Quote from: Lars-J on 11/06/2018 07:06 pmQuote from: oiorionsbelt on 11/06/2018 05:58 pmThe fretting over perceived ineptitude of SpaceX to have figured out the Dragon UI is below this sites usual standard. IMO.Indeed. [see image below, replace 'radiation' with 'UI responsiveness']....
Quote from: oiorionsbelt on 11/06/2018 05:58 pmThe fretting over perceived ineptitude of SpaceX to have figured out the Dragon UI is below this sites usual standard. IMO.Indeed. [see image below, replace 'radiation' with 'UI responsiveness']
The fretting over perceived ineptitude of SpaceX to have figured out the Dragon UI is below this sites usual standard. IMO.
Quote from: oiorionsbelt on 11/06/2018 05:58 pmThe fretting over perceived ineptitude of SpaceX to have figured out the Dragon UI is below this sites usual standard. IMO. SpaceX and related companies have made a few pretty dumb mistakes. Not the least, putting large resources to high tech solutions where a trained squirrel monkey could have handled the job more efficiently. No person or company that's ever existed is or should be immune from criticism of the way they're trying to do things. A whole lot of people in this place have made livings out of identifying and fixing problems caused by beyond reproach experts, and it's one of the best aspects of this asylum. Critisizing people solely because they dare question the experts is cheap and definitely below this sites standards.
In my opinion there is a difference between concern trolling that touchscreens are a bad idea when you hear about a proposed touchscreen implementation, and being concerned about a >500ms lag in touchscreen response time when the implemented hardware, running the implemented software, is being operated by the eventual end-user, in the implemented space suit, in a video approved for release by the company.
What is the difference if 1/2 second screen lag and 1/2 second delay finding the right switch in a sea of switches?
Quote from: Doesitfloat on 11/07/2018 03:07 pmWhat is the difference if 1/2 second screen lag and 1/2 second delay finding the right switch in a sea of switches?Training, obviously. Then you don't have that 1/2 second to find a switch. But then you need to have ALL the switches you need within reach. And then the display is smaller. And then .... well, then maybe you are better off with a touch screen even with the 1/2 second lag.
Reminder: There is NOTHING the crew can do that must be done that the automated controls haven't already executed before any member of the crew even realizes that an action must be taken. Put another way, by the time anyone onboard, or even on the ground, realizes that some action must be taken, the onboard avionics will have already identified the situation, selected the correct response and executed it. There is nothing any member of the crew can do at any point during the launch, ride uphill, rendezvous and docking except screw up what the avionics have already accomplished. Crew are deliverable passengers, just the same as if you bought a ticket on Delta from New York to Seattle. You strap in and ride - nothing more.
Crew are deliverable passengers, just the same as if you bought a ticket on Delta from New York to Seattle. You strap in and ride - nothing more.
Reminder: There is NOTHING the crew can do that must be done that the automated controls haven't already executed before any member of the crew even realizes that an action must be taken. Put another way, by the time anyone onboard, or even on the ground, realizes that some action must be taken, the onboard avionics will have already identified the situation, selected the correct response and executed it.
Quote from: clongton on 11/08/2018 01:33 pmCrew are deliverable passengers, just the same as if you bought a ticket on Delta from New York to Seattle. You strap in and ride - nothing more.Try telling that to any pilot trained to deal with emergencies caused by an equipment or software malfunction. There's a reason to keep people in the loop, even if only as a last resort when the unforeseen happens.
Quote from: ELinder on 11/08/2018 01:44 pmQuote from: clongton on 11/08/2018 01:33 pmCrew are deliverable passengers, just the same as if you bought a ticket on Delta from New York to Seattle. You strap in and ride - nothing more.Try telling that to any pilot trained to deal with emergencies caused by an equipment or software malfunction. There's a reason to keep people in the loop, even if only as a last resort when the unforeseen happens.Delivering something reliably to a destination in LEO (ISS) is something Cargo Dragon has been doing for years.No human intervention necessary.The unforseen is dealt with by having an abort system that is capable of aborting ascent over the entire ascent profile.Please get this in to your head: this is not the 1960's anymore. Computers do the flying these days. No "stick and rudder" flying necessary on ascent. In case something goes wrong, the computer aborts the mission and returns the spacecraft to Terra Firma.
I only slightly disagree in that non-critical phases of flight may offer choices as to what to do to the crew in the event of faults.(not hand-flying the ascent). For example, if life support has a major issue a couple of minutes out from ISS.
But, for most of those cases, if the ground is in contact with the vehicle, the people on the ground are likely to have a much better understanding of any issue and the best outcome.
If it were as foolproof as ideally hoped, why not just remove all the displays and controls completely from the manned spacecraft and use that weight savings to bring more cargo mass into orbit?
Quote from: ELinder on 11/09/2018 01:58 pmIf it were as foolproof as ideally hoped, why not just remove all the displays and controls completely from the manned spacecraft and use that weight savings to bring more cargo mass into orbit?Because the Astronaut Office would not agree.
All this faith in the systems may be justified, but I still think it's a case of "hope for the best but plan for the worst". There's a reason so much training is devoted to emergency procedures. If it were as foolproof as ideally hoped, why not just remove all the displays and controls completely from the manned spacecraft and use that weight savings to bring more cargo mass into orbit?