Xref: utzoo sci.space:6104 sci.space.shuttle:873
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!karn
From: karn@thumper.bellcore.com (Phil R. Karn)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Von Braun quote
Summary: humans in space
Message-ID: <1222@thumper.bellcore.com>
Date: 12 Jul 88 20:23:37 GMT
References: <1988Jun17.053132.5314@utzoo.uucp>, <3361@phri.UUCP> <4782@killer.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Inc
Lines: 69

> The state of communications has not gotten so good as to defy phyics, now
> has it?  The non-manned approach works fine when in earth orbit, but what
> happens when you get up there to around the moon?  By the time the person
> on the ground has reacted to a problem, six seconds will have passed in 
> transmission time!  In a critical situation, this could mean the destruction 
> of the craft.

Good point. But how many applications really require six second response
time? Voyager seems to have been highly successful without humans on
board, despite round trip times measured in hours.  There may well be
"deep space" applications which require short human response times and
therefore humans in space, but this is a tiny fraction.

> Also, the computers these days are not nearly advanced to do the sort of 
> problem manegement that you describe.  Show me an unmanned launch vehical
> which can do as much as the shuttle can!

Let's try comparing the "versatile" shuttle against those old, outdated,
unmanned launchers.

1. Unmanned launchers such as Delta, Ariane and Atlas-Centaur routinely
put payloads into geostationary transfer orbit. With the Transtage,
Titan can put them directly into their final geostationary orbit. But
shuttle sticks you with this silly 296km circular orbit, and you need
ANOTHER kick motor (in addition to the one you've already got for
circularizing orbit at geostationary altitude) to pick up where the
shuttle leaves off.

2. You can get Atlas, Delta and Ariane launches into polar, sun-
synchronous orbit. But shuttle is restricted to low inclination orbits
because the Vandenburg launch complex has been essentially abandoned.

3. In unmanned launches, the customer calls the shots. But when the
shuttle was carrying commercial payloads, there was considerable
friction between the payload people and the shuttle people. The reason?
Trying to do too many different things on a single flight with an
extremely expensive vehicle that NASA is counting on getting back.  If
the customer of an unmanned launch wants to fly a "risky" payload (i.e.,
one that could cause the destruction of the launcher or the failure of
the mission should the payload fail in certain ways) why shouldn't he?
After all, it's his money, and there aren't any astronaut lives at
stake. (Of course, this wouldn't include external risks, e.g., people or
facilities on the ground.) But not on the shuttle. As I've repeatedly
commented before: if you want to get depressed, go read the GAS payload
safety manual. And my copy was printed long BEFORE Challenger.

>  The most advanced computer in 
> the world is that 10 pound ball of grey matter resting on your neck...

This is meaningless hyperbole. What does "advanced" mean? The ability to
solve differential equations in real time? The ability to withstand
thousands of rads of radiation? The ability to monitor hundreds of
voltages, currents and pressures 24 hours per day, for years at a time,
without making any mistakes?  (By the way, *you* may be from Talos IV,
but my brain weight is probably about 3 pounds, the average for Homo
Sapiens).

Most people know that there are some things computers do much better
than humans, and there are other things that humans do much better than
computers. An intelligently designed system will apply each resource
where it is best suited. There is certainly room for discussion and
disagreement as to exactly how to do this in any project. But in the
realm of space travel, emotional romanticism has gotten the upper hand
over rational design as in almost no other area of technology. The
result? Expensive turkeys like the Shuttle that have sucked away almost
all money from other, far more cost-effective projects and have nearly
wrecked our space program in the process.

Phil