Author Topic: LIVE: Launching astronauts from US soil to ISS for first time in last 9 years  (Read 2006 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 11509
  • Country: lv
Second attempt due to bad weather scrub last Wednesday:

 
The following users thanked this post: Shock, MK14, netmonk

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: au


« Last Edit: May 30, 2020, 04:50:46 pm by Shock »
Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM               >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Rigol DS1054Z, Phillips PM3065
 

Offline Lord of nothing

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1290
  • Country: at
I hope Mr. Dave is online to. He gave us interesting Information.
--> https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/downlink-freq-for-the-today-space-flight/

Does anyone here try to receive Stuff from the Aircraft?
Made in Japan, destroyed in Sulz im Wienerwald.
 

Online rdl

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2968
  • Country: us
The weather is still iffy, they just said estimated odds for launch are 50-50. Jim Bridenstein said something like, it's May in Florida - we have to try every chance we get because the next opportunity will probably be no better.

The video feed showing the inside of the Dragon looks truly futuristic.
 

Offline Lord of nothing

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1290
  • Country: at
Will Mr. Dave do a Stream today to?
Made in Japan, destroyed in Sulz im Wienerwald.
 
The following users thanked this post: netmonk

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 11509
  • Country: lv
8 minutes left. Looks it's a go.
 
The following users thanked this post: Lord of nothing

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: au
Success! 19 hours to the ISS.



Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM               >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Rigol DS1054Z, Phillips PM3065
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
That was a neat and uneventful launch, just like you'd want them to be. As posted in the TEA thread I saw what seems to be a 87V used during the door closing procedure. Looks like they were using it in the ohms range or continuity mode. I'm quite curious what they were doing, as it seems part of the regular procedure. Maybe it's used to check the door is properly sealed somehow.

 

Online dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2191
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...
^  Those guys need renamed to SpaceX Ninjas!

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: au
Purely speculation but likely a manual check to see if the locking mechanism is fully engaged. I've not seen much on the design but they exit to the ISS via the nose so that is essentially a one way door.
Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM               >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Rigol DS1054Z, Phillips PM3065
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19673
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
I'm not liking the Nintendo-look of the inside of the new space ship.  8) Where did all the buttons go?
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Purely speculation but likely a manual check to see if the locking mechanism is fully engaged. I've not seen much on the design but they exit to the ISS via the nose so that is essentially a one way door.
That's my guess too, but I'd like to know how they do it exactly. Maybe some resistance measurement to infer how well the mechanism is engaged?
 

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: au
Could possibly be also the emergency exit release now I've watched it again and them faffing with the handle. So it's probably something like an air bag system for blowing the door open or breaking the seal, either way resistance is a good way to check you have a good electrical connection or that a mechanism is fully connected without powering it up fully.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2020, 08:32:38 pm by Shock »
Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM               >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Rigol DS1054Z, Phillips PM3065
 

Offline Gyro

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5594
  • Country: gb
In the coverage on Wednesday, they said they were checking for pressure bleed - some kind of resistive pressure sensor?
Chris

"Victor Meldrew, the Crimson Avenger!"
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
In the coverage on Wednesday, they said they were checking for pressure bleed - some kind of resistive pressure sensor?
Possibly, but I'd wager those would be accessible from inside the vehicle and included in the telemetry. This looks like something which is checked once.
 
The following users thanked this post: Shock

Offline Howardlong

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4838
  • Country: gb
I'm not liking the Nintendo-look of the inside of the new space ship.  8) Where did all the buttons go?

I was also thinking the touch screens were an interesting update, I mean it's not like we've ever had a touch gesture misinterpreted!
 

Offline eti

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 156
  • Country: gb
It was superb, but I will just say this:

~ Those space suits look ridiculous - too "trendy".

~ I wish Elon-"I am gonna rule the world, save the planet and then move everyone to the moon"-Musk would butt out, and leave space to REAL ENGINEERS from NASA; having his cringey company stepping in and funding stuff just seems like one GIANT, perpetual commercial marketing stunt & money grab. His cars are SHITE, they're never going to take over, and I find the whole thing very weird, and it doesn't sit well.
 

Offline eti

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 156
  • Country: gb
I'm not liking the Nintendo-look of the inside of the new space ship.  8) Where did all the buttons go?

It's silly, but then, society is brainwashed because everyone's convinced themselves that touch screens HAVE to be on EVERYTHING, and because they're everywhere else too...  :palm: :palm:

I can hear this fictional narrator in my head, saying "But this is the science fiction we'd dreamed of YEARS ago, and we hoped one day it would happen - we've MADE it happen, it HAS to happen, and everything HAS to be touch screen because it was our dream" kinda narrative - like it's SO forced and contrived - they HAVE to have touch screen EVERYTHING "just because..." and because some kids had a sci fi fantasy 50 years ago, then those kids grew up, and forced their fantasy to become reality "JUST BECAUSE"

People are idiots, didn't you realise?  ;D

It's likely because Mr Musk is on the scene, and has forced giant iPad-esque touch panels into Teslas... WHY? Who knows! Because it's ... "futuristic" and looks "kewl" - and along with idiotic gullwing doors that serve no purpose except to SCREEEAAAAAAM "FUTURE!!!! FUTURISTIC!!!"  I bet you the cognitive load with those Tesla touch panels is AWFUL! When you're driving a car, you want a PHYSICAL CONTROL - buttons don't freeze and crash, software does!

Ain't NO WAY, ever, these kiddy toy cars are "the foooootcha!" OR taking over anything, it's all a pipe dream from sci fi nerds and Tesla cheerleaders. NO WAY.
« Last Edit: May 31, 2020, 12:23:32 am by eti »
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
It's silly, but then, society is brainwashed because everyone's convinced themselves that touch screens HAVE to be on EVERYTHING, and because they're everywhere else too...  :palm: :palm:

I can hear this fictional narrator in my head, saying "But this is the science fiction we'd dreamed of YEARS ago, and we hoped one day it would happen - we've MADE it happen, it HAS to happen, and everything HAS to be touch screen because it was our dream" kinda narrative - like it's SO forced and contrived - they HAVE to have touch screen EVERYTHING "just because..." and because some kids had a sci fi fantasy 50 years ago, then those kids grew up, and forced their fantasy to become reality "JUST BECAUSE"

People are idiots, didn't you realise?  ;D

It's likely because Mr Musk is on the scene, and has forced giant iPad-esque touch panels into Teslas... WHY? Who knows! Because it's ... "futuristic" and looks "kewl" - and along with idiotic gullwing doors that serve no purpose except to SCREEEAAAAAAM "FUTURE!!!! FUTURISTIC!!!"  I bet you the cognitive load with those Tesla touch panels is AWFUL! When you're driving a car, you want a PHYSICAL CONTROL - buttons don't freeze and crash, software does!

Ain't NO WAY, ever, these kiddy toy cars are "the foooootcha!" OR taking over anything, it's all a pipe dream from sci fi nerds and Tesla cheerleaders. NO WAY.
Are you trying to single handedly prove people are idiots?  :-DD
 

Online rdl

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2968
  • Country: us
I read somewhere that the concept for the look of the suits was done by a Hollywood costume designer.

Starliner has a much more traditional interior design than the Dragon but both are intended to be flown completely automated, so the controls are somewhat redundant anyway.
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
I read somewhere that the concept for the look of the suits was done by a Hollywood costume designer.

Starliner has a much more traditional interior design than the Dragon but both are intended to be flown completely automated, so the controls are somewhat redundant anyway.
As far as I understand the craft can be fully controlled from the capsule, even though most spacecraft have historically been flown mostly automatically. In almost all cases crew are simply meaty cargo. Either way, there's little doubt extensive testing was done to ensure functionality of any newly introduced features. Any failure due to a bad choice could effectively end SpaceX at this stage.
 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 11509
  • Country: lv
I'm not liking the Nintendo-look of the inside of the new space ship.  8) Where did all the buttons go?

It's silly, but then, society is brainwashed because everyone's convinced themselves that touch screens HAVE to be on EVERYTHING, and because they're everywhere else too...  :palm: :palm:

I can hear this fictional narrator in my head, saying "But this is the science fiction we'd dreamed of YEARS ago, and we hoped one day it would happen - we've MADE it happen, it HAS to happen, and everything HAS to be touch screen because it was our dream" kinda narrative - like it's SO forced and contrived - they HAVE to have touch screen EVERYTHING "just because..." and because some kids had a sci fi fantasy 50 years ago, then those kids grew up, and forced their fantasy to become reality "JUST BECAUSE"

People are idiots, didn't you realise?  ;D

It's likely because Mr Musk is on the scene, and has forced giant iPad-esque touch panels into Teslas... WHY? Who knows! Because it's ... "futuristic" and looks "kewl" - and along with idiotic gullwing doors that serve no purpose except to SCREEEAAAAAAM "FUTURE!!!! FUTURISTIC!!!"  I bet you the cognitive load with those Tesla touch panels is AWFUL! When you're driving a car, you want a PHYSICAL CONTROL - buttons don't freeze and crash, software does!

Ain't NO WAY, ever, these kiddy toy cars are "the foooootcha!" OR taking over anything, it's all a pipe dream from sci fi nerds and Tesla cheerleaders. NO WAY.
At least in case with astronauts gullwing doors make them way easier to enter/leave while wearing constraining spacesuits. Fashion thing but in this case quite usable feature.
Also do you think this is more practical than 3 touchscreens and a few buttons? If it does the job well, put something that takes minimum space and weight which are quite limited resources in space capsule.

« Last Edit: May 31, 2020, 01:05:22 am by wraper »
 

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: au
It has to be made before people realize if they need it or not. Certain technologies have downsides, VR has been around since the 80s and it's still a take it or leave it technology. Looks like lithium battery powered cars may not be around in the future. Touch screens are good for displaying and sorting through information but I don't think they will replace manual controls any time soon.
Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM               >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Rigol DS1054Z, Phillips PM3065
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19673
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
I read somewhere that the concept for the look of the suits was done by a Hollywood costume designer.

Starliner has a much more traditional interior design than the Dragon but both are intended to be flown completely automated, so the controls are somewhat redundant anyway.

Found an article on the controls:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/30/21275753/nasa-spacex-astronauts-fly-crew-dragon-touchscreen-controls

I'm still puzzled on how they are going to operate those touch screens in high-G (emergency) situations. Fighter jets typically have force sensor sticks for which you don't need to lift or move your arm at all.
« Last Edit: May 31, 2020, 01:10:42 am by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
At least in case with astronauts gullwing doors makes them way easier to enter wearing constraining spacesuits. Fashion thing but in this case quite usable feature.
Also you think this is more practical than 3 touchscreens and a few buttons? If it does the job well, put something that takes minimum space and weight which are quite limited resourceы in space capsule.


The Space Shuttle was a not too great compromise in many ways. It should never have existed from an engineering point of view but politics and large amounts of money pumped into facilities across the nation ensured it did anyway.
 

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: au
The Space Shuttle is 70s tech rolled out into the 80s for specific tasks. It's not like they said hey lets make this complicated as we can, back then everything needed a button, switch or knob. 135 missions according to NASA.
« Last Edit: May 31, 2020, 01:09:27 am by Shock »
Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM               >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Rigol DS1054Z, Phillips PM3065
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
The Space Shuttle is 70s tech rolled out into the 80s for specific tasks. It's not like they said hey lets make this complicated as we can, back then everything needed a button, switch or knob. 135 missions according to NASA.
It wasn't just a product of its age. It was as much a political vehicle as it was a functional one and it shows.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2011/07/06/193194/was-the-space-shuttle-a-mistake/
 

Online hendorog

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1516
  • Country: nz
I read somewhere that the concept for the look of the suits was done by a Hollywood costume designer.

Starliner has a much more traditional interior design than the Dragon but both are intended to be flown completely automated, so the controls are somewhat redundant anyway.

Found an article on the controls:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/30/21275753/nasa-spacex-astronauts-fly-crew-dragon-touchscreen-controls

I'm still puzzled on how they are going to operate those touch screens in high-G (emergency) situations. Fighter jets typically have force sensor sticks for which you don't need to lift or move your arm at all.

I was thinking the same thing. It's such an obvious problem with touchscreens that they must have mitigated it somehow.
 

Offline eti

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 156
  • Country: gb
It's silly, but then, society is brainwashed because everyone's convinced themselves that touch screens HAVE to be on EVERYTHING, and because they're everywhere else too...  :palm: :palm:

I can hear this fictional narrator in my head, saying "But this is the science fiction we'd dreamed of YEARS ago, and we hoped one day it would happen - we've MADE it happen, it HAS to happen, and everything HAS to be touch screen because it was our dream" kinda narrative - like it's SO forced and contrived - they HAVE to have touch screen EVERYTHING "just because..." and because some kids had a sci fi fantasy 50 years ago, then those kids grew up, and forced their fantasy to become reality "JUST BECAUSE"

People are idiots, didn't you realise?  ;D

It's likely because Mr Musk is on the scene, and has forced giant iPad-esque touch panels into Teslas... WHY? Who knows! Because it's ... "futuristic" and looks "kewl" - and along with idiotic gullwing doors that serve no purpose except to SCREEEAAAAAAM "FUTURE!!!! FUTURISTIC!!!"  I bet you the cognitive load with those Tesla touch panels is AWFUL! When you're driving a car, you want a PHYSICAL CONTROL - buttons don't freeze and crash, software does!

Ain't NO WAY, ever, these kiddy toy cars are "the foooootcha!" OR taking over anything, it's all a pipe dream from sci fi nerds and Tesla cheerleaders. NO WAY.
Are you trying to single handedly prove people are idiots?  :-DD

No, that would be a waste of energy and time; they do just fine proving it all on their own.
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
No, that would be a waste of energy and time; they do just fine proving it all on their own.
Too late, you already did. ;)
 

Offline ChunkyPastaSauce

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 537
  • Country: 00
Also do you think this is more practical than 3 touchscreens and a few buttons? If it does the job well, put something that takes minimum space and weight which are quite limited resources in space capsule.



Better comparison would be another capsule for ISS missions, since the functionality is about the same. The obvious one being Soyuz capsule, the control dash area happens to be about the same size and looks more realistic to condense.

Soyuz


 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 11509
  • Country: lv
 

Offline jogri

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 237
  • Country: de
I read somewhere that the concept for the look of the suits was done by a Hollywood costume designer.

Starliner has a much more traditional interior design than the Dragon but both are intended to be flown completely automated, so the controls are somewhat redundant anyway.

Found an article on the controls:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/30/21275753/nasa-spacex-astronauts-fly-crew-dragon-touchscreen-controls

I'm still puzzled on how they are going to operate those touch screens in high-G (emergency) situations. Fighter jets typically have force sensor sticks for which you don't need to lift or move your arm at all.

What exactly is an high-G manoeuvre for you? If i recall correctly the crew is suspected to ~2.5G shortly before Max-Q, and right now you have to fighter pilots sitting in the capsule, they probably won't bat an eye (okay, that's going to change with regular missions). They would probably see ~6-7 G on a inflight abort at Max-Q (someone did the math for the ground abort and calculated 3.5G for that, plus the ~2.5G during normal flight), but it would require superhuman reactions to control the capsule anyway, so it is done by the flight computer ->no interactions required.
The only situation where they could be required to use the touchscreens at high-G would be during reentry, but if the capsule is similar to the Souyz they would experience under 4G (and i am not sure if this G-number is reached while breaking or if it is the negative G they would feel when the chutes deployed).

It's not like the old Gemini/Mercury systems that reached 7G on both stages, you probably just had to pray that the rest of the rocket would function if something broke during launch.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19673
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
IIRC one of the Gemini missions got a stuck manoeuvring thruster putting the space craft into a wild spin. Current technology is likely much better but things still can go wrong.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2191
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...
Anybody know what OS is running on the Dragon touchscreens?

SpaceX uses a lot of Linux from what I've heard, but the bottom menu row does look a bit custom Winish.   :horse:

Offline Lord of nothing

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1290
  • Country: at
Well I guess the use some highly customised  system who will reset them self in the case of a OS Crash.
Made in Japan, destroyed in Sulz im Wienerwald.
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
  • Country: gb
  • Electron Fiddler, FPGA Hacker, Embedded Systems EE
If SpaceX were using Windows on those systems I'd be shocked.  It's almost certainly a custom Linux or possibly an RTOS for reliability if qualifying Linux was seen as too difficult.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19673
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Well I guess the use some highly customised  system who will reset them self in the case of a OS Crash.
I doubt they run Linux and I doubt they run an OS they wrote from scratch. More likely it is a mission critical OS; probably very similar to what Tesla is using in their cars.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2191
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...
what Tesla is using in their cars.

Pretty sure the cars run Linux.

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5325
  • Country: fr
Tesla is using a custom Linux-based OS, while a few other manufacturers use QNX.

AFAIK, SpaceX also uses a custom Linux-based OS. I don't know if there are any major differences between the two, like for instance the kernel version and set of patches.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-is-under-your-hood/
https://www.rankred.com/what-hardware-software-does-spacex-use-to-power-its-rockets/
 
The following users thanked this post: dr.diesel

Online rdl

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2968
  • Country: us
Docking is complete. Commander Chris Cassidy looks overworked getting ready to open the hatch. I bet he's looking forward to having some help onboard.
 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5325
  • Country: fr
I missed the docking sequence itself, I'll have to see that on a replay.

Amazing job anyway. :-+

 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
  • Country: gb
  • Electron Fiddler, FPGA Hacker, Embedded Systems EE
Well I guess the use some highly customised  system who will reset them self in the case of a OS Crash.
I doubt they run Linux and I doubt they run an OS they wrote from scratch. More likely it is a mission critical OS; probably very similar to what Tesla is using in their cars.

Tesla runs Linux in their cars for their touchscreen and instrument cluster (specifically, at least in the original Model S, it was a heavily stripped Ubuntu distribution.)
Not sure about the ECUs but likely an RTOS or baremetal, depends on what the ECU controls.
 

Offline Lord of nothing

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1290
  • Country: at
sry I was busy I just saw them docking what did the do now?
Are the out of the Aircraft?
Made in Japan, destroyed in Sulz im Wienerwald.
 

Offline jogri

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 237
  • Country: de
Yeah, they entered the ISS about an hour ago
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19673
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
what Tesla is using in their cars.

Pretty sure the cars run Linux.
Probably for the infotainment system but it would surprise me if they run Linux on the computers which do the auto-pilot, safety features and engine control. That was what I was aiming at (to be clear).
« Last Edit: May 31, 2020, 06:56:12 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2191
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...
Probably for the infotainment system but it would surprise me if they run Linux on the computers which do the auto-pilot, safety features and engine control. That was what I was aiming at (to be clear).

Auto Pilot is a really good question, would love to read more about that specifically. 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5325
  • Country: fr
what Tesla is using in their cars.

Pretty sure the cars run Linux.
Probably for the infotainment system but it would surprise me if they run Linux on the computers which do the auto-pilot, safety features and engine control. That was what I was aiming at (to be clear).

Yeah. But the OS question started with the question: "Anybody know what OS is running on the Dragon touchscreens?", so it was sort of obvious subsequent replies were dealing with that: the OS used for all the UI systems.

As for all the other subsystems, probably hundreds of them, sure most of them are unlikely to run on Linux. And I also doubt they all run on the same OS. There are probably baremetal subsystems, others on RTOSs, etc.
 

Offline Shock

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: au
For those who missed the docking rewind this stream.

Soldering/Rework: Pace ADS200, Pace MBT350
Multimeters: Fluke 87V, 117, 27/FM               >>> WANTED STUFF <<<
Oszilloskopen: Rigol DS1054Z, Phillips PM3065
 

Offline IDEngineer

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 925
  • Country: us
Found today that SpaceX writes their code in C++, their screens in JavaScript, the OS is Linux, and the platform is PowerPC. They do not use rad-hard components but instead shield at the modular level.
 
The following users thanked this post: hendorog

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Found today that SpaceX writes their code in C++, their screens in JavaScript, the OS is Linux, and the platform is PowerPC. They do not use rad-hard components but instead shield at the modular level.
They also use ridiculous amounts of redundancy. Almost every CPU is tripled and the set uses majority voting. There are many, many CPUs aboard for all kinds of subsystems.
 

Offline IDEngineer

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 925
  • Country: us
They also use ridiculous amounts of redundancy. Almost every CPU is tripled and the set uses majority voting.
That's very common. Even the Shuttle had such redundancy. IIRC, it had five computers, three of which were "live" at any one time, with one auto-backup and I can't remember when the fifth came into play. On the original launch in 1980(?) one shut down and a backup kicked in. Then a SECOND one shut down. I remember John Young saying his knees got a little weak at that point. But it all turned out fine... it wasn't CPU's that cost us two Shuttles and two groups of astronauts.
 

Online 0culus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2208
  • Country: us
  • Electronics, RF, and TEA Hobbyist
They also use ridiculous amounts of redundancy. Almost every CPU is tripled and the set uses majority voting.
That's very common. Even the Shuttle had such redundancy. IIRC, it had five computers, three of which were "live" at any one time, with one auto-backup and I can't remember when the fifth came into play. On the original launch in 1980(?) one shut down and a backup kicked in. Then a SECOND one shut down. I remember John Young saying his knees got a little weak at that point. But it all turned out fine... it wasn't CPU's that cost us two Shuttles and two groups of astronauts.

IIRC the final computer ran software independently developed from the primary ones.

https://history.nasa.gov/computers/Ch4-3.html
 

Offline IDEngineer

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 925
  • Country: us
IIRC the final computer ran software independently developed from the primary ones.
That's what I thought I remembered, but wasn't sure so I didn't want to say so.

I'd be tempted to specify things at the MODULAR level and have separately developed hardware too, but rad-hard stuff isn't exactly commonplace. SpaceX's approach of hardening the enclosure is the better solution IMO because it affords such flexibility.
 

Online dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2191
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...
During the Starlink launch last night the host mentioned the SpaceX Software Team will be hosing a Q&A on Reddit in the next couple weeks.  Might be a great opportunity for further info on OS/Touchscreens etc.

Offline Sal Ammoniac

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1021
  • Country: us
It's likely because Mr Musk is on the scene, and has forced giant iPad-esque touch panels into Teslas... WHY? Who knows! Because it's ... "futuristic" and looks "kewl"

Tesla owner here. I find the large touchscreen panel to be quite easy to use and it gives me much more information while driving than any dashboard on previous vehicles I've driven. It's never crashed or frozen on me even under extreme conditions (temperatures <0C and >45C).
Complexity is the number-one enemy of high-quality code.
 

Offline rrinker

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: us
 Notice also the Crew Dragon has a stick, and there are also buttons for certain functions on the arm rest, where they would be relatively easy to hit while under high G loads. And also notice that the right-hand seat has the buttons on the left side, and the left seat has the buttons on the right armrest. So either person can access the buttons on the other person's seat. This is most definitely not something that was rushed through, the details have been well thought out.
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
They also use ridiculous amounts of redundancy. Almost every CPU is tripled and the set uses majority voting.
That's very common. Even the Shuttle had such redundancy. IIRC, it had five computers, three of which were "live" at any one time, with one auto-backup and I can't remember when the fifth came into play. On the original launch in 1980(?) one shut down and a backup kicked in. Then a SECOND one shut down. I remember John Young saying his knees got a little weak at that point. But it all turned out fine... it wasn't CPU's that cost us two Shuttles and two groups of astronauts.
Those were the main computers, not all the subsystems. There are crazy amounts of powerful processors in SpaceX hardware. SpaceX also uses commercial grade computer hardware and trusts the redundancy.
 

Online Mr. Scram

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9250
  • Country: 00
  • Display aficionado
Last time I didn't have time to go into detail, but it's pretty interesting. Below is a quote without any sources, but it's consistent with what we've heard elsewhere. It's essentially COTS hardware made redundant to a somewhat ridiculous degree. Rad hardening isn't wholly necessary for short orbital hops.

Quote
SpaceX uses an Actor-Judge system to provide triple redundancy to its rockets and spacecraft. The Falcon 9 has 3 dual core x86 processors running an instance of linux on each core. The flight software is written in C/C++ and runs in the x86 environment. For each calculation/decision, the "flight string" compares the results from both cores. If there is a inconsistency, the string is bad and doesn't send any commands. If both cores return the same response, the string sends the command to the various microcontrollers on the rocket that control things like the engines and grid fins.

The microcontrollers, running on PowerPC processors, received three commands from the three flight strings. They act as a judge to choose the correct course of actions. If all three strings are in agreement the microcontroller executes the command, but if 1 of the 3 is bad, it will go with the strings that have previously been correct. The Falcon 9 can successfully complete its mission with a single flight string.

The triple redundancy gives the system radiation tolerance without the need for expensive rad hardened components. SpaceX tests all flight software on what can be called a table rocket. They lay out all the computers and flight controllers on the Falcon 9 on a table and connect them like they would be on the actual rocket. They then run a complete simulated flight on the components, monitoring performance and potential failures.

SpaceX engineers perform what they call "Cutting the strings" where they randomly shut off a flight computer mid simulation, to see how it responds.

Dragon uses a similar triple redundant system for its flight computers.

Apparently they use LabView for the ground based stuff:

Quote
The Flight Software team is about 35 people. We write all the code for Falcon 9, Grasshopper, and Dragon applications; and do the core platform work, also on those vehicles; we also write simulation software; test the flight code; write the communications and analysis software, deployed in our ground stations. We also work in Mission Control to support active missions.

The Ground Software team is about 9 people. We primarily code in LabVIEW. We develop the GUIs used in Mission and Launch control, for engineers and operators to monitor vehicle telemetry and command the rocket, spacecraft, and pad support equipment. We are pushing high bandwidth data around a highly distributed system and implementing complex user interfaces with strict requirements to ensure operators can control and evaluate spacecraft in a timely manner.

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/9243/what-computer-and-software-is-used-by-the-falcon-9
 

Online rdl

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2968
  • Country: us
Quote
They use Chromium and JavaScript for the Dragon 2 flight interface.

Wow, so Dragon 2 displays are basically using a web browser.
(if that quote is correct)
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3762
  • Country: gb
  • Electron Fiddler, FPGA Hacker, Embedded Systems EE
I wonder how much validation you'd have to go through to prove that Chromium is stable when running a JS web app for crucial flight information displays.

I've managed to crash it pretty easily doing fairly normal things.
 

Online dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2191
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...
Quote
They use Chromium and JavaScript for the Dragon 2 flight interface.

Wow, so Dragon 2 displays are basically using a web browser.
(if that quote is correct)

If optimized and debugged for that particular set of functions, reliability might not be an issue.


Online dr.diesel

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2191
  • Country: us
  • Cramming the magic smoke back in...


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf