DART auto-rendezvous -- any ISS application?

The DART automated rendezvous mission
(possibly tomorrow) is a very exciting new
technology.

But as far as I can tell, NASA's manned
space program wants nothing to do with
it. Are there any plans -- real plans, not
idle hand-waving -- for NASA to
develop its own automated docking
system to supply the ISS? Or will
that capability be 'out-sourced' to
contractors, if at all?

Jim O

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...

The DART automated rendezvous mission
(possibly tomorrow) is a very exciting new
technology.

But as far as I can tell, NASA's manned
space program wants nothing to do with
it.

Why doesn't the manned space program want anything to do with it? Ego trip
by the astronauts who can say, as with STS landing approaches, that they are
better than automated systems, even though the Russians/Soviets have been
using automated rendezvous and docking for 30+ years?

--
Alan Erskine
We can get people to the Moon in five years,
not the fifteen GWB proposes.
Give NASA a real challenge

"Alan Erskine" wrote in message
...
Why doesn't the manned space program want anything to do with it? Ego
trip
by the astronauts who can say, as with STS landing approaches, that they
are
better than automated systems, even though the Russians/Soviets have been
using automated rendezvous and docking for 30+ years?

Same reason that you'll likely never see a shuttle "autoland" itself. ;-)

It would be interesting to know how many times the crews have to take manual
control of docking a Soyuz or Progress. Rumor (in these groups) has it that
they get paid a bonus if they have to perform a manual docking.

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

Same reason that you'll likely never see a shuttle "autoland" itself. ;-)


OOOH dont be so sure....

NASA will automate the shuttle before just retiring it.

Unmanned looses the astronauts a job but keeps the rest of the standing army
employeed...
..
..
End the dangerous wasteful shuttle now before it kills any more astronauts....

Traditionally the ISS program has been wary of automated rendevous. The
Soyuz and progress are accepted because there have been no ISS accidents.
The first ATV flight is a demo to the RS and the HTV does not dock with the
station (it's grappled). In addition being manned there is an abundance of
people to perform the necessary manouevres. A US automated docking system
would be an added expense and a cultural/political upheaval with little
gain.
Now that I think about it though, there was talk about unmanned cargo
vehicles on top of Deltas in SLI, but I don't recall the terminal guidance.
Plus the program was canned/evolved
Having said that I have seen presentations regarding automated docking
presentations in the public domain for the Moon/Mars stuff. Primarily at the
staging areas and LaGrange points.

I'm a little curious why the distinction between a NASA developed docking
system and a 'out-sourced' system. The ISS is 'out-sourced', does this mean
it's not NASA developed?

"Jim Oberg" wrote in message
...

The DART automated rendezvous mission
(possibly tomorrow) is a very exciting new
technology.

But as far as I can tell, NASA's manned
space program wants nothing to do with
it. Are there any plans -- real plans, not
idle hand-waving -- for NASA to
develop its own automated docking
system to supply the ISS? Or will
that capability be 'out-sourced' to
contractors, if at all?

Jim O

"sh'maal" wrote:

Traditionally the ISS program has been wary of automated rendevous. The
Soyuz and progress are accepted because there have been no ISS accidents.

More correctly automated docking was accepted because the accidents
and problems that the Russians had experienced were covered up with
the active cooperation of NASA.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Id like to think of it more as the 'we don't like, but we have no choice and
nothing's happened so it must be safe' philosophy.
You're observation was a contributing factor.

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"sh'maal" wrote:

Traditionally the ISS program has been wary of automated rendevous. The
Soyuz and progress are accepted because there have been no ISS accidents.

More correctly automated docking was accepted because the accidents
and problems that the Russians had experienced were covered up with
the active cooperation of NASA.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"sh'maal" wrote:

Traditionally the ISS program has been wary of automated rendevous. The
Soyuz and progress are accepted because there have been no ISS accidents.

More correctly automated docking was accepted because the accidents
and problems that the Russians had experienced were covered up with
the active cooperation of NASA.

Actually, the Progress hitting Mir did so because the Russians were
conducting a test of a *manual* control system. They were planning on
discontinuing using the automated system due to cost concerns. In a
nutshell, even with the automated system, you need a manual backup. So to
save cost, why not always use the automated system?

On top of that, they performed the attempted manual docking in a very bad
way. You can look up the details if you want, but the automated system
simply wasn't the problem.

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

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
In a
nutshell, even with the automated system, you need a manual backup. So to
save cost, why not always use the automated system?

Clearly I meant to say "why not always use the manual system?".

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