-
#20
by
tankmodeler
on 21 Nov, 2007 14:25
-
Alejandro,
While there might be some notional designs for the controllers for the Orion capsule out there, there is no real detail work taking place on the LSAM landers at the moment and won't be for several years. I'd bet there won't be a reasonable answer available for this question for another 5 years.
Paul
-
#21
by
Jim
on 21 Nov, 2007 14:25
-
knowing the Astronauts, the controllers will be the similar to the shuttle, which were similar to Apollo. The LM descent engine throttle was the translational controller and so the LSAM would probably be similar, which means it will be similar to the shuttle's.
So the picture you saw are most likely representative of the controllers that will be used
-
#22
by
airausquin
on 21 Nov, 2007 14:25
-
Thanks Paul and Jim!
That is what I guessed. I understand that the idea behind keeping the rotational control on the right is to make its operation similar to a plane control, while the translational control is kind of a throttle (which indeed, it is...)
The only "spacecraft" I have seen with a different arrangement is the SAVER, with replace the two controls in the MMU with an single selectable one for rotation and translation.
I have been toying with the idea of building a computer controller similar to the one covered by the US Patent 4555960, but it does seem too unconventional. A similar controller can been seen in the slideshow Maida_SVS.pdf.
Nevertheless, matching it with an accesory like the Nostromo keypad shown in
http://isis.arc.nasa.gov/publications/ACAWS_report_final.pdf seems to provide an interesting setup for spacecraft controls. The Nostromo will act like the Gulfstream's bizjet interface control. See
http://www.gulfstream.com/gulfstreamplaneview/pv_window.cfm?q=highA separate throttle lever like in the Space Shuttle will complete the setup.
All mentioned PDF documents are available by web search
Thanks again
Alejandro
-
#23
by
James Lowe1
on 21 Nov, 2007 14:26
-
airausquin - 21/11/2007 9:25 AM
Hello, 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.
Merged it into that relevant thread, which links to that article and some slides from the presentation on L2.
-
#24
by
DaveS
on 21 Nov, 2007 14:27
-
airausquin - 21/11/2007 4:25 PM
The only "spacecraft" I have seen with a different arrangement is the SAVER,
It's SAFER(Simplified Aid For EVA Rescue).
-
#25
by
airausquin
on 21 Nov, 2007 15:56
-
DaveS - 21/11/2007 11:27 AM
It'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
-
#26
by
Jim
on 21 Nov, 2007 17:12
-
airausquin - 21/11/2007 11:56 AM
DaveS - 21/11/2007 11:27 AM
It'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
SAFER is not an MMU replacement. It is only what the name says, rescue device. Hence the reason for the single controller. SAFER is not intended to replace the MMU nor any of its capabilities. There is no need for a MMU
-
#27
by
airausquin
on 21 Nov, 2007 18:03
-
Jim - 21/11/2007 2:12 PM
SAFER is not an MMU replacement.
That somehow explain some doubts I have. I don't follow space shuttle activities closely, but not so as not being aware of a replacement like that. My comment was based on an article by NASAExplores found here:
http://media.nasaexplores.com/lessons/03-050/fullarticle.pdfhttp://www.nasa.gov/missions/shuttle/f_saferspacewalk.htmlThe article is dated on 2003 and states the following:
"The MMU was used a total of nine times on three Space Shuttle missions in 1984, but has not been used since. Tethers, grips, and other restraints proved more than adequate for space walks in a Shuttle cargo bay, and the Canadarm robot arm proved itself ideal for recovery of satellites and other tasks outside the Shuttle."
-
#28
by
Andy USA
on 22 Nov, 2007 05:50
-
STS Tony - 27/2/2007 10:19 AM
Sure are beautiful jets, especially the Gulfstream.
When I get rich and buy one, I'll invite you over :laugh:
-
#29
by
Big Al
on 20 Jan, 2008 03:55
-
Will HUD (Head UP Displays) be part of their system? It could reduce the area required for plat panels.
-
#30
by
Jim
on 20 Jan, 2008 04:39
-
Big Al - 19/1/2008 11:55 PM
Will HUD (Head UP Displays) be part of their system? It could reduce the area required for plat panels.
Not really needed. Actually windows aren't really needed, landings aren't flown. Docking alignment is done by centerline television camera.
Also HUD is extra weight
-
#31
by
Thomas
on 25 Jan, 2008 14:48
-
What 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.
-
#32
by
Jim
on 25 Jan, 2008 16:09
-
cold plates
-
#33
by
tankmodeler
on 25 Jan, 2008 16:24
-
Thomas - 25/1/2008 10:48 AM
What 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.
Things to think about for vacuum use:
Non-metallic out gassing
lubricant/grease boil off
radiation hardening
Static charge drain
Heat dissipation
Vacuum embrittlement of insulators
capacitance/inductance changes
etc.
Paul
-
#34
by
JohnV
on 25 Jan, 2008 18:44
-
Nate_Trost - 27/2/2007 4:57 PM
Anybody 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?
The General Aviation units I am most familiar with run $4K and up (to whatever you want to spend), depending on capabilities, etc, etc. The only flight qualification issue I would be concerned with is vacuum, since that is not part of the standard FAA certification criteria. Vibration, thermal, and other environmental issues are already well tested.
Some models do put out a pretty impressive amount of heat, but given the glass flight experience on the shuttle I am sure they have data on dealing with this (and test data for vacuum operation I would assume).
- John
-
#35
by
renclod
on 25 Jan, 2008 20:02
-
Jim
- 27/2/2007 5:24 PM
renclod - 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
Exactly, Jim. The CEV is not a fighter and not all crew members are pilots. They could all have one of these:
[OK, the helmet is not part of the HMI]
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.
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.
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.
I think wearable human-machine-interfaces should play a big role for Orion and Altair.
-
#36
by
Jim
on 26 Jan, 2008 12:09
-
renclod - 25/1/2008 4:02 PM
1. 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.
1. Laptops will be everywhere
2. The suit is not made for it.
3. Laptops again
4. Minor role, if any it would be on the new EVA suits
-
#37
by
SpikeSpiegel
on 23 Feb, 2008 05:18
-
It seems to me that t he Flat panel/ glass cockpit is the only way to go. ho would want to wear a heads-up display for 2+ weeks in an oversize beach ball? Something "attached" to your head is going to be unwieldy, and constantly in the way.
The glass cockpit is an opportunity. Internal monitoring of spacecraft telemetry means you don't have to look at a screen, unless you need to change something. No mucking around in menu items when you have a gauge out of spec (or floating around to read them). Software knows when something is wrong, clears the screen, and takes you to that control.
Maybe I'm just living in a pipe dream of automated systems, and integration, but it seems that the evolution that was the Apollo flight computer should be applied here. Don't just do an "upgrade" to current systems flying in the shuttle, but something that could fly to the moon, and do a quake deathmatch with one processor behind its back.
Let the computer run the ship. Allow for human interaction or override. If needs be make the damn thing be able to fly itself to the moon, and land. We're going to need that for the lunar base.
Make the systems open source, so any program (NASA, USAF, ESA) can use it with minimal changes to the basic flight systems. Make it fly-by-wire.
rm -rf if this is the wrong place for this, or just pm if you think i'm just talking out my butt.
-
#38
by
simonbp
on 25 Feb, 2008 00:43
-
Jim - 26/1/2008 6:09 AM
1. Laptops will be everywhere
2. The suit is not made for it.
3. Laptops again
4. 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
-
#39
by
Jim
on 25 Feb, 2008 00:55
-
simonbp - 24/2/2008 8:43 PM
Jim - 26/1/2008 6:09 AM
1. Laptops will be everywhere
2. The suit is not made for it.
3. Laptops again
4. 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
The crew isn't going to be wearing helmets for the bulk of the mission (<5%) . Laptops messy? Not for a few of them and if there is a wifi system.
