Title: Man's Place in Spaceplane Flight Operations: Cockpit, Cargo Bay, or Control Room?
Subject: An examination of the proper role for humans in the flight operation of a military spaceplane.
Author(s): David M. Tobin; Mikael S. Beno (Faculty Advisor)
DTIC Keywords: AEROSPACE CRAFT, AEROSPACEPLANES, AIR TO SPACE, ASTRONAUTS, MANNED SPACECRAFT, RECOVERABLE SPACECRAFT, REMOTELY PILOTED VEHICLES, SPACE CREWS, SPACE FLIGHT, SPACE MISSIONS, SPACE WARFARE, SPACECRAFT, UNMANNED SPACECRAFT
Abstract:
This paper begins to investigate the question: "What is the proper
role of humans in the operation of a military Spaceplane?" All too often,
the question boils down to: "Should it be manned or unmanned?" While
it's true that some man-machine interface types require a man on-board
and some don't, this manned/unmanned oversimplification skews the
true context of the issue. Therefore, this paper seeks to put man's role
in military Spaceplane flight operations into a more proper perspective.
Each of the paper's three objectives is achieved.
The first objective is to summarize the current literature which is best
characterized as a "manned vs. unmanned" debate. Although existing
evidence suggests a manned spaceplane configuration provides
maximum mission flexibility and an unmanned configuration will result in
a more economical program, other factors such as flight safety and
program development risk are more difficult to pin down. Neither the
manned nor unmanned argument is clearly compelling, and the debate
appears to be at a stalemate.
The second objective is to approach the problem from a different
perspective by considering an entire spectrum of man-machine interface
possibilities. A generic process is presented where specific mission
tasks are mapped to optimum man-machine interface choices by
considering such factors as performance, cost, schedule, and risk.
Viewed in this context, the optimal man-machine interface for a military
Spaceplane is shown to be the result of an iterative design process and
not a pre-specified system requirement. Moreover, the presence or
absence of a man-on-board becomes a byproduct of a structured
analysis instead of the central focus of an ad-hoc debate.
Using the insights provided by this new approach, the third objective
is to conduct a preliminary analysis to answer the question posed by the
paper's title. Existing space operations doctrine and preliminary mission
requirements are assessed to arrive at a generic characterization of
military Spaceplane tasks. These tasks are then linked to man-machine
interface types using the results of an existing NASA study on the
performance of humans in space. Although selecting a specific
man-machine interface design for a military Spaceplane is beyond the
scope of this paper, some clear insight into man's role in its operation is
achieved. This insight suggests a two-phased approach for military
Spaceplane development. The baseline military Spaceplane will be
capable of supporting all four space mission areas (Force Application,
Force Enhancement, Space Control, and Space Support) but should not
require the presence of on-board human operators. However, since
some Space Control and Space Support missions will involve tasks that
can only be performed via direct human intervention, the baseline
military Spaceplane will eventually need to be upgraded to carry
humans. Since the focus of these humans will be on satellites and
payloads (vice the Spaceplane vehicle itself), this 'second generation'
MSP should be configured to carry the crew in a removable cargo-bay
module only when dictated by mission requirements. Therefore, the
proper place for humans in military Spaceplane flight operations is
always in the control room, sometimes in the cargo bay, but possibly
never in a traditional cockpit environment.
Adobe Acrobat 3.0 document (180,855 bytes)
Last updated 1999 Apr 27
NEWSLETTER
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|