You want SpaceX to dump all that automation and go back to a human doing the flying?
Quote from: kevinof on 08/06/2018 04:59 pmThe Pilot is not on the ground because there is no pilot. It's all automated. Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 04:55 pm...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 nowno there is a pilot somewhere. NASA would not allow something that would operate without some positive control
The Pilot is not on the ground because there is no pilot. It's all automated. Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 04:55 pm...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
...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
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. Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 05:14 pmKevinof"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
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
Quote from: kevinof on 08/06/2018 05:21 pmThe 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. Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 05:14 pmKevinof"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 thereas 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 madethats 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 dayssorry I cannot explain it better
Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 05:03 pmQuote from: kevinof on 08/06/2018 04:59 pmThe Pilot is not on the ground because there is no pilot. It's all automated. Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 04:55 pm...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 nowno there is a pilot somewhere. NASA would not allow something that would operate without some positive controlFrom 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.
Quote from: envy887 on 08/06/2018 05:37 pmQuote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 05:03 pmQuote from: kevinof on 08/06/2018 04:59 pmThe Pilot is not on the ground because there is no pilot. It's all automated. Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 04:55 pm...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 nowno there is a pilot somewhere. NASA would not allow something that would operate without some positive controlFrom 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
CRS-2 stuck valves. It wasn't fixed until after Dragon sep.
>It's 100% computer controlled and there's nothing anyone on the ground or in the capsule can do except mess it up.
>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.">
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
Quote from: envy887 on 08/06/2018 05:37 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.">
Quote from: matthewkantar on 08/06/2018 05:47 pmIt 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. MatthewWell 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 instructorjoke aside I probably dont agree with your last sentence, either of themthe 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 versionas for being elite...just ask my cabin crews have a good evening
Quote from: TripleSeven on 08/06/2018 06:29 pmQuote from: matthewkantar on 08/06/2018 05:47 pmIt 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. MatthewWell 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 instructorjoke aside I probably dont agree with your last sentence, either of themthe 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 versionas for being elite...just ask my cabin crews have a good eveningThis 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.
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).
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.