[sci.space.shuttle] Old fashioned control room: upgrades, masscomps, RTDS

phil@titan.rice.edu (William LeFebvre) (04/07/89)

In article <2108@botter.cs.vu.nl> wallagh@cs.vu.nl () writes:
>I've an other question about the Space shuttle.
>Last summer I visited (briefly) Houston Mission Control, and there
>I was showed around in the mission-control room.
> 
>2 Things where very surprising:
>a). It's much much smaller than you expect it to be (from TV).

They probably use a wide angle lens in the TV cameras.  The cabin of the
shuttle is also smaller than it seems on TV because of wide angle lenses.
It really is quite small, but then microgravity enables you to use space
more effectively.

>b). The equipment looks very oldfashioned.
>My question is: Why? The tourguide said: Because there no need for 
>newer equipment.

The consoles are the same ones that were used for Apollo.  Really!  They
are completely reconfigurable and the budget managers probably saw no need
to throw away "perfectly useful" equipment.  They are in the process of
exploring new console setups.  There is a room behind the front control
room (FCR, MOCR, Mission Control:  take your pick)---behind the room that
is behind the big screens, in fact---called the "Test(?) Flight Control
Room" or TFCR (I don't remember offhand what the "T" stands for).  In this
room there are several different working prototype consoles set up for
experimentation and evaluation.  They include color workstations (Suns and
Masscomps) installed in a console (in place of the old video display
terminals).  So they are exploring upgrades.

There is resistance, however.  All the console displays are driven by the
Mission Operations Computer (MOC), which is some sort of IBM behemoth
(well, almost all---I think FIDO gets some stuff straight from the
satellite for super-accurate telemetry readings).  This computer processes
all the real time data and makes it available via a large assortment of
displays (the console operators choose which displays they want to see).
Some of the people who have been around there awhile believe that this is
the only way to do real time displays.  They don't believe that a "puny
little" mini or microcomputer has sufficient power to display data in real
time.  Mainframe mentality.  So they are opposed to using anything like
the Real Time Display System (RTDS) mentioned in another posting.  There
also tends to be the feeling that the current displays are the only way to
look at the data.  The "we've always done it that way" philosophy.  Sigh.

The Masscomps that sit next to the consoles in the FCR are used for just
about everything except real time display.  They can use them to format
and send commands up to the shuttle, they can use them to configure their
own consoles, and they can use them to process what they call "Near Real
Time data":  you request to see data from time X to time Y with
granularity Z, the masscomp will fetch it from the "NRT" machine and
display it in a form that you want.  It's "near" real time because you can
only fetch data that has already come down and been processed.  You can't
fetch it in real time.

The real neat thing about RTDS is that it takes the raw data off the
satellite, throws away what it doesn't need and makes the necessary data
available for display on just about anything you want:  Mac, Masscomp,
Sun, whatever.  The machine that's actually doing the real time crunching
is an ADDS 100.  The idea (if I recall correctly) is that one ADDS 100
will be used per display (or maybe per discipline) and the centralized MOC
will no longer be necessary.

>I don't believe that. Personally I think it's to show to all the 
>poeple that NASA has not enough money to even make a modern control-
>room (and thus: give NASA more money).
>Just for publicity.
> 
>What do you think about that? 

I think you're grasping at straws.

By the way:  all around the main mission control room are Mission Planning
and Support Rooms (MPSR).  Each room holds more consoles like the ones in
the FCR and more flight controllers work back there to support the ones
working in the front.  So the controllers you see on TV aren't the only
ones working the flight.  How do I know all this?  My wife works in one of
the MPSR rooms.  Whoops!  My secret is out.  Oh well.

			William LeFebvre
			Department of Computer Science
			Rice University
			<phil@Rice.edu>