Imagine designing flight controls for a spaceship

cowman

Final Approach
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
5,281
Location
Danger Zone
Display Name

Display name:
Cowman
Yeah this, like my defining speed in space thread is me thinking about my fictional story. I got to writing a bit where a character in training gets to fly the ship for the first time and I realized I don't know how the ship is piloted and that just won't do.

So here's my general though- when flying planet to planet over long distances you probably would be punching in numbers. Basically a flight director/autopilot type system.

But then you have situations like docking or ship to ship combat where you might need manual control. This gets more interesting. A spaceship, unlike an airplane can move(relative to the ship) straight up or down, left/right. You could also alter your pitch/roll/yaw without changing direction which brings up the whole issue of inertia. Clearly any sort of control would have to be fly by wire with a computer interpreting your wishes and applying thrust(or whatever the ship uses) to accomplish whatever you appear to be trying to do.

So initially I'm thinking OK, we have 2 joysticks and foot pedals. The left side is pitch/roll and the pedals are yaw. Then your right side is straight up/down left/right movement. Then I thought OK that makes sense if I'm trying to move slowly around and dock at a space station or something like that but now how do I go forward/backward? Some kind of thumb switches/throttle control setup? Well that could work, but now if we're flying around at speed and dodging projectiles do we assume aircraft like thrust pushing forward and mostly fly with an aircraft-like pitch/roll/yaw arrangement? Seems like the controls would need multiple operation modes.

Or, I had an abstract thought. What if you had a virtual reality interface and there was a little model spaceship in front of you... kind of like a model airplane you could grab and physically move around however you wanted it to move. The VR could simulate the difficulty in say changing direction due to inertia by making you pull harder to move the model.

I think I figured out why Star Trek always just had Sulu punching random buttons. This stuff is complicated.
 
The Shuttle had, I believe, four sets of Rotational/Translational Hand Controllers: Pilot, Commander, and two more sets for control of the Remote Manipulator System (The Arm). The units were identical in case of an on-orbit failure, they could be switched around to restore capability. In the Pilot and Commander seats, they controlled attitude, but on the aft station they controlled the Arm. *What* the Arm did in response to Controller action depended on what mode was selected for the RMS, but it did keep the rotation/translation functions. The mode just established what it would rotate or translate in reference *to*.

When I was on Boeing's proposal team for the Space Station in the '80s, I led the development of an engineering simulator for Station assembly that used the Arm on the Shuttle. I researched the RHC/THC. Real units were too expensive for us (I believe they were a half-million each) so we used commercial 3-axis joysticks. The yaw function used small black spring-loaded dials atop the main joystick. You can see the joysticks in use here:
sim_op1.jpg
The big monitor represented the view out the aft windows of the Shuttle aft deck; the Shuttle also had TV cameras through the cargo bay which the operator could select to display on the separate monitor.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Remember that, in space, nothing is going to want to remain where you put it, and unless secured, will fly around the cabin when you maneuver (unless you have some sort of inertial stabilizer/artificial gravity). This goes for feet on "rudder" pedals as well. One's hands will grasp joysticks without an issue, but some sort of clamp/attachment/magnets will be necessary if you want your feet to remain on the pedals while maneuvering unless the "pilot" continually holds their legs in place (uncomfortable, and tiring).

Ron Wanttaja
 
iu
 
The Shuttle had, I believe, four sets of Rotational/Translational Hand Controllers: Pilot, Commander, and two more sets for control of the Remote Manipulator System (The Arm). The units were identical in case of an on-orbit failure, they could be switched around to restore capability. In the Pilot and Commander seats, they controlled attitude, but on the aft station they controlled the Arm. *What* the Arm did in response to Controller action depended on what mode was selected for the RMS, but it did keep the rotation/translation functions. The mode just established what it would rotate or translate in reference *to*.

When I was on Boeing's proposal team for the Space Station in the '80s, I led the development of an engineering simulator for Station assembly that used the Arm on the Shuttle. I researched the RHC/THC. Real units were too expensive for us (I believe they were a half-million each) so we used commercial 3-axis joysticks. The yaw function used small black spring-loaded dials atop the main joystick. You can see the joysticks in use here:
View attachment 83362
The big monitor represented the view out the aft windows of the Shuttle aft deck; the Shuttle also had TV cameras through the cargo bay which the operator could select to display on the separate monitor.

Ron Wanttaja

Ron... is that back when you had hair!
 
I remember a roaming gang of NASA white lab coat types showed up at my aeronautics class in 1978.

They had that hand controller and a cool eye movement tracking system that mounted on a visor. In 1978!

On April 14, 1981, I drove all night to get to the dry lake bed to watch the first ever Space Shuttle landing from space. Only three years had passed from testing to landing!
 
Ron... is that back when you had hair!
You must have me confused with someone whose hair genes give up after 30 years. Here's a shot from last year...shorter, but still there. Not red anymore, but I don't mind if the leaves change color as long as they stay on the tree. :)
selfie batik2.jpg
Ron Wanttaja
 
Last edited:
A spaceship, unlike an airplane can move(relative to the ship) straight up or down, left/right. You could also alter your pitch/roll/yaw without changing direction which brings up the whole issue of inertia. Clearly any sort of control would have to be fly by wire with a computer interpreting your wishes and applying thrust(or whatever the ship uses) to accomplish whatever you appear to be trying to do.

There's a lot to unpack here, depending how accurate you want to be for your reader. First, there is rendezvous and docking, which are related but different. Your statement that your spaceship can go up down left right is not accurate unless it is very close to its target. Even then it is still technically inaccurate, but the math works out that for all practical purposes you can think of it that way when very close.

For rendezvous, I agree it takes a computer to calculate and execute the burn. But when it comes to docking, the astronaut is using the controls above to fire thruster pulses to close the gap with the target. The analogy I would make to flying is that when you begin your descent you adjust your controls for a desired vertical rate. But when you flare for landing, you're not thinking 'ok, now I am adjusting for .5 feet per second descent rate,' you're just adjusting controls to give you the sight picture you know makes a squeaker landing.

All that being said, autonomous rendezvous and docking is reality now, so your idea of your crew just pointing to a picture on a screen and effectively hitting the 'direct to' button works also. There's really no need for the direct man in the loop any more.
 
Last edited:
"East takes you out, out takes you west, west takes you in, in takes you east; north and south bring you back" Larry Niven, Integral Trees
 
Back
Top