dsb@Rational.COM (David S. Bakin) (11/18/88)
(Excuse me if this has been discussed before, but I just started reading sci.space.shuttle 3 weeks ago.) A friend at work asserted that the US Shuttle lands itself with onboard computers doing the work, the pilot just sitting there. Is this true? Can the US Shuttle be totally machine controlled from launch to landing? On the USSR Shuttle flight, was control of landing onboard or from the ground? Thanks -- Dave ---------------------------------------------------------- Dave Bakin (408) 496-3600 c/o Rational; 3320 Scott Blvd.; Santa Clara, CA 95054-3197 Internet: dsb@rational.com Uucp: ...!uunet!igor!dsb
sheppard@caen.engin.umich.edu (Kenneth Charles Sheppardson) (11/18/88)
In article <350@igor.Rational.COM>, dsb@Rational.COM (David S. Bakin) writes: > > A friend at work asserted that the US Shuttle lands itself with onboard > computers doing the work, the pilot just sitting there. Is this true? I believe Jack Lousma was the first pilot to take control of the Orbiter during landing. Since he wasn't on the first flight, I assume earlier landings were all done on autopilot. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Ken Sheppardson sheppard@caen.engin.umich.edu | Aero Engin | U of Michigan ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
phil@titan.rice.edu (William LeFebvre) (11/19/88)
In article <350@igor.Rational.COM> dsb@Rational.COM (David S. Bakin) writes: >A friend at work asserted that the US Shuttle lands itself with onboard >computers doing the work, the pilot just sitting there. Is this true? >Can the US Shuttle be totally machine controlled from launch to landing? Ascent is almost completely computer controlled (I would go so far as to say that it is totally computer controlled in a nominal ascent). Landing is completely different. The pilot does not just sit there. The computers are controlling some of it and are providing quite a bit of information in the "heads up" display, but some things are definitely human controlled---especially the final approach, flare, and actual landing. >Can the US Shuttle be totally machine controlled from launch to landing? No. And altering it to do so (or altering it to be completely remote controlled from the ground) would require extensive modifications. And it probably ain't worth it. William LeFebvre Department of Computer Science Rice University <phil@Rice.edu>
brody@eos.UUCP (Adam Brody) (11/19/88)
Although the space shuttle has full capability for automatic landing, it has always been landed manually. One time in automatic mode, the shuttle made an abrupt move that startled the pilot endough to take over control. Later analysis confirmed that the computer was correct. The reason for manual controlis more political than technological. "Pilots want to Fly!" The fact that the Soviet shuttle landed automatically lends further support to the fact that it is possible. They also rendezvous and dock automatically while we again plan manual control for more or less the same reasons. It is very interesting that a country who is so far behind us technologically (although so far ahead of us in space) can do something so sophisticated as land (and dock) automatically when we can't (or won't as I maintain).
dep@cat.cmu.edu (David Pugh) (11/19/88)
In article <1953@eos.UUCP> brody@eos.UUCP (Adam Brody) writes: >The fact that the Soviet shuttle landed automatically lends further >support to the fact that it is possible. They also rendezvous and dock >automatically while we again plan manual control for more or less the >same reasons. After listening to the news reports (which are always accurate when it comes to reporting science/aviation issues :-)), I was under the impression that Buran didn't "auto-land," but instead it was radio- controlled to a landing, at least for the final approach and flare. Does anyone know for sure? -- Never be angry when a fool acts like a David Pugh fool. It's better when fools identify ....!seismo!cmucspt!cat!dep themselves...it removes so much uncertainty. --Lord Peace --
phil@titan.rice.edu (William LeFebvre) (11/20/88)
In article <2160@kalliope.rice.edu> I wrote: >In article <350@igor.Rational.COM> dsb@Rational.COM (David S. Bakin) writes: >... >>Can the US Shuttle be totally machine controlled from launch to landing? > >No. And altering it to do so (or altering it to be completely remote >controlled from the ground) would require extensive modifications. And it >probably ain't worth it. Well, I was wrong there. Although it is true that it cannot do a totally machine controlled landing, it can *almost* do one. There are a few switches in the flight deck that can only be thrown by a humanoid. So it turns out that modifying it to do an automatic landing would not be very hard. It also turns out that the pilot does not need to do all that much (just throw a few switches), but he ends up doing a fair amount of it himself anyway. I guess the pilots want to feel useful. William LeFebvre Department of Computer Science Rice University <phil@Rice.edu>
twltims@watmath.waterloo.edu (Tracy Tims) (11/20/88)
No one has yet come up with what I consider a definitive answer to the question, "Can the shuttle land under computer control?" I've seen a number of apparently authoritative and mutually exclusive responses. Could someone who really knows the answer please post it? Don't bother posting unless you can include high-quality citations. Tracy Tims
mwilkins@muddcs.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) (11/20/88)
In article <2160@kalliope.rice.edu> phil@Rice.edu (William LeFebvre) writes: >Ascent is almost completely computer controlled (I would go so far as to >say that it is totally computer controlled in a nominal ascent). Landing >is completely different. The pilot does not just sit there. The >computers are controlling some of it and are providing quite a bit of >information in the "heads up" display, but some things are definitely >human controlled---especially the final approach, flare, and actual >landing. According to astronaut Pinky Nelson of STS-26, a Harvey Mudd graduate who visited last week, there is a completely operational automatic landing system on the shuttle. Any or all of the landing can be automated, largely to guard against the possiblity that both pilots are, for some reason, unable to land the thing because of, say, injury. The problem with an automated mission is that the APUs and other necessary systems require ongoing human maintenance during the flight. -- M. Wilkins (mwilkins@muddcs.UUCP)
holroyd@dinl.uucp (kevin w. holroyd) (11/22/88)
In article <2170@kalliope.rice.edu> phil@Rice.edu (William LeFebvre) writes: <Stuff Deleted> >Well, I was wrong there. Although it is true that it cannot do a totally >machine controlled landing, it can *almost* do one. There are a few >switches in the flight deck that can only be thrown by a humanoid. So it >turns out that modifying it to do an automatic landing would not be very >hard. It also turns out that the pilot does not need to do all that much >(just throw a few switches), but he ends up doing a fair amount of it >himself anyway. I guess the pilots want to feel useful. > > William LeFebvre > Department of Computer Science > Rice University > <phil@Rice.edu> Anyone who has much experience flying (as pilot) will tell you that very seldom does everything in the aircraft work correctly. I have little faith in any one piece of equipment working at any given time. (Especially if I really need that particular piece of equipment at that time.) That's when the pilot steps in and through training and experience works around the problem. What happens when the fancy microwave landing system on the shuttle goes TANGO UNIFORM (if you don't know what that means, just substitute "out of service" :-) ) and there are no pilots on board? BOOM, scratch one shuttle. I guess the pilots have some use after all. I don't think I would ever sit in a vehicle totally controlled by computer. Let's have someone up on the flight deck who has as much at stake as I do. Kevin W. Holroyd Commercial Pilot Flight Instructor Aerospace Engineer
willisa@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (Mark Willis) (11/22/88)
In article <1294@muddcs.Claremont.EDU> mwilkins@muddcs.UUCP (Mark Wilkins) writes: > According to astronaut Pinky Nelson of STS-26, a Harvey Mudd graduate who >visited last week, there is a completely operational automatic landing >system on the shuttle. Any or all of the landing can be automated, largely I'm not absolutely sure, but as I remember, the first four missions were landed maually. The computers were made to think they were in control, and their performances recorded for later evaluation. The STS-5 landing was automatic, but obviously, the pilot was ready to take over in case of any problem. > The problem with an automated mission is that the APUs and other >necessary systems require ongoing human maintenance during the flight. Yeah, maybe. But surely they would ensure anything messy like that was in full working order before trying to land. I cant really see the crew making adjustments to an APU or fuel cell (even if they could) just before the flare or final approach :-) Surely that sort of equipment is self regulating anyway. Mark ---- -- ARPA: willisa@cs.glasgow.ac.uk JANet: willisa@uk.ac.gla.cs USENET: mcvax!cs.glasgow.ac.uk!willisa Voice: +44 41 not telling!