Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wickberg 4001 days ago
STS was never fully automated, they would have needed to install a temporary cable that allowed the landing gear to be automatically deployed.

It looks like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STS-3xx has details on this cable, referred to as the Remote Control Orbiter (RCO) in-flight maintenance (IFM) cable.

1 comments

The STS was fully automated. There was a political decision to allow landing gear be option-only via a cable that wasn't installed by default, but kept in the cargo area. I don't recall all the reasons why, a lot of it had to do with shuttle pilots not liking they are not actually piloting and the concern that full automation means they now they have a commander and pilot with zero non-simulator flight experience. Or heaven forbid a bug that opened the chute or landing gear too early or too late (although this seems unlikely and fear mongering by those who prefer manual control).

In scenarios where the shuttle was damaged in space, the cable would be deployed and NASA could fly it home safely via remote while the crew stayed in the ISS. In normal scenarios the landing was done by pilot or commander. So yes, NASA had these capabilities and for a long time, it just chose not to use them outside of certain scenarios. Considering the Buran never carried a person to space, its unknown whether they would have gone the NASA approach or gone full automation once in production. The nice thing of having a system that never worked is that you can fantasize about how its better than everything because it never had to get out there and actually launch human beings safely.

Frankly, its pretty dishonest to say the Buran had automation that the Shuttle lacked. That's like saying my computer can't play 3D video games because all I ever do is 2D. I just choose not to.