Where will the pilot/crews come from?

"Jeff Findley" :

"Greg D. Moore (Strider)" wrote in message
...
I think the early riders of launch craft aren't going to be stopped to
easily by a somewhat rough ride.

I don't think that this is limited to "early riders". People who really
want to go into space (e.g. NASA astronauts) will put up with quite a bit
of
discomfort and inconvienence to get a ride into space. Why else would
people endure years of training and waiting for the chance of a shuttle
flight? Given the glut of astronauts NASA currently has, it's likely that
many of the newest astronauts may not even get to fly on the shuttle before
the program is shut down, yet they stick with the program and cling to the
hope that they'll eventually get a flight on something.

Sticking it out with NASA atleast I think lets you build up a good resume to
apply as a pilot/crew if private space flight takes off in the next decade or
two.

Who do you think will be the best source of pilots/crew if private space
flight takes off and rapidly expands?

Earl Colby Pottinger

--
I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos,
SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to
the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp

"Earl Colby Pottinger" wrote in message
...

Sticking it out with NASA atleast I think lets you build up a good resume
to
apply as a pilot/crew if private space flight takes off in the next decade
or
two.

Who do you think will be the best source of pilots/crew if private space
flight takes off and rapidly expands?

Not necessarily unflown NASA astronauts. Since the systems and procedures
on any private vehicle will be vastly different than the shuttle, their
training doesn't directly apply. Certainly some of the astronauts who were
training to be shuttle pilots might be good to hire, but I'd skip any
astronaut without that sort of training (especially Mission Specialists with
no piloting skills).

I'd look to hire someone with a lot of test pilot experience. I'm sure
there are still a few NASA astronauts who've had test pilot experience, but
once they join NASA, they generally stop flying high performance
experimental aircraft (except for the shuttle, of course). You might have
better luck finding real test pilots at the first A in NASA instead of the
second.

The other places to look would be the military and the test pilots for the
big aerospace companies.

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

Well... In the last S.T.S. flight, six out of seven crewmembers are
members of the military.

I think that the thing that many people tend to forget is that N.A.S.A.
is a military organization under a civilian cover.


Then there's also another fact that people seems to forget, that
despite the civilian look of space travel now, the nature is still
military and top secret.

Sure that Tito and Shuttleworth go up there, but it's no doubt that
they remain silent on what ever they aren't supposed to say. Besides,
they managed to go up there not because of their money, but because due
to politics.



Anyway. Most if not all aspects of space travel will be automated. For
example, the Orbiter of the S.T.S. basically can land by itself if they
want it that way (Buran sure did land by itself). So it's doubtful that
you would need any pilots at all.

What you need is just a good operator (women made good operators), plus
also a good troubleshooter (men made good troubleshooters).

Airliner pilots of modern airliners these days for example aren't
really pilots, at least based on past definition of pilot, airliner
pilots of modern airliners these days are more like system operators
and system administrators.

What one probably look for is basically would be on how good you do in
a video game, how good you are at finding clever imaginative ways of
doing things, and of course on how controllable you are.

For that kind of stuff, the military seems to have enough this kind of
human resources.



As for working for N.A.S.A. gives one a good point in the resume.

Yes, it is. Unless 'they' decided to muck up N.A.S.A.'s reputation
really good that one will try almost anything to hide one once worked
for N.A.S.A.

As for their N.A.S.A. training. Well... Training to work in a space
enviroment might be more of a plus than training to work on the space
hardware itself.

On 15 Feb 2005 20:43:19 -0800, in a place far, far away,
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

Well... In the last S.T.S. flight, six out of seven crewmembers are
members of the military.

I think that the thing that many people tend to forget is that N.A.S.A.
is a military organization under a civilian cover.

How can people "forget" something that is not now, and never was,
true?

"Jeff Findley" :

"Earl Colby Pottinger" wrote in message
...

Sticking it out with NASA atleast I think lets you build up a good resume
to apply as a pilot/crew if private space flight takes off in the next
decade or two.

Who do you think will be the best source of pilots/crew if private space
flight takes off and rapidly expands?

Not necessarily unflown NASA astronauts. Since the systems and procedures
on any private vehicle will be vastly different than the shuttle, their
training doesn't directly apply. Certainly some of the astronauts who were
training to be shuttle pilots might be good to hire, but I'd skip any
astronaut without that sort of training (especially Mission Specialists
with
no piloting skills).

I'd look to hire someone with a lot of test pilot experience. I'm sure
there are still a few NASA astronauts who've had test pilot experience, but
once they join NASA, they generally stop flying high performance
experimental aircraft (except for the shuttle, of course). You might have
better luck finding real test pilots at the first A in NASA instead of the
second.

The other places to look would be the military and the test pilots for the
big aerospace companies.

But are there many test pilots now? In the old days the only way to see if
it would fly was to have someone take it up. Today alot of computer
simulation replaces a high percentage of what a test pilot does. I get the
impression that today there are fewer active test pilots than 50 years ago.

Earl Colby Pottinger

--
I make public email sent to me! Hydrogen Peroxide Rockets, OpenBeos,
SerialTransfer 3.0, RAMDISK, BoatBuilding, DIY TabletPC. What happened to
the time? http://webhome.idirect.com/~earlcp

In article ,
Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:
The other places to look would be the military and the test pilots for the
big aerospace companies.

But are there many test pilots now? In the old days the only way to see if
it would fly was to have someone take it up. Today alot of computer
simulation replaces a high percentage of what a test pilot does.

Not really. The test pilot still has to establish whether the pretty
computer pictures have any relation to reality. (No, that is not taken
for granted.) Flight testing still yields surprises, as witness some of
the difficulties Rutan had with SS1.

I get the
impression that today there are fewer active test pilots than 50 years ago.

Probably, but that has much more to do with there being fewer aircraft
development programs active now.
--
"Think outside the box -- the box isn't our friend." | Henry Spencer
-- George Herbert |

"Earl Colby Pottinger" wrote in message
news
But are there many test pilots now? In the old days the only way to see
if
it would fly was to have someone take it up. Today alot of computer
simulation replaces a high percentage of what a test pilot does. I get
the
impression that today there are fewer active test pilots than 50 years
ago.

This is very true. However, there are still many people who fly high
performance jet aircraft(i.e. military fighter pilots). They would have
many of the qualities you'd be looking for in a spacecraft pilot.

Take a Navy fighter pilot who was flying off the deck of an aircraft carrier
(say within the last year) and compare them to an unflown NASA Mission
Specialist with zero piloting experience, but at least one PHD in the
engineering, science, or medical fields. Which would you trust at the
controls of your brand new private spacecraft?

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

wrote:
: Well... In the last S.T.S. flight, six out of seven crewmembers are
: members of the military.

: I think that the thing that many people tend to forget is that N.A.S.A.
: is a military organization under a civilian cover.

Does that include the earth scientists studying global climate change and
the space scientists studing the planets? Or, are you so naive to think
that NASA is only a manned space program?

: Then there's also another fact that people seems to forget, that
: despite the civilian look of space travel now, the nature is still
: military and top secret.

The DOD has that plus the budget. NASA's budget is 1/26th that of the
DOD. You should be critical of the DOD and leave NASA out of it. What next
NOAA? NSF? EPA?

: Sure that Tito and Shuttleworth go up there, but it's no doubt that
: they remain silent on what ever they aren't supposed to say. Besides,
: they managed to go up there not because of their money, but because due
: to politics.

Tito went up in a Russian craft. Explain the politics of that.

: Anyway. Most if not all aspects of space travel will be automated. For
: example, the Orbiter of the S.T.S. basically can land by itself if they
: want it that way (Buran sure did land by itself). So it's doubtful that
: you would need any pilots at all.

But why use such a large craft fit for humans and then use remote control?
Your brainstorming here with too little information.

: What you need is just a good operator (women made good operators), plus
: also a good troubleshooter (men made good troubleshooters).

: Airliner pilots of modern airliners these days for example aren't
: really pilots, at least based on past definition of pilot, airliner
: pilots of modern airliners these days are more like system operators
: and system administrators.

: What one probably look for is basically would be on how good you do in
: a video game, how good you are at finding clever imaginative ways of
: doing things, and of course on how controllable you are.

Since you're out of control, that leaves you off the list!

: For that kind of stuff, the military seems to have enough this kind of
: human resources.

Back to the military again?

: As for working for N.A.S.A. gives one a good point in the resume.

There are many other points to consider.

: Yes, it is. Unless 'they' decided to muck up N.A.S.A.'s reputation
: really good that one will try almost anything to hide one once worked
: for N.A.S.A.

Never heard that! Did you know that NASA was ranked #1 of all agencies
polled as the best place to work in the federal government?

: As for their N.A.S.A. training. Well... Training to work in a space
: enviroment might be more of a plus than training to work on the space
: hardware itself.

You're clueless to the fact that NASA does more than manned spaceflight.
You might want to look at some of the unmanned space programs at GSFC and
JPL.

Eric

Earl Colby Pottinger writes:

"Jeff Findley" :

The other places to look would be the military and the test pilots for the
big aerospace companies.

But are there many test pilots now? In the old days the only way to see if
it would fly was to have someone take it up. Today alot of computer
simulation replaces a high percentage of what a test pilot does. I get the
impression that today there are fewer active test pilots than 50 years ago.

The pictures on the wall at the Edwards test pilot school don't seem to be
getting any smaller. And there's another test pilot school just down the
road, that wasn't there fifty years ago.

Also, the job of a test pilot is *not*, "to see if it would fly". By the
time a test pilot gets hold of it, there should be very little doubt on
that point. The job of the test pilot, or the flight test engineer, is
to determine exactly *how* it flies, and nobody who can be trusted with
putting an aircraft into operational service, trusts what a computer
simulation tells him in that regard.


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *

Earl Colby Pottinger wrote:

:But are there many test pilots now? In the old days the only way to see if
:it would fly was to have someone take it up. Today alot of computer
:simulation replaces a high percentage of what a test pilot does. I get the
:impression that today there are fewer active test pilots than 50 years ago.

The Navy graduates two classes from USNTPS a year. I'm assuming that
the Air Force rate is probably similar.

I would not think that this number of graduating pilots would leave a
shortage.

--
"This is a war of the unknown warriors; but let all strive
without failing in faith or in duty...."

-- Winston Churchill