside (the shuttle) and there was no situation that the astronauts couldn't make worse by touching the wrong switch at the wrong time," he said. "We're  grateful that the next vehicle we're going to fly on is going to be a little bit more automated."

"It's  like flying an iPhone, right?" Bridenstine asked, referring to the glass cockpit architecture.

"It is absolutely like flying the iPhone," Behnken said. "I  look forward, sir, to getting you (to the SpaceX factory) and maybe you can sit next to us in the cockpit and maybe go through flying the iPhone to dock to space station."
>
« Last Edit: 08/06/2018 06:20 pm by docmordrid »
DM

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1510 on: 08/06/2018 06:29 pm »
It will always be tough for pilots, well trained, talented, elite, to swallow the idea they are redundant, even a waste of valuable space. The key distinction between flying a Dragon and flying a Cessna is that a ten year old could "fly" the Dragon after a brief lesson.

Matthew

Well my 8 year old can fly the Triple 7 or at least microsoft flight simulator...and she can land the actual J-3...we had to do some "novel" things to let her get to the pedals when she first started but not now.  she of course has a great instructor

joke aside I probably dont agree with your last sentence, either of them

the 10 year old could be shown "what buttons to push" on the Dragon crewed and learn the stick skills necessary to land the Cessna..

.but in the case of the Dragon crewed would nto have the ability to grasp the systems and profile knowledge of "when to push them" or how she can get into trouble by choosing to push  the wrong one.

...similarly my middle daughter knows how to crab the J3 for landing in a cross wind, but has no real idea of the aerodynamic forces at work or how she can get into trouble if she uses the technique incorrectly. 

this is the training I was referring to in my rather long explanation.  its just different training.

Years ago I was involved with an effort by Continental Airlines.  Gordon Bethune was than their "leader" and he was curious as to what would happen if both pilots were incapacitated could a cabin chief land the plane ...he asked his old company for two pilots to help their test shop work out procedures...and we tried 50 cabin chiefs...ie we would talk them through getting the automation to autoland.  with no knowledge every one of them did it.  not a one of them had a clue what they were doing.

there actually were two movies along a similar line that illustrate the difference.  cant recall the names but Doris Day was the first one and Lauren Holly was the latter version

as for being elite...just ask my cabin crews :) have a good evening






Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1511 on: 08/06/2018 06:30 pm »
>
It's 100% computer controlled and there's nothing anyone on the ground or in the capsule can do except mess it up.

Speaking to that point,

CBS News...

Quote
>
SpaceX's first crewed launch of its human-rated Dragon spacecraft will feature former chief astronaut Bob Behnken, veteran of two shuttle flights, and Douglas Hurley, Ferguson's co-pilot for the final shuttle mission.
>
>
Behnken said he looked forward to flying the more automated Dragon, a welcome relief compared to the complexity of the space shuttle.

"There were about 3,000 switches inside (the shuttle) and there was no situation that the astronauts couldn't make worse by touching the wrong switch at the wrong time," he said. "We're  grateful that the next vehicle we're going to fly on is going to be a little bit more automated."

"It's  like flying an iPhone, right?" Bridenstine asked, referring to the glass cockpit architecture.

"It is absolutely like flying the iPhone," Behnken said. "I  look forward, sir, to getting you (to the SpaceX factory) and maybe you can sit next to us in the cockpit and maybe go through flying the iPhone to dock to space station."
>

Bob Behnken did far better than I have done here...the standards meeting must have tired me out more than I thought.  time for wine, no flight tomorrow :)
« Last Edit: 08/06/2018 06:31 pm by TripleSeven »

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7993
  • Liked: 6527
  • Likes Given: 2926
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1512 on: 08/06/2018 06:43 pm »
It will always be tough for pilots, well trained, talented, elite, to swallow the idea they are redundant, even a waste of valuable space. The key distinction between flying a Dragon and flying a Cessna is that a ten year old could "fly" the Dragon after a brief lesson.

Matthew

Well my 8 year old can fly the Triple 7 or at least microsoft flight simulator...and she can land the actual J-3...we had to do some "novel" things to let her get to the pedals when she first started but not now.  she of course has a great instructor

joke aside I probably dont agree with your last sentence, either of them

the 10 year old could be shown "what buttons to push" on the Dragon crewed and learn the stick skills necessary to land the Cessna..

.but in the case of the Dragon crewed would nto have the ability to grasp the systems and profile knowledge of "when to push them" or how she can get into trouble by choosing to push  the wrong one.

...similarly my middle daughter knows how to crab the J3 for landing in a cross wind, but has no real idea of the aerodynamic forces at work or how she can get into trouble if she uses the technique incorrectly. 

this is the training I was referring to in my rather long explanation.  its just different training.

Years ago I was involved with an effort by Continental Airlines.  Gordon Bethune was than their "leader" and he was curious as to what would happen if both pilots were incapacitated could a cabin chief land the plane ...he asked his old company for two pilots to help their test shop work out procedures...and we tried 50 cabin chiefs...ie we would talk them through getting the automation to autoland.  with no knowledge every one of them did it.  not a one of them had a clue what they were doing.

there actually were two movies along a similar line that illustrate the difference.  cant recall the names but Doris Day was the first one and Lauren Holly was the latter version

as for being elite...just ask my cabin crews :) have a good evening

This right there is the difference. Dragon can land (or do most other things) without a person "getting" it to do anything at all. If the LV blows up on ascent, Dragon scrams, reenters, and chutes down with no manual interference. If if completely loses contact with ground control while in orbit it could do the same without the crew ever lifting a finger.

Offline John Alan

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 958
  • Central IL - USA - Earth
    • Home of the ThreadRipper Cadillac
  • Liked: 721
  • Likes Given: 2735
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1513 on: 08/06/2018 07:56 pm »
Dragon 2 is like a modern jet with it's full feature Autopilot always on and the FMS primary interface is on the ground in "mission control"...
Now the "pilots" will have a limited ability to alter the FMS flight program sequence running and also do limited manual roll, pitch, yaw, thruster maneuvering...
And they got their row of manual buttons for big items that they decided they must have available always... even with all screens dead...

But reality is... Dragon 2 is a satellite with seats and air... Pilots are NOT required, for it to fly and dock... by design.

 ;)
« Last Edit: 08/06/2018 07:58 pm by John Alan »

Offline TripleSeven

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Istanbul Turkey and Santa Fe TEXAS USA
  • Liked: 588
  • Likes Given: 2095
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1514 on: 08/06/2018 08:26 pm »
It will always be tough for pilots, well trained, talented, elite, to swallow the idea they are redundant, even a waste of valuable space. The key distinction between flying a Dragon and flying a Cessna is that a ten year old could "fly" the Dragon after a brief lesson.

Matthew

Well my 8 year old can fly the Triple 7 or at least microsoft flight simulator...and she can land the actual J-3...we had to do some "novel" things to let her get to the pedals when she first started but not now.  she of course has a great instructor

joke aside I probably dont agree with your last sentence, either of them

the 10 year old could be shown "what buttons to push" on the Dragon crewed and learn the stick skills necessary to land the Cessna..

.but in the case of the Dragon crewed would nto have the ability to grasp the systems and profile knowledge of "when to push them" or how she can get into trouble by choosing to push  the wrong one.

...similarly my middle daughter knows how to crab the J3 for landing in a cross wind, but has no real idea of the aerodynamic forces at work or how she can get into trouble if she uses the technique incorrectly. 

this is the training I was referring to in my rather long explanation.  its just different training.

Years ago I was involved with an effort by Continental Airlines.  Gordon Bethune was than their "leader" and he was curious as to what would happen if both pilots were incapacitated could a cabin chief land the plane ...he asked his old company for two pilots to help their test shop work out procedures...and we tried 50 cabin chiefs...ie we would talk them through getting the automation to autoland.  with no knowledge every one of them did it.  not a one of them had a clue what they were doing.

there actually were two movies along a similar line that illustrate the difference.  cant recall the names but Doris Day was the first one and Lauren Holly was the latter version

as for being elite...just ask my cabin crews :) have a good evening

This right there is the difference. Dragon can land (or do most other things) without a person "getting" it to do anything at all. If the LV blows up on ascent, Dragon scrams, reenters, and chutes down with no manual interference. If if completely loses contact with ground control while in orbit it could do the same without the crew ever lifting a finger.

I dont think that is accurate

I dont think that a Dragon crewed or uncrewed can 1) detach from the space station and then without any further action by people "land"

on the other hand...Airbus' today will abort the takeoff without any pilot action :)

Offline [email protected]

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
  • Liked: 6
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1515 on: 08/06/2018 09:14 pm »
OK.  I have been reading this section with great interest and it's time I have to post.  I don't do this very often as you all have such a greater knowledge than I do.  Until we talk about automation and flying (either in the air or space).  Before I retired from the US Army, I flew many different helicopters and fixed wing.  All of the Bell Helicopters and Cessna fixed wing I flew were "dumb".  No automation.  That changed when I started flying the Airbus Helicopters EC-145 (UH-72A Lakota) and the Beechcraft King Air B2000 and KA300.  This was the first time I flew with "automation".  Please bear with me as I do have a point to make.  The UH-72A as well as the King Air had autopilots and FMS systems installed.  It was great to finally relax in flight and not have to constantly manipulate the controls.

However, it didn't take long in using the automation to realize you had to stay on top of what the aircraft was doing, what it supposed to be doing, and be prepared to get rid of the automation, take control, and correct the situation.  While this did not happen often in either aircraft, it did happen.  A perfect example of this was shooting a LPV approach and expecting the helicopter to continue straight on the final approach course after the final approach fix (FF).  The 75 degree turn to the right was completely unexpected.  Uncoupling the automation, turning back on course for the approach and then troubleshooting the cause saved a lot of heartache.  But only because I was mentally ahead of the aircraft, trained on what to expect, and took control, corrected the problem, and then re-coupled the automation.

My point is that the "pilots" of both spacecraft need to know enough information and have enough training to "get rid of the automation" and hand-fly the thing until the problems can be sorted out in the cabin or on the ground and the automation put back in control.  On the few occasions I needed to do this, it allowed me to be here today and waste your time with this post.  My 50 cents (inflation).

Offline biosehnsucht

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
  • Liked: 124
  • Likes Given: 317
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1516 on: 08/06/2018 10:11 pm »
All this discussion of "pilots" onboard crewed vehicles wanting to fly manually reminds me of this


Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7993
  • Liked: 6527
  • Likes Given: 2926
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1517 on: 08/07/2018 12:50 am »
OK.  I have been reading this section with great interest and it's time I have to post.  I don't do this very often as you all have such a greater knowledge than I do.  Until we talk about automation and flying (either in the air or space).  Before I retired from the US Army, I flew many different helicopters and fixed wing.  All of the Bell Helicopters and Cessna fixed wing I flew were "dumb".  No automation.  That changed when I started flying the Airbus Helicopters EC-145 (UH-72A Lakota) and the Beechcraft King Air B2000 and KA300.  This was the first time I flew with "automation".  Please bear with me as I do have a point to make.  The UH-72A as well as the King Air had autopilots and FMS systems installed.  It was great to finally relax in flight and not have to constantly manipulate the controls.

However, it didn't take long in using the automation to realize you had to stay on top of what the aircraft was doing, what it supposed to be doing, and be prepared to get rid of the automation, take control, and correct the situation.  While this did not happen often in either aircraft, it did happen.  A perfect example of this was shooting a LPV approach and expecting the helicopter to continue straight on the final approach course after the final approach fix (FF).  The 75 degree turn to the right was completely unexpected.  Uncoupling the automation, turning back on course for the approach and then troubleshooting the cause saved a lot of heartache.  But only because I was mentally ahead of the aircraft, trained on what to expect, and took control, corrected the problem, and then re-coupled the automation.

My point is that the "pilots" of both spacecraft need to know enough information and have enough training to "get rid of the automation" and hand-fly the thing until the problems can be sorted out in the cabin or on the ground and the automation put back in control.  On the few occasions I needed to do this, it allowed me to be here today and waste your time with this post.  My 50 cents (inflation).

Only if by "uncoupling the automation" you mean "back off and/or hold until ground controllers can reprogram the vehicle's autonomous capabilities in flight".

Pretty much everything else is going to result in a mission abort or a Really Bad Day.

Offline mgeagon

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 157
  • Hong Kong
  • Liked: 255
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1518 on: 08/07/2018 09:38 am »
OK.  I have been reading this section with great interest and it's time I have to post.  I don't do this very often as you all have such a greater knowledge than I do.  Until we talk about automation and flying (either in the air or space).  Before I retired from the US Army, I flew many different helicopters and fixed wing.  All of the Bell Helicopters and Cessna fixed wing I flew were "dumb".  No automation.  That changed when I started flying the Airbus Helicopters EC-145 (UH-72A Lakota) and the Beechcraft King Air B2000 and KA300.  This was the first time I flew with "automation".  Please bear with me as I do have a point to make.  The UH-72A as well as the King Air had autopilots and FMS systems installed.  It was great to finally relax in flight and not have to constantly manipulate the controls.

However, it didn't take long in using the automation to realize you had to stay on top of what the aircraft was doing, what it supposed to be doing, and be prepared to get rid of the automation, take control, and correct the situation.  While this did not happen often in either aircraft, it did happen.  A perfect example of this was shooting a LPV approach and expecting the helicopter to continue straight on the final approach course after the final approach fix (FF).  The 75 degree turn to the right was completely unexpected.  Uncoupling the automation, turning back on course for the approach and then troubleshooting the cause saved a lot of heartache.  But only because I was mentally ahead of the aircraft, trained on what to expect, and took control, corrected the problem, and then re-coupled the automation.

My point is that the "pilots" of both spacecraft need to know enough information and have enough training to "get rid of the automation" and hand-fly the thing until the problems can be sorted out in the cabin or on the ground and the automation put back in control.  On the few occasions I needed to do this, it allowed me to be here today and waste your time with this post.  My 50 cents (inflation).

Your post is a great description of what pilots must do everyday with modern aeronautical automation: monitor and manage aircraft systems. Commercial transport airplanes, for example, have a multitude of cruise, departure and descent (SIDS and STARs), and terminal IAPs programmed in data bases in order to meet speed and crossing restrictions, as well as navigate laterally. Add in ATC instructions which are oftentimes added with little warning and modern day FMSs because task saturated very quickly. Pilots must always be on their toes to reduce automation and take corrective action. The main cause of errors is the plethora of variables that must be solved in real time, with an FAA certified computer perhaps decades older than state of the art.

While some variables surely exist, spacecraft launched to the ISS have nearly everything canned. The launch sequence, separation events, orbital burns, station approach and docking have all been choreographed to the millisecond. Positional updates must be constantly inputted and a delta from nominal determined, but this is not significant if the rocket launched during its correct window. Flying a capsule to the same destination (the ISS or a somewhat large geographical point on Earth) can easily be handled by modern avionics. The job of management and monitoring can also be delegated to automation, removing error-prone humans from the task. While precious human cargo is aboard, providing manual input could be considered an extra layer of redundancy, although my guess is it will not be the level of last resort. If a human screws something up, it is likely the AFS will disengage manual input and right the ship.
« Last Edit: 08/07/2018 09:44 am by mgeagon »

Offline Chris Bergin

Re: SpaceX Dragon 2 Updates and Discussion - Thread 2
« Reply #1519 on: 08/07/2018 09:47 am »
Page 75, 521,673 views! We need a new thread. Will get on that this week. Meantime, long thread = people losing their tempers. Don't.

New thread.
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=46136.0

Locking this one as we want a clean break and no more off topic ramblings.
« Last Edit: 08/07/2018 09:50 am by Chris Bergin »
Support NSF via L2 -- Help improve NSF -- Site Rules/Feedback/Updates
**Not a L2 member? Whitelist this forum in your adblocker to support the site and ensure full functionality.**

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1