Train-Sim.Com
General

OFI Message to NASA

Started by OTTODAD 18 posts 15 min read

Notice to all visitors and members of the Train-Sim.Com message forums:
If you plan on using a signature banner in your posts, we would like to remind you that there is a maximum size for banners. That maximum is 450 pixels wide by 120 pixels high, and not to exceed 25k. Your compliance is appreciated. FORUM RULES Problems? There are two common reasons for problems with logging in and posting messages. The first is that you are running a firewall that prevents your messages from being sent to the server. The other is that you have cookies disabled; the DCForum software requires cookies to work properly.

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend

Reading Topic #4148

OTTODADCharter Member · 1908 posts

Please, no more irrelevant or personal remarks ! Below is a copy of a suggestion I sent to NASA, registered under OFI 2003-000211, Pin 5234 you may be able to access and monitor NASA's response.I seem to remember an occasion with one of the first Shuttle test flights when a Heat Tile was repaired in Space ? Some adhesives do not need Oxygen to cure. But with the Columbia having found to be unable to re-enter safely a Russion Spacecraft could have supplied it with more Fuel, Food and Oxygen to keep it in orbit until Mission Control can come up with an answer.Perhaps a second Shuttle should be standing by, ready for Lift-Off, costing CONGRESS far less than other less important items in it's Budget ! Perhaps even making it possible to Repair the damaged Shuttle and bring it back home using Remote Control. Civil Avitiation ILS can do that already.More Info about Columbia here:MELTING WING
http://www.itv.com/news/298385.html
SPY SATELLITES
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5330-2003Feb13.htmlO t t o=====================================================================
The COLUMBIA disaster, by now almost certain having been caused by a localised failure of the Heat Shield underneath it's left wing, caused either by that piece of foam detaching itself from the Main Fuel Tank and hitting the underside of it's leading edge or orbital chunk puncturing the wing, highlights the need for some means of doing External Pre-Re-entry-Checks of the Heatshield and other vital external parts not visible to Surveillance Cameras.As there was no "Space Walker" on this Mission, a simple to operate device for doing such external inspection would have been able to get close-up views of the Heatshield, displaying them on the Shuttle's and Mission Control's Monitors, making sure that at this point in time there was no damage endangering the Shuttle's Re-Entry into the Earth's Atmosphere and if there was, give Mission Control an opportunity to deal with it.I am talking about a "Roving Space Eye", RSE, a small football size, soft rubber coated device, containing a Mini TV Camera and compressed air jets for directional steering, linked to the Shuttle by means of an Umbilical Cord, containing the compressed air supply line and Control Cables. Waste Carbondioxide could be used.Any kid like my 5 year old grandson, playing computer games or remote control cars with external controllers, could steer the RSE.Such a device could also be useful for inspecting the Space Station's exterior and other Space Conveyances associated with it.I do not claim COPYRIGHT for this idea and hope that it will be implemented soon.Otto A. Wipfel
www.otto-wipfel.co.uk

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

RE: OFI Message to NASA, downside, Feb-14-03, 09:25 AM, (1) RE: OFI Message to NASA, OTTODAD, Feb-14-03, 11:01 AM, (2) RE: OFI Message to NASA, Poltergeist, Feb-14-03, 01:29 PM, (3) RE: OFI Message to NASA, OTTODAD, Feb-14-03, 04:00 PM, (4) RE: OFI Message to NASA, downside, Feb-14-03, 05:20 PM, (5) RE: OFI Message to NASA, Poltergeist, Feb-14-03, 05:57 PM, (6) RE: OFI Message to NASA, Poltergeist, Feb-14-03, 06:33 PM, (9) RE: OFI Message to NASA, LARKIE, Feb-14-03, 07:03 PM, (11) RE: OFI Message to NASA, Poltergeist, Feb-14-03, 09:25 PM, (12) RE: OFI Message to NASA, plainsman, Feb-14-03, 06:16 PM, (7) RE: OFI Message to NASA, chucksc, Feb-14-03, 06:21 PM, (8) RE: OFI Message to NASA, OTTODAD, Feb-14-03, 06:46 PM, (10) RE: OFI Message to NASA, plainsman, Feb-14-03, 09:26 PM, (13) RE: OFI Message to NASA, HAC, Feb-15-03, 01:17 PM, (14) RE: OFI Message to NASA, railnut, Feb-15-03, 04:03 PM, (15) RE: OFI Message to NASA, CGW409, Feb-16-03, 12:25 PM, (16) RE: OFI Message to NASA, HAC, Feb-16-03, 01:14 PM, (17)

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

downsideCharter Member · 1443 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

LAST EDITED ON Feb-14-03 AT 09:30 AM (EDT)

OttoThe idea of refuelling in space between a Russian spacecraft and an Orbiter just doesn't work. Where are they supposed to store the fuel on the Russian craft and how are they meant to refuel the Orbiter. It is a capsule. In any event the Russian Progress supply craft are unmanned and only dock with the ISS (and anyway the Orbiter had no docking facilities.)And who would pay for the launch of the Russian craft? The US is not allowed to and the Russians cannot afford to. This is why they are happy taking 'Space Tourists' as they are desperate for income into their space budget.As far as repair kits are concerned Thomas Moser, a former NASA engineer responsible for tile safety during the first mission when foam broke away from the external tank during launch (April 1981 - Columbia's maiden flight) is reported as saying that 'NASA considered the repair kit option after the first mission, but concluded it probably would cause more problems than it cured: Astronauts might not be able to get to the damage, and a misapplied tile could result in an uneven surface that could increase friction during re-entry.' (Washington Post Tuesday, Feb 4, 2003)Bill

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

OTTODADCharter Member · 1908 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Bill,has not a Russian unmanned Spacecraft stocked up the Space Station recently, not doubt paid for by NASA ? Think it is being reported on the NASA site or the "Washington Post"s I looked at before posting my message.It supplied additional Fuel needed for a 20+ mins Burn to put it into a higher Orbit ?One way or the other NASA could with an equivalent of the "Automobile Association" up there, rescueing stranded Shuttles ! The other Thread reminding me of NASA, hidden in my "Favorites" for a long time, re-kindled new interest. Thanks for that ! Would I like to go up myself ? You bet, I wish I had the money ! O t t o

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

PoltergeistMember since Aug-8-02 · 522 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Click to send message via ICQ

OFI Message to NASA – image 1

Perhaps even making it possible to Repair the damaged Shuttle and bring it back home using Remote Control. Civil Avitiation ILS can do that already.Ok I am a pilot and I can tell you that ILS is an form of approach that we use not a form of Remote Controlling. ILS approach is when the pilot tunes into the localizer freq. of a Runway and the computer on board the aircraft picks up the Loc signal. Then the pilots hears several beeping sounds which indicates that the computer and radio have the singal. By now the pilot should see two lines on his Artifical Horizon, one beside it, and one below it. These line indicate the glide slope of the Runway. The pilot uses these two lines to line his aircraft up with the glideslope of the Runway to make a safe and easy landing. Right now the only form of Remote Control flying that I can think of is being used by spy planes and test flights. Beside what good would it do to bring it home via, remote control??? I mean even if the repair is fessable on the aircraft then what the hell is the crew for??? Look it takes a special type of pilot to fly the shuttle and land it, your average joe cannot take a joystick and TV screen and land it. Jesus get your story straight man.
OFI Message to NASA – image 2 OFI Message to NASA – image 3 OFI Message to NASA – image 4 OFI Message to NASA – image 5 OFI Message to NASA – image 6 OFI Message to NASA – image 7 OFI Message to NASA – image 8 OFI Message to NASA – image 9


I know I've made a couple of miskate, but I'm only human, at least I'm man enough to face them today! ~Eminem

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

OTTODADCharter Member · 1908 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

If you are a "PILOT" then you will understand all about the following 2 paragraphs. The first about Computer Controlled Shuttle Autolandings and the second about similar ILS / AUTOPILOT / FMS Computer Controlled Autolandings in operation on all recent Civilian Aircraft like the AIRBUS, BOEING 777 and 747.O t t o==================================================================Entry flight control is maintained with the aerojet DAP, which generates effector and RCS <http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/sts-rcs.html> jet commands to control and stabilize the vehicle during its descent from orbit. The aerojet DAP is a three-axis rate command feedback control system that uses commands from guidance in automatic or from the flight crew's RHC in control stick steering. Depending on the type of command and the flight phase, these result in fire commands to the RCS <http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/sts-rcs.html> or deflection commands to the aerosurfaces.
In the automatic mode, the orbiter <http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/sts_asm.html> is essentially a missile, and the flight crew monitors the instruments to verify that the vehicle is following the correct trajectory. The onboard computers execute the flight control laws (equations). If the vehicle diverges from the trajectory, the crew can take over at any time by switching to CSS. The orbiter <http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/sts_asm.html> can fly to a landing in the automatic mode (only landing gear extension and braking action on the runway are required by the flight crew). The autoland mode capability of the orbiter <http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/sts_asm.html> is used by the crew usually to a predetermined point in flying around the heading alignment cylinder. In flights to date, the crew has switched to CSS when the orbiter <http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/technology/sts-newsref/sts_asm.html> is subsonic. However, autoland provides information to the crew displays during the landing sequence.===================================================================Re: Will future airliners (and spaceliners) need pilots?
<<Prev </cgi-bin/BBS/SpacePolicy/read/32272> | 32273 of 32462 | Next>> </cgi-bin/BBS/SpacePolicy/read/32274>
Posted by Robert G. Oler (71461.34@compsurve.com <mailto:71461.34@compsurve.com>) at 01:45 GMT on 03 Jan 2003
In reply to Re: Will future airliners (and spaceliners) need pilots? </cgi-bin/BBS/SpacePolicy/read/32267>
from Edward Wright at 22:52 GMT on 02 Jan 2003 > Indeed, on some flights, the auto-pilot may be engaged immediately after take-off, while the plane is still climbing,
> and then remain switched on throughout the flight and during the landing.I suggest you talk to some actual airline pilots, rather than relying on magazine articles, Marcus.
<<The statement above (not yours) is more or less an accurate statement. In all the "Boeings" that have an AFDS of somesort the only limitation after takeoff is 400 feet AGL...Until you reach 400 feet the "FD" (flight director) cannot be put into any mode other then TOGA. Most airlines will not allow engagement of the autopilot in TOGA in any other mode but CWS (control wheel steering...and thats for the 737) and most airlines dont use CWS (Southwest is about the only one I aware of that does, Delta and United have taken it off theirs). In an Airbus (which of course is FBW) the airplane can be put on autoflight immediatly after landing gear retraction. The difference there is that the Airbus will automatically protect itself from a problem with the FD in TOGA and only the 777 will do it for a Boeing and will default into single engine mode in TOGA and only the 777 will do it for Boeing (ie autorudder).Most airlines heavily use the automation. SWA is eventually crudgingly going to come that direction. It just takes them longer because there is a very heavy anti automation core there.<<> “Most people are blissfully unaware that when an aircraft lands in mist or fog, it is a computer that is landing it,”
> says Paul Jackson, editor of “Jane's All the World's Aircraft”.If you refer to ILS as a computer, which is not really accurate. Furthermore, synthetic vision technology is now being developed that will allow pilots to make *visual* landings in weather that is *below* IFR minimums. <<.The ILS of course doesnt land anything. Its two seperate radio signals (one horizontal and one vertical...one at VHF and the other at UHF) that by use of phasing techniques define a centerline both in azimuth and elevation for a given distance from the runway.This statement was doubtless writtened for the "populace" but if one implies that we are talking about Cat II-CAT III weather then the odds are that an autolanding is being done. The key thing is that on the ground the CATII holdback lines need to be enforced...and thats the problem with using the autolander when they are not.If one attempts autolanding in say Cat 1 or other "higher" weather and the CATII holdbacks are not being enforced and the autoland fails then one doesnt know wheather or not the ILS signal was corrupted near the ground or the autolander has a problem...but under current rules that will fail the autolander until a successful demo is conducted. CAT II's can of course be handflown. The failure rate on the approach is much higher then autolanding (except of course for companies that dont have autolanding) and it brings up some sticky issues of transitioning from the "panel" to the outside which of course gets easier with a HUD. The Airbus will easily autoland as will the triple seven even with one out.EVENTUALLY When the kinks are worked out of the new approach procedures and curved approaches or more procedures like now done at SFO come into play automation is going to be more or less mandatory to play in bad weather.<<okay, once was a "controlled high-speed taxi off the end of the runway") << They didnt call it that when SWA not using autobrakes did the same thing. Of course autothrottle would have helped them not land at wrap speed. And the autopilot could have done a much better job flying the profile...and......

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

downsideCharter Member · 1443 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Autoland is computer controlled from within the shuttle This is not remote control. Remote means away from the shuttle. There is no capability to do remote control.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

PoltergeistMember since Aug-8-02 · 522 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Click to send message via ICQ

OFI Message to NASA – image 10

>Autoland is computer controlled from within the
>shuttle This is not remote control. Remote means
>away from the shuttle. There is no capability to do remote
>control. THANK YOU!
OFI Message to NASA – image 11 OFI Message to NASA – image 12 OFI Message to NASA – image 13 OFI Message to NASA – image 14 OFI Message to NASA – image 15 OFI Message to NASA – image 16 OFI Message to NASA – image 17 OFI Message to NASA – image 18


I know I've made a couple of miskate, but I'm only human, at least I'm man enough to face them today! ~Eminem

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

PoltergeistMember since Aug-8-02 · 522 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Click to send message via ICQ

OFI Message to NASA – image 19

Like I said, the only two forms of remote controlled aircraft, are spy planes and flight test that are too dangrous for a manned flight. I watched this one film where they rigged an old Boeing 707 to be controlled by remote control a few miles away. They were testing ways to make a plane less destructionable during a crash. They crash this one into a concreate wall. Needless to say all test fails. I forgot what they were testing though.
OFI Message to NASA – image 20 OFI Message to NASA – image 21 OFI Message to NASA – image 22 OFI Message to NASA – image 23 OFI Message to NASA – image 24 OFI Message to NASA – image 25 OFI Message to NASA – image 26 OFI Message to NASA – image 27


I know I've made a couple of miskate, but I'm only human, at least I'm man enough to face them today! ~Eminem

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

LARKIECharter Member · 308 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

I think they were testing a "gel" type of kerosene.It was theoretically supposed to be less liable to ignition than "regular" in a crash situation.This fuel had previously been tested as safe to burn in jet engines,with suitable preheating etc.If I remember correctly it was filled with dummies,internal cameras,plus all sorts of external filming points too,to observe the results.Although the theory worked,in small scale tests,the actual results proved the idea was wrong.It acted like napalm,sticking to the aircraft,and burning,so was judged to be worse than ordinary fuel which spreads out when fuel tanks rupture,thus spreading fire outwards away from the aircraft.No more was heard of that particular idea.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

PoltergeistMember since Aug-8-02 · 522 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Click to send message via ICQ

OFI Message to NASA – image 28

Yea that was it! Thanks Larkie!
OFI Message to NASA – image 29 OFI Message to NASA – image 30 OFI Message to NASA – image 31 OFI Message to NASA – image 32 OFI Message to NASA – image 33 OFI Message to NASA – image 34 OFI Message to NASA – image 35 OFI Message to NASA – image 36


I know I've made a couple of miskate, but I'm only human, at least I'm man enough to face them today! ~Eminem

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

plainsmanCharter Member · 1860 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Why do you insist on not only disparaging a program you really only marginally at best, know anything about, and in the process, only reinforce your own arrogance. Your facts never quite fit, your not anywhere near the knowledge level (in spite of your overinflated self-regard) to contribute really helpful input on this. I find your continued harrange offensive! You do have some helpful input on some computer matters, as this seems to be somethiong you actually know something about. Stick with areas you can be useful and helpful with, and stop sticking your nose into every subject you don't have a clue about.
Bob

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

chuckscCharter Member · 2644 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

"Please, no more irrelevant ..... remarks "I guess this means most of your posts will soon be deleted eh?Chuck Schneider
(Virtual) CEO
North American (Virtual) Locomotive WorksOFI Message to NASA – image 37

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

OTTODADCharter Member · 1908 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Thanks guys, I put money on it to get a more intelligent response this time ! Ah well, there is always another time ?Not if I can help it ! O t t o

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

plainsmanCharter Member · 1860 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Otto,
Just for your reference, this is Shinola, please quite making the substitution!
BTW, I disagree as to being uncouth. I was going to compare and contrast your intellect with a few loads of dirt, but refrained largely due to the high regard folks out here have for dirt.Bob

Attachments
OFI Message to NASA – image 38
http://www.train-sim.com/dcforum/User_files/3e4da44c258e6bdc.jpg

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

HACCharter Member · 1159 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

Shinola was originally a Canadian product, and as such was most often confused with the substance that eminates from our House of Commons in Ottawa, hence the phrase...Cheers
HACPS>Do you know what happened to the fellow who didn't know sh*t from Shinola? (No....) Well, nothing happened to him, but you should see his shoes...

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

railnutCharter Member · 341 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

>Shinola was originally a Canadian product, and as such was
>most often confused with the substance that eminates from
>our House of Commons in Ottawa, hence the phrase...
>
LMAO !!!!!
Sounds like the twits up on Beacon Hill here in Massachusetts, known as the House and Senate. Same stuff spewing out of the building as well...

OFI Message to NASA – image 39

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

CGW409Charter Member · 469 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

HAC
Speaking of not knowing s*** from shinola we're starting to get a lot more of the "shut down NASA, that money could help the homeless" calls
here in the Chicago area.
I know it's politicaly incorrect but when giving Willie the wino a warm place to drink himself to death generates spin off tech that makes my life better or safer maybe I'll consider it.

Alert | IP

Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

HACCharter Member · 1159 posts

RE: OFI Message to NASA

yep.. hear ya, and agree,, I was just comenting on Shinola, though..
HAC

Alert | IP


[ Home | MSTS Forum | MSTS FAQ | File Library ] Copyright © 2002 by Nels Anderson. All Rights Reserved.

Restored from the Train-Sim.Com archive, captured March 31, 2003. About this archive.