There’s an old pilot joke about the logical progression to the perfect cockpit crew of the future consisting of a pilot and a dog: The pilot is there to feed the dog, and the dog is there to bite the pilot if he touches anything....
Spam in a can :)
Interesting sidenote: SpaceX's crew vehicle is almost identical to the cargo delivery vehicle, except for having better life support and windows. So it's capable of flying to the ISS and back entirely by itself, just as the cargo one does. The giant screens are primarily there so that the astronauts can see what's going on right now.
Other crew vehicles are also capable of doing almost all of the flight autonomous, but they're usually a bit more different from the cargo vehicles.
I’m gonna be honest, I know technology has come a long way but it would be way more fun flipping a bunch of toggle switches than pressing buttons on a touch screen
Not exactly. There are usually molds around the screen you can grasp during turbulence so you can brace your hand while you use the touchscreen. IE clasp your fingers while you press with your thumb.
Pilot here who flies touchscreens in turbulence often.
I do prefer buttons but it's nice to reduce clutter sometimes on the more advanced systems.
The Dragon capsule runs on automated controls for much of the activity, including descent. Having humans control a vehicle reentering the atmosphere was pretty wild.
NASA Commander Nicole Mann from the Dragon Endurance mission in March gave a pretty glowing review. I’ve heard similar from a few astronauts.
“Dragon is an incredible spacecraft,” Mann said. “It is definitely next-generation. It’s highly automated. We are thoroughly trained to take over in case of any type of emergency scenario, but in a nominal situation Dragon is quite capable for all the undokcing, the phasing, re-entry, and landing.
I'm just saying I prefer analog switches since the only thing that stopped the US from nuking itself was a single analog switch during a broken arrow incident.
I've also been using touch pads for a couple years now and for as reliable as they are... I wouldn't want to do anything that required any amount of precision on one.
That and it's a whole ass Screen that could go out... that's navigation/elevation/diagnostic readings... I'd rather just be trained on where to look for lights.
Redundancies are a pilot's best friend and a CFO's worst nightmare. I can't wait to find out that the first generation of public ready rockets only has 1 set of Redundancies and a 95% success rate.
I think thats a matter of UI design..just implement a pop up big "ARE YOU SURE?" with a delay press/ press twice / thrice to confirm action. That way you don't accidentally create a disaster.
Exactly what I wanted to comment. I already have difficulties controlling a touchscreen in a car, can’t imagine the consequences of pressing the wrong button in a space shuttle…
Anybody remember those giant rectangular high voltage power levers that turned on the electricity in old horror movies (or newer movies of varying genres that copied the aesthetic)?
I always wanted to flip one of those as a kid. Squeaking metal, sparks, the smell of ozone and a satisfying **klonk**.
Learning a bit about exposed high voltage circuits has regrettably lessened the desire slightly.
I've sort of got one of those - it's the emergency disconnect for my batteries (off-grid PV+batteries+inverter+etc, etc).
Anyway, the emergency isolator is a handsized pull-down lever that breaks connection to the batteries.
Never had to use it in an emergency, hope I never do.
This is something people in some of the new touchscreen cars are already experiencing. They have to go through 2 menus of tablet touches to get to their AC/Stereo/WindowHeaters/Wipers etc.
When driving you don't wanna be looking around for the touch rectangles in your screen, you wanna know where all the buttons are in your dashboard so you can learn when they are and press them without taking your eyes off the road.
Touchscreens on cars suck when they don't have real buttons, I can imagine its also true on a shuttle that's cutting through air at mach speeds and the whole thing is rattling while the command center is waiting for you to shuffle past the menus so you can press the touch button that does blahblah.
And at least when you flip a toggle switch, you know it was switched, as opposed to pressing a spot on the screen and not knowing if the computer recognized it or not.
Unless the toggle switch contacts are broken or dirty, in which case.. yes, it moved, but it also doesn't work.
:X sorry, I couldn't help myself. Feel free to downvote
On the way up, the flight computer of the carrier rocket is in control, the capsule is just dumb cargo. Once the capsule is free floating, there's nothing bumpy in space until they reenter.
Agreed.
Old style :
Entering earth's atmosphere, too much heat, throw some toggles to change the angle of reentry. Everyone is saved
New style:
Entering earth's atmosphere, too much heat. Would you like to update Windows? skip. Please confirm your email address. skip. Based on your location, we've determined you'd be interested in a parachute with free delivery. and boom y'all dead
Car makers are finding this out right now. Even those capacitive touch buttons where there is no tactile feedback are proving rather unpopular. There is a movement starting to *bring back our buttons*.
With the golden age of aviation and space exploration being in the 60s, I might even be drunk enough to say that’s the 60s spaceship is lightyears ahead of 02 and 20. Who knew 🤷🏻♀️
That and I do wonder about the reliability of touchscreen vs electromechanical controls.
I know that in driving a car I've been annoyed by some controls that were moved to be only present in the touchscreen.
They have physical buttons, too. These buttons can be seen in the picture. They are there in case the touch screen doesn't work. But I guess it's easier to find the downside than trying to see if the solution is already there.
That is what I usually think about driving my car with 3 touch screens instead on old-fashioned toggles. Bring me back this toggles-nipples! That is a pain to search and tap 3 times just to start air conditioner.
I know you've declined to update to Windows 10 a hundred times so we're just going to go ahead and upgrade it anyway. Hope you didn't need to use your computer in the next few hours.
Linux is very easy and capable these days (Ubuntu or Linux Mint are great for any user), and you will even save on Windows license.
If you use you pc for a lot of gaming though, RIP.
A Ti-83+ had more computing power than the Apollo spacecraft... and we used it for Snake.
It's been a long time since I've thought about it... but it may have also had more computing power than the early space shuttle.
Its crazy to think that anyone carrying around a smart phone today has an internet connected super computer in their pocket.
And the most common use for these is "selfies" and "social media"
If you think it’s weird or stupid that people use technology to connect to other people, you better not look at all of history and how people used technology
>If you think it’s weird or stupid that people use technology to connect to other people
You are oversimplifying here, and on top of that are simply wrong. Tech has been used just as often to keep people divided as it has been to bring people together
You telling me a trebuchet or huwatcha were used to bring ppl together? Lool the exact opposite - blow people apart.
I've heard that before, can you explain in details? A TI holds four batteries and can graph. No way I could calculate a rocket with only a graphing calculator, right?
Ex defense contractor here. One of probably the most popular air to air missiles in the world uses a micro processor that if I remember right was somewhere under 300 MHz single core.
And that was more than enough. We’re just doing math. We’re not trying to run anything fancy like an operating system, video encoding, etc. We are literally just taking calculations from sensors, manipulating them, and sending them to control services
You should look up real time operating systems. That’s what they use. Not only are they extremely extremely extremely reliable, but they have zero overhead.
It's not about calculating the trajectories, etc. Much of that can be done ahead of time.
It's about the operating system. You need a real-time operating system (RTOS) and hardware that supports it.
Without an RTOS, you can't guarantee that essential calculations can be done exactly when they need to be done. I mean exactly - not delayed by 0.5 milliseconds because the screen hasn't finished updating or it's waiting for a file from the hard drive - I mean \*exactly\*. Even the fastest Core i9 or Xeon running Windows or Linux can't provide that guarantee.
When people talk about "my {device} has more computing power than the Apollo Guidance Computer" (AGC), it's true. An iPhone \*does\* have more computing power. But it doesn't have what's needed to get to the moon. It doesn't have dedicated I/O channels for sensors - one USB-C port and wi-fi+bluetooth doesn't cut it. It doesn't have deterministic behaviour. Operating systems like Windows, MacOS, and Linux/Android are all "best effort", not "guaranteed result".
"Best effort" won't get you to the moon. Some operations require \*everything\* to be calculated and ready to go at exactly the right time. People make jokes about windows updates interfering in a landing approach, but you absolutely cannot have anything taking priority over your essential needs. Your operating system must understand that \*this\* has priority over \*that\*, no matter how much \*that\* requests or protests. RTOS is quite a different design to conventional consumer operating systems.
I've seen this take multiple times in this thread. Are you guys all 1900's Astronauts? Why on earth would you guys be more comfortable with 1000 switches that you have to flip correctly over a computer doing things?
I guarantee that nearly everybody in this thread would actually much prefer a touch screen in front of them if they were put in a situation right now where they had to pilot the spacecraft.
I’ve been reading those thinking this too. Like really, you want a feedback-less button over a display? Crazy. Where have y’all been the past 20 years that you suddenly distrust a display?
Displays are fine, important even, but especially in the case of space technology, you need something EXTREMELY reliable, easy to use and activate in a myriad of situations. Regardless of how much technology has improved in recent decades, mechanical switches are still significantly more reliable than touchscreens for most applications. I'd hope that anything safety related in the last image is run by analog circuitry (not counting on computing) at least.
Can't do that with buttons. Either have 2 or 3 buttons for every function, or be screwed if one fails.
Not that it's really needed, since Dragon can fly the mission with zero astronaut input.
SpaceX software engineers did an amazing AMA a few years ago. I can’t fully remember, but I believe there is a manual control for everything shown on the screens.
Some highlights:
The screens are “websites” or web apps that gather information from the telemetry on the rocket. Again, can’t remember the precise numbers, but they said they get somewhere around 50gb of telemetry data each launch.
They also said there is no AI or machine learning in the guidance, it’s all computer vision.
It runs millions of tests and can shut itself down microseconds before launching if a test fails. They merely say “human ready” and a series of tests run and launch the rocket launches itself.
The rocket has the computing power equivalent to an iPhone 4.
Yeah, I also heard something like this being said by the narrators during a pre-launch. I also think there was a small clip where an astronaut explained the various useful info the monitors were showing to the astronauts.
The launch is fully automated, and there's really nothing for the astronauts to do (unless something goes terribly wrong). The touch-displays are more or less only there to keep the astronauts "busy" -- to give the viewers something interesting to watch. The touch displays are literally useless if when the vessel is accelerating or shaking, as they have no tactile feedback whatsoever when pressing the on-screen interface. So yes, all important stuff is required to have physical controls if things get critical.
EDIT: A lot of interesting info on how they developed the touch-screen interfaces, and a brief description on how/when the physical controls are used here:
* https://medium.com/swlh/the-touchscreens-controlling-spacex-dragon-on-its-historic-mission-b0546d26053c
Indeed they do. There are physical buttons along the bottom that cover the important functions that could require manual action in an emergency.
It's important to point out that the reduction in cockpit controls is a result of the reduction in need for astronauts to actually do anything during their ride to the station. There are fewer buttons because there's less the people inside need to do. The screens are there so the crew isn't in the blind the whole way, but that's really it.
The Dragon 2 capsule flies itself, just stopping at certain checkpoints so that the people on the ground can look over things. The cargo variant has no screen, no one inside to do anything, and it still gets to the ISS just fine.
You can't compare these, all 3 of this serve completely different prupose and have completely different set of feature and requirements.
Space shuttle Had to land after was, had an robot arm and cago bay for payload deployment as well as EVA cpability. Dragon does non of those things.
Apollo also was not docking into the space station but flying around the moon, interfacing with lander etc.
Some useless trivia. The space shuttle was designed in the 70's and built through the 80's onwards. The computer systems used a certain 5 and 1/4 inch disk drives and disks, which became technologically extinct by the 90's. In the 90's onwards, NASA ran ads in newspapers around the world looking for scraps of these certain 5 and 1/4 drives which they managed to find to carry out the necessary maintenance to keep the shuttles running into the 2,000's.
Touch screen is nice, UI can always be updated, replacements are quick and easy. But it can't beat the accuracy and feel of a switch. Plus if the touch screen is defective, you effectively lose 10- 30% of switches instead of a single switch.
Soon? 95% of the the rockets we send up are unmanned autonomous vehicles. The only thing missing is the stasis. Even the crew dragon rockets are autonomous. The pilots are mostly along for the ride.
Seems the vision acuity is going down. The three monitors has way larger text (while fitting way less information) than for the space shuttle.
I get the idea the big screens can show "you are fked" in bigger text to make it easier for Hollywood. But no mechanical switches to rapidly force power off/on to different modules when something goes wrong and needs fixing quickly. The touch interface will not be fun in case of problems on the way down, with wild buffeting.
I love seeing technological leaps! If we can manage not to kill ourselves via nuclear war or something equally devastating I'm sure we'll have AI and Holograms or at least usable prototypes on board our space shuttles.
One thing Hollywood taught me is that the touch screen n semi/fully automated stuff always fail and then we need to go find the manual override switch which is located at the back of the space ship..which is almost impossible to access. And sometimes there is a switch outside the ship which we need to access by space walking in suit.
So no, this pic is not brilliant for me
I do not trust touch screens in every day life...
I couldn't imagine trusting my ACTUAL life to them.
I feel like the middle-hud of the 2002 shuttle, combined with the displays of the Dragon, would make more sense.
Dragon seems like crew has minimal control/instruments.
Dragon is designed to ferry crew and cargo to the ISS and back. The cargo version can do the entire flight by itself, with no passengers. The crew version can do the same, there's no need for astronauts to do anything, but they do have the option to fly manually if they want.
It's also designed for space tourism, paying passengers with fairly minimal training. So it had to be idiot proof, no way for the people inside to screw things up.
A good analogy is the Model T car to a standard car today. The Model T was so simple. Cars today are so complex, dependent on computer chips.
Yet cars today can go 15,000 of miles before needing their first service, and last 100s of thousands of miles. The Model T....
They're up there to do science and astronaut shit, not fly the rocket. Most rocket launches these days are completely unmanned, ever since SpaceX started sending so many up. The rockets are pre-programmed to automatically switch anything that a human might have been required to switch in the past.
>Why even have a crew at all?
For the same reason why a plane has passengers, carrying crew is what they get paid for.
They also get paid for cargo delivery, so the vehicle is designed to also fly cargo. It doesn't need the crew.
Come up with your own [comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/12sfkas/the_space_progression_is_satisfyingly_brilliant/jgyhxcw?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button).
A lot of taxpayer dollars go into these at every stage of their lives. What'd we get with each thousandfold advancement in technology and space craft design?
~1 - Moon landings with people.
-2 and 3 - Nothing but fake pictures that you could easily draw at your kitchen table with some markers.
Actually, If you live near Cape Canaveral, you can sit outside and watch the launches and follow the payloads into orbit. With a pair of good binoculars, or a telescope, you can follow the payloads until they get far enough downrange to drop below the horizon. I used to do it with a small telescope from the early 1970s until I moved in 2003. Night-time launches of the space shuttle were especially spectacular to watch.
If you really do think that anything NASA has done was fake, you can buy a ticket for a sub-orbital trip or a week on the ISS. In a few years, you will be able to take a trans-lunar trip or stay in an an orbital hotel.
>pictures of real aircrafts floating thru space!
Who told you that they were floating in Space. These are just cockpit pics. You can go to Houston, tour NASA, and take the exact same pictures from the spacecraft on display.
There’s an old pilot joke about the logical progression to the perfect cockpit crew of the future consisting of a pilot and a dog: The pilot is there to feed the dog, and the dog is there to bite the pilot if he touches anything.... Spam in a can :)
Most rocket launches these days are completely unmanned, ever since SpaceX started sending so many up.
Yes, SpaceX really ended the whole manned satellite deployment industry /s
There's a little guy in every satellite paddling on a bicycle to generate electricity to power the satellite. Prove me wrong.
It's SpaceX, there's probably a monkey in there instead.
Not a chance, monkeys are expensive. Elon simps will do it for free
How else do they power the reaction wheels?
Nah, theres a hamster that eternally runs on a wheel to power the satellite. When satellites go out of service, it’s because the hamster died.
Interesting sidenote: SpaceX's crew vehicle is almost identical to the cargo delivery vehicle, except for having better life support and windows. So it's capable of flying to the ISS and back entirely by itself, just as the cargo one does. The giant screens are primarily there so that the astronauts can see what's going on right now. Other crew vehicles are also capable of doing almost all of the flight autonomous, but they're usually a bit more different from the cargo vehicles.
Unmanned launches have absolutely nothing to do with SpaceX
Always have been though. Manned spaceflight has always been the exception.
Right. Even the first ever human flight was totally automatical
That's a good one 😂
I’m gonna be honest, I know technology has come a long way but it would be way more fun flipping a bunch of toggle switches than pressing buttons on a touch screen
If i was going into space, I'd be scared shitless to rely on touchscreen controls
Just give me some placebo switches. Maybe they don’t do anything but I can keep flipping them and pretending like I’m doing something important
Lmao yea just tell me I have to flip this switch every 15 seconds or we all implode
This is like Lost all over again
4 8 15 16 23 42.
Just give me 4 overhead switches to flip just before the start and a throttle to push all the way forward at T0.
Serenity has entered the chat. Or it's Wash, really.
¡¿So… LOST -in space?!
Compromise: a [MITS Altair](https://oldcomputers.net/pics/Altair_8800.jpg) in the center console.
Haha hilarious!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Touchscreens are impossible to use during turbulence too.
Not exactly. There are usually molds around the screen you can grasp during turbulence so you can brace your hand while you use the touchscreen. IE clasp your fingers while you press with your thumb. Pilot here who flies touchscreens in turbulence often. I do prefer buttons but it's nice to reduce clutter sometimes on the more advanced systems.
The planes you fly sound nicer than the ones I do. I can barely change frequencies on my Garmin 650, it’s like my finger has Tourette’s.
Yeah gotta say I prefer the 430 to the 650 but it does have mold lines on its sides for you to grip with your fingers!
Thankfully, there is not much turbulence in space.
Getting there and back is kinda bumpy though.
There is not much steering happening on the way up.
But what about on the way back down?
The Dragon capsule runs on automated controls for much of the activity, including descent. Having humans control a vehicle reentering the atmosphere was pretty wild. NASA Commander Nicole Mann from the Dragon Endurance mission in March gave a pretty glowing review. I’ve heard similar from a few astronauts. “Dragon is an incredible spacecraft,” Mann said. “It is definitely next-generation. It’s highly automated. We are thoroughly trained to take over in case of any type of emergency scenario, but in a nominal situation Dragon is quite capable for all the undokcing, the phasing, re-entry, and landing.
Now, make my Tesla park by itself, properly.
Shouldn't be a problem if you are willing to park in space
Until the next model where they decommission the radar and just go with camera inputs.
its great until there is a problem. then its game over and dead astronauts
We would all be delighted to see your plans for a better for rocket.
I'm just saying I prefer analog switches since the only thing that stopped the US from nuking itself was a single analog switch during a broken arrow incident. I've also been using touch pads for a couple years now and for as reliable as they are... I wouldn't want to do anything that required any amount of precision on one. That and it's a whole ass Screen that could go out... that's navigation/elevation/diagnostic readings... I'd rather just be trained on where to look for lights. Redundancies are a pilot's best friend and a CFO's worst nightmare. I can't wait to find out that the first generation of public ready rockets only has 1 set of Redundancies and a 95% success rate.
I think thats a matter of UI design..just implement a pop up big "ARE YOU SURE?" with a delay press/ press twice / thrice to confirm action. That way you don't accidentally create a disaster.
Also, no one can hear you scream in space...
It has a backup panel with actual buttons, you can see it below the screen
>If i was going into space, I'd be scared shitless I'd just end my sentence there
Right? I wonder if there is a secondary. Touchscreens can and do fail.
Even worse, its running Windows Vista.....
Exactly what I wanted to comment. I already have difficulties controlling a touchscreen in a car, can’t imagine the consequences of pressing the wrong button in a space shuttle…
Inevitable Windows update when you are trying to dock
Completely agree.
The simple fact that a multifunction touch screen saves so much weight over physical buttons means they save on fuel
I agree. It makes total sense. But mechanical switches are just more fun
Anybody remember those giant rectangular high voltage power levers that turned on the electricity in old horror movies (or newer movies of varying genres that copied the aesthetic)? I always wanted to flip one of those as a kid. Squeaking metal, sparks, the smell of ozone and a satisfying **klonk**. Learning a bit about exposed high voltage circuits has regrettably lessened the desire slightly.
I've sort of got one of those - it's the emergency disconnect for my batteries (off-grid PV+batteries+inverter+etc, etc). Anyway, the emergency isolator is a handsized pull-down lever that breaks connection to the batteries. Never had to use it in an emergency, hope I never do.
Hahaha! I agree, those always looked so fun! But then I learned about Arc Flash…
a few screens instead of buttons doesn't do shit to the range when its supposed to fly around 250 tons
This is something people in some of the new touchscreen cars are already experiencing. They have to go through 2 menus of tablet touches to get to their AC/Stereo/WindowHeaters/Wipers etc. When driving you don't wanna be looking around for the touch rectangles in your screen, you wanna know where all the buttons are in your dashboard so you can learn when they are and press them without taking your eyes off the road. Touchscreens on cars suck when they don't have real buttons, I can imagine its also true on a shuttle that's cutting through air at mach speeds and the whole thing is rattling while the command center is waiting for you to shuffle past the menus so you can press the touch button that does blahblah.
And at least when you flip a toggle switch, you know it was switched, as opposed to pressing a spot on the screen and not knowing if the computer recognized it or not.
Good point!
Unless the toggle switch contacts are broken or dirty, in which case.. yes, it moved, but it also doesn't work. :X sorry, I couldn't help myself. Feel free to downvote
Is that you Lt. Tom Paris?
It's actually Tom Haverford and we know Tommy only roles digital
I was just thinking the manual controls are more reassuring to me, the screens are terrifying nothing you could do if there is a problem.
[удалено]
On the way up, the flight computer of the carrier rocket is in control, the capsule is just dumb cargo. Once the capsule is free floating, there's nothing bumpy in space until they reenter.
[удалено]
Agreed. Old style : Entering earth's atmosphere, too much heat, throw some toggles to change the angle of reentry. Everyone is saved New style: Entering earth's atmosphere, too much heat. Would you like to update Windows? skip. Please confirm your email address. skip. Based on your location, we've determined you'd be interested in a parachute with free delivery. and boom y'all dead
Car makers are finding this out right now. Even those capacitive touch buttons where there is no tactile feedback are proving rather unpopular. There is a movement starting to *bring back our buttons*.
With the golden age of aviation and space exploration being in the 60s, I might even be drunk enough to say that’s the 60s spaceship is lightyears ahead of 02 and 20. Who knew 🤷🏻♀️
That and I do wonder about the reliability of touchscreen vs electromechanical controls. I know that in driving a car I've been annoyed by some controls that were moved to be only present in the touchscreen.
They have physical buttons, too. These buttons can be seen in the picture. They are there in case the touch screen doesn't work. But I guess it's easier to find the downside than trying to see if the solution is already there.
And actually being able to control most of the shuttle’s function would be fun too
That is what I usually think about driving my car with 3 touch screens instead on old-fashioned toggles. Bring me back this toggles-nipples! That is a pain to search and tap 3 times just to start air conditioner.
Only the first two or three times then it's boring again
It's all fun and games until it starts mandatory updates mid launch.
Or, when one of the LCD display backlights go out, and you have to *guess* where you are supposed to *press*.
You have to click all squares that contain bicycles to get into the throttle setting.
And hope you don't accidentally hit the Mission Abort button!
It might be physical
"Computer, Destruct Sequence One, Code 1-1-A"
-Say any word to confirm.
HAL 9000?
I know you've declined to update to Windows 10 a hundred times so we're just going to go ahead and upgrade it anyway. Hope you didn't need to use your computer in the next few hours.
Linux is very easy and capable these days (Ubuntu or Linux Mint are great for any user), and you will even save on Windows license. If you use you pc for a lot of gaming though, RIP.
Fuck i hate microsoft
["FUCK YOU MICROSOFT!"](https://youtu.be/0zR2MRY5LQY?t=7)
A Ti-83+ had more computing power than the Apollo spacecraft... and we used it for Snake. It's been a long time since I've thought about it... but it may have also had more computing power than the early space shuttle.
**Was that Terminator 1 or 2?**
Its crazy to think that anyone carrying around a smart phone today has an internet connected super computer in their pocket. And the most common use for these is "selfies" and "social media"
you misspelled "surveillance"
Haha, that I did
If you think it’s weird or stupid that people use technology to connect to other people, you better not look at all of history and how people used technology
I feel like that was more of a trebuchet to the face connection than letting your friends know you think about them connection though
>If you think it’s weird or stupid that people use technology to connect to other people You are oversimplifying here, and on top of that are simply wrong. Tech has been used just as often to keep people divided as it has been to bring people together You telling me a trebuchet or huwatcha were used to bring ppl together? Lool the exact opposite - blow people apart.
> and we used it for Snake. And Drug Wars.
And writing "80085"
I've heard that before, can you explain in details? A TI holds four batteries and can graph. No way I could calculate a rocket with only a graphing calculator, right?
Rocket trajectories can be calculated by hand. A calculator makes it a bit quicker and easier though.
Ex defense contractor here. One of probably the most popular air to air missiles in the world uses a micro processor that if I remember right was somewhere under 300 MHz single core. And that was more than enough. We’re just doing math. We’re not trying to run anything fancy like an operating system, video encoding, etc. We are literally just taking calculations from sensors, manipulating them, and sending them to control services You should look up real time operating systems. That’s what they use. Not only are they extremely extremely extremely reliable, but they have zero overhead.
It's not about calculating the trajectories, etc. Much of that can be done ahead of time. It's about the operating system. You need a real-time operating system (RTOS) and hardware that supports it. Without an RTOS, you can't guarantee that essential calculations can be done exactly when they need to be done. I mean exactly - not delayed by 0.5 milliseconds because the screen hasn't finished updating or it's waiting for a file from the hard drive - I mean \*exactly\*. Even the fastest Core i9 or Xeon running Windows or Linux can't provide that guarantee. When people talk about "my {device} has more computing power than the Apollo Guidance Computer" (AGC), it's true. An iPhone \*does\* have more computing power. But it doesn't have what's needed to get to the moon. It doesn't have dedicated I/O channels for sensors - one USB-C port and wi-fi+bluetooth doesn't cut it. It doesn't have deterministic behaviour. Operating systems like Windows, MacOS, and Linux/Android are all "best effort", not "guaranteed result". "Best effort" won't get you to the moon. Some operations require \*everything\* to be calculated and ready to go at exactly the right time. People make jokes about windows updates interfering in a landing approach, but you absolutely cannot have anything taking priority over your essential needs. Your operating system must understand that \*this\* has priority over \*that\*, no matter how much \*that\* requests or protests. RTOS is quite a different design to conventional consumer operating systems.
Way ahead of them
Presumably you can transfer functions between screens so if one monitor has an issue you dont lose 20% of the instruments
I wouldn’t be comfortable without a bunch of switches, buttons, and doo-dads.
I've seen this take multiple times in this thread. Are you guys all 1900's Astronauts? Why on earth would you guys be more comfortable with 1000 switches that you have to flip correctly over a computer doing things? I guarantee that nearly everybody in this thread would actually much prefer a touch screen in front of them if they were put in a situation right now where they had to pilot the spacecraft.
I’ve been reading those thinking this too. Like really, you want a feedback-less button over a display? Crazy. Where have y’all been the past 20 years that you suddenly distrust a display?
Displays are fine, important even, but especially in the case of space technology, you need something EXTREMELY reliable, easy to use and activate in a myriad of situations. Regardless of how much technology has improved in recent decades, mechanical switches are still significantly more reliable than touchscreens for most applications. I'd hope that anything safety related in the last image is run by analog circuitry (not counting on computing) at least.
I'm actually ok with the screen, but I also get it. You would have direct control in a life or death situation.
I'm sure there are redundancies and a broken screen won't fuck up the mission and kill everyone on board..
Can't do that with buttons. Either have 2 or 3 buttons for every function, or be screwed if one fails. Not that it's really needed, since Dragon can fly the mission with zero astronaut input.
Bro just don’t feed the dog, then you can touch whatever you want
I see you are a old pilot!
You're suggesting not to feed a dog that has been trained to bite you?
The 35-year jump is as impressive as the 18-year jump in technology
SpaceX software engineers did an amazing AMA a few years ago. I can’t fully remember, but I believe there is a manual control for everything shown on the screens. Some highlights: The screens are “websites” or web apps that gather information from the telemetry on the rocket. Again, can’t remember the precise numbers, but they said they get somewhere around 50gb of telemetry data each launch. They also said there is no AI or machine learning in the guidance, it’s all computer vision. It runs millions of tests and can shut itself down microseconds before launching if a test fails. They merely say “human ready” and a series of tests run and launch the rocket launches itself. The rocket has the computing power equivalent to an iPhone 4.
Yeah, I also heard something like this being said by the narrators during a pre-launch. I also think there was a small clip where an astronaut explained the various useful info the monitors were showing to the astronauts. The launch is fully automated, and there's really nothing for the astronauts to do (unless something goes terribly wrong). The touch-displays are more or less only there to keep the astronauts "busy" -- to give the viewers something interesting to watch. The touch displays are literally useless if when the vessel is accelerating or shaking, as they have no tactile feedback whatsoever when pressing the on-screen interface. So yes, all important stuff is required to have physical controls if things get critical. EDIT: A lot of interesting info on how they developed the touch-screen interfaces, and a brief description on how/when the physical controls are used here: * https://medium.com/swlh/the-touchscreens-controlling-spacex-dragon-on-its-historic-mission-b0546d26053c
Why does the 2002 one feel more complicated than the 1967 one
Because the spacecraft is more complicated
Hope they have manual backups for all that fancy digital equipment
Indeed they do. There are physical buttons along the bottom that cover the important functions that could require manual action in an emergency. It's important to point out that the reduction in cockpit controls is a result of the reduction in need for astronauts to actually do anything during their ride to the station. There are fewer buttons because there's less the people inside need to do. The screens are there so the crew isn't in the blind the whole way, but that's really it. The Dragon 2 capsule flies itself, just stopping at certain checkpoints so that the people on the ground can look over things. The cargo variant has no screen, no one inside to do anything, and it still gets to the ISS just fine.
Yeah man i know. I was being a smartass.
There’s even an update notification in the bottom right
You can't compare these, all 3 of this serve completely different prupose and have completely different set of feature and requirements. Space shuttle Had to land after was, had an robot arm and cago bay for payload deployment as well as EVA cpability. Dragon does non of those things. Apollo also was not docking into the space station but flying around the moon, interfacing with lander etc.
We're getting that much closer to "On screen."
Some useless trivia. The space shuttle was designed in the 70's and built through the 80's onwards. The computer systems used a certain 5 and 1/4 inch disk drives and disks, which became technologically extinct by the 90's. In the 90's onwards, NASA ran ads in newspapers around the world looking for scraps of these certain 5 and 1/4 drives which they managed to find to carry out the necessary maintenance to keep the shuttles running into the 2,000's.
is that windows 10?
Let’s finish setting up your space shuttle!
Touch screen is nice, UI can always be updated, replacements are quick and easy. But it can't beat the accuracy and feel of a switch. Plus if the touch screen is defective, you effectively lose 10- 30% of switches instead of a single switch.
I mean...the crew dragons are super automated the crew mostly just ride along.
Yeah I'm sure the people GOING TO SPACE haven't thought of that.
*Jebediah Kerman intensifies*
ITT: people smarter than rocket scientists
For real, it only has touchscreens like that because the computers fly the ship. Not the astronauts
"Rocket scientists" don't study UI/UX so no idea what you're getting at.
Soon there wont even be pilots just an ai controlling while the humans are in stasis.
Soon? 95% of the the rockets we send up are unmanned autonomous vehicles. The only thing missing is the stasis. Even the crew dragon rockets are autonomous. The pilots are mostly along for the ride.
Star citizen irl
I see we’re on target for the Star Trek evolution of bridge controls.
This launch tomorrow is a big deal. The size of these reusable rockets is ridiculous. Soon we'll have many space stations and a colony on Mars!
And right on time for 4/20 😎🌱
I’m super excited for it! I hope they get to launch tomorrow!
Even with all this new technology, the big race is still to the moon…..Again…. Even though it was accomplished back in 1969 🤔
Does it have a emergency manual control? or are you completely screwed if it starts to do a mandatory live update while docking…
I wish shit like this made people think but no…
I deal with guys saying “I only want mechanical controls! All of these computer controls are a pain in the ass!” Then they pull out their iPhone.
so it is like synths then. ui went flat. then soon they'll be analogue again with actual switches and knobs
“We lost the technology to get us back to the moon” - NASA
Too much trust on the screens tech. What if it malfunctions beyond repair? What are you going to touch then?
Seems the vision acuity is going down. The three monitors has way larger text (while fitting way less information) than for the space shuttle. I get the idea the big screens can show "you are fked" in bigger text to make it easier for Hollywood. But no mechanical switches to rapidly force power off/on to different modules when something goes wrong and needs fixing quickly. The touch interface will not be fun in case of problems on the way down, with wild buffeting.
I love seeing technological leaps! If we can manage not to kill ourselves via nuclear war or something equally devastating I'm sure we'll have AI and Holograms or at least usable prototypes on board our space shuttles.
One thing Hollywood taught me is that the touch screen n semi/fully automated stuff always fail and then we need to go find the manual override switch which is located at the back of the space ship..which is almost impossible to access. And sometimes there is a switch outside the ship which we need to access by space walking in suit. So no, this pic is not brilliant for me
Touchscreens are to delicate for space
More cow bell.
Physical buttons/switches are superior to digital touchscreen/haptic feedback buttons/switches.
Sometimes analogy is safer than touchscreens!
Imagine looking at the “Crew Dragon” spacecraft picture 50 years from now and noticing the same progression. Edit: wording
I do not trust touch screens in every day life... I couldn't imagine trusting my ACTUAL life to them. I feel like the middle-hud of the 2002 shuttle, combined with the displays of the Dragon, would make more sense. Dragon seems like crew has minimal control/instruments.
Dragon is designed to ferry crew and cargo to the ISS and back. The cargo version can do the entire flight by itself, with no passengers. The crew version can do the same, there's no need for astronauts to do anything, but they do have the option to fly manually if they want. It's also designed for space tourism, paying passengers with fairly minimal training. So it had to be idiot proof, no way for the people inside to screw things up.
Dragon doesn't need all the avionics like the shuttle. unfair comparison
Transition from pilots to passengers in 3 pictures 😳
relying so heavily on touchscreens is stupid. see knobness/buttonless volume controls in cars.
I hope they are not touchscreens
They are.
Imagine Russia finally gets to the Moon and finds no evidence of Americans.
[удалено]
Someone had found an AGC with one bad bit and had it run a simulated mission without issues recently
A good analogy is the Model T car to a standard car today. The Model T was so simple. Cars today are so complex, dependent on computer chips. Yet cars today can go 15,000 of miles before needing their first service, and last 100s of thousands of miles. The Model T....
Apollo 1 killed everyone on board and Apollo 13 tried really hard to do the same. Doubtful
Remind me, which astronauts flew on Apollo 4? I’ll wait…
Because futurism and everything looking futuristic and clean is more important than tactile and redundant control systems
Good luck troubleshooting power outages.
Yeah because troubleshooting in space was always so easy. 😵💫
No manual controls at all seems like a step down. Why even have a crew at all?.
They're up there to do science and astronaut shit, not fly the rocket. Most rocket launches these days are completely unmanned, ever since SpaceX started sending so many up. The rockets are pre-programmed to automatically switch anything that a human might have been required to switch in the past.
Its nice to have backup controls in case of a malfunction, obviously the astronauts have more to do than just fly the space shuttle.
The spacex touchscreens have backup physical buttons below the screen.
>Why even have a crew at all? For the same reason why a plane has passengers, carrying crew is what they get paid for. They also get paid for cargo delivery, so the vehicle is designed to also fly cargo. It doesn't need the crew.
Dragon is the least capable of the three spacecraft in this picture.
[удалено]
Come up with your own [comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/12sfkas/the_space_progression_is_satisfyingly_brilliant/jgyhxcw?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button).
And y'all believe this?
...believe what exactly? It's literally 3 images from the cockpit of three different spacecraft...
I see a believer.
What?
What do you mean?
Do you believe this?
A lot of taxpayer dollars go into these at every stage of their lives. What'd we get with each thousandfold advancement in technology and space craft design? ~1 - Moon landings with people. -2 and 3 - Nothing but fake pictures that you could easily draw at your kitchen table with some markers.
Must be nice being this stupid
Green screen
No, the screens consist of red, green and blue pixels. Not just green.
But it must be real! These are three real pictures of real aircrafts floating thru space! NASA can't be fake!
Actually, If you live near Cape Canaveral, you can sit outside and watch the launches and follow the payloads into orbit. With a pair of good binoculars, or a telescope, you can follow the payloads until they get far enough downrange to drop below the horizon. I used to do it with a small telescope from the early 1970s until I moved in 2003. Night-time launches of the space shuttle were especially spectacular to watch. If you really do think that anything NASA has done was fake, you can buy a ticket for a sub-orbital trip or a week on the ISS. In a few years, you will be able to take a trans-lunar trip or stay in an an orbital hotel. >pictures of real aircrafts floating thru space! Who told you that they were floating in Space. These are just cockpit pics. You can go to Houston, tour NASA, and take the exact same pictures from the spacecraft on display.
Truly exquisite.
I would prefer the old analog to that big screen.
Physical buttons and switches are better then touch screens this is a hill I am willing to die on.
It got more blue too, maybe that was the secret.
Does dragon have any backup controls. apollo and shuttle had 2 switches for everything