Re: Automated Orbiter Rapid Prototype (AORP)


<craigcocca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1151421186.146143.21810@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
NASASpaceFlight.com is reporting this morning that NASA has quietly
developed a device called the Automated Orbiter Rapid Prototype, which
can be installed on an Orbiter during an ISS safe haven scenario to
allow the damaged orbiter to attempt an unmanned landing. Apparently
gone are the days when the shuttle required a human in the loop to
deploy the air data probes and landing gear...the AORP automates the
one thing that "couldn't" be automated that has been talked about in
this group for years.

Here's a reference to the article:
http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/content/?id=4582

The article points out that NASA PAO hasn't made a huge deal out of the
existence of the AORP. I would suspect this is for good reason. If
the AORP were well known, wouldn't the next logical step be to launch
as many components to the ISS as possible on unmanned shuttles, and
then send up an astronaut crew to outfit the station with whatever
needs to be done by EVA?

The crews on ISS flights actually do lots of work while at ISS. It wouldn't
be easy to offload this work an ISS crew of three (which is the current
limit), two of which spend most of their time keeping ISS running.

On top of that, not having a crew on the shuttle increases the chances that
something will go wrong that you can't fix from the ground and you'll lose
the shuttle. Right now, NASA has very few shuttles, but they have a glut of
astronauts trained to fly the shuttle. Since there are so few shuttles
left, and many of the ISS payloads don't have backup hardware, if the
shuttle is considered safe enough that losing an orbiter and it's payload is
an acceptable risk, then it's also acceptable to risk a crew on the same
flight.

Jeff
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety"
- B. Franklin, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (1919)


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: And what about civilian Shuttle casualties?
    ... I *really* wouldn't want to put a crew into ISS safe ... Wouldn't the scenario be that the damaged shuttle would stay docked to ... only be undocked to clear the port for the arriving rescue shuttle? ... I would also have the ISS crew training the crew of the damaged shuttle ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: In two years time...
    ... The Shuttle crew never do any ISS assembly until they have docked to ... With the shuttle, every development problem resulted in an operational workaround that increased crew workload, and that was accepted because the crew was always going to be there and you had plenty of them to help. ... Relying on the ISS crew for AMS assembly would also require that AMS have everything frozen and ready for procedures development a lot earlier, so that the ISS crew can be trained before they fly. ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: How serious is the May window?
    ... orbiter docked to ISS? ... a 200,000+ lb orbiter during reentry and how the lack of certification ... I put a smiley behind cant kill a crew, ... shuttle is being shut down is the risk of killing another crew. ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Whats nasa thinking
    ... > minimize the size of shuttle crews on ISS construction flights? ... > With the exception of missions involving crew rotations I don't see why more ...
    (sci.space.shuttle)
  • Re: Future Use of the Space Station
    ... The current plan is that after ISS assembly is complete and the shuttle ... NASA would continue to use the station for research until ... > with 2 crew indefinitely. ...
    (sci.space.policy)