NASA's Plans
Mar. 29th, 2006 01:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
stickmakerIn response to the criticism leveled at NASA for abandoning the idea of using methane or propane as fuels in the new Crew Excursion Vehicle and Lunar lander/launcher the LSAM, they are now saying that "Methane rockets have never flown in space. Developing them is too risky."
Yeah, right. As usual, NASA is taking risks where they aren't need in order to add glitz, and refusing to take risks where the payoffs would be significant, such as increasing mission capabilities by using a more suitable fuel. That's just not glamorous enough.
At least they're admitting that they still need pilots for Lunar landings... so far. The technology still isn't advanced enough - and isn't likely to be for decades - for a fully automatic landing. However, NASA administrators are insisting that the LSAM be able to land without anyone on board, in what they call "cargo mode." What do you want to bet that if this is developed, they start insisting that pilots let the machines land _everything_ automatically, and punishing pilots who use their judgment to override the computers? No matter how justified the decision is later found to be?
The people most resistant to this are the pilots, naturally, and not because of ego. They _know_ how many ways a landing can go wrong, and the best course of action to take. Would a computer? How do you program in experience? (Trust me, they are nowhere near capable of building successful neural net piloting computers, and even if they were NASA management would never let the computers have the experience necessary to learn how to handle the unexpected.)
By all means, have the capability in place. But recognize its limitations.
Yeah, right. As usual, NASA is taking risks where they aren't need in order to add glitz, and refusing to take risks where the payoffs would be significant, such as increasing mission capabilities by using a more suitable fuel. That's just not glamorous enough.
At least they're admitting that they still need pilots for Lunar landings... so far. The technology still isn't advanced enough - and isn't likely to be for decades - for a fully automatic landing. However, NASA administrators are insisting that the LSAM be able to land without anyone on board, in what they call "cargo mode." What do you want to bet that if this is developed, they start insisting that pilots let the machines land _everything_ automatically, and punishing pilots who use their judgment to override the computers? No matter how justified the decision is later found to be?
The people most resistant to this are the pilots, naturally, and not because of ego. They _know_ how many ways a landing can go wrong, and the best course of action to take. Would a computer? How do you program in experience? (Trust me, they are nowhere near capable of building successful neural net piloting computers, and even if they were NASA management would never let the computers have the experience necessary to learn how to handle the unexpected.)
By all means, have the capability in place. But recognize its limitations.
