|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 3, 2017 20:13:46 GMT
You called a weapons officer or RIO a navigator, you know the guy who fires NUCLEAR MISSILES!!! Quote me I have no idea what you are talking about, sorry. And speaking of that, modern jets used to have onboard navigators until a generation ago. the second guy in the cockpit was NOT a navigator, and modern jets means jets from now.
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 20:14:54 GMT
I can't remember who said it but I believe deltav that you don't need the smart people on a ship, you need people who can read the effing manual, smart people within a few light seconds if anything goes really wrong can maintain a fleet How the manual will sound to untrained people...
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 3, 2017 20:16:23 GMT
I can't remember who said it but I believe deltav that you don't need the smart people on a ship, you need people who can read the effing manual, smart people within a few light seconds if anything goes really wrong can maintain a fleet How the manual to sound to untrained people... I can't remember who said it but I believe deltav that you don't need the smart people on a ship, you need people who can read the effing manual, smart people within a few light seconds if anything goes really wrong can maintain a fleet You don't need smart people, you need trained people.
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 20:18:36 GMT
I can't remember who said it but I believe deltav that you don't need the smart people on a ship, you need people who can read the effing manual, smart people within a few light seconds if anything goes really wrong can maintain a fleet How the manual to sound to untrained people... Nooooo you use the manual to train. You do know Jets and the Space Shuttle do have owners manuals too right? I mean they're called flight manual and operations manual respectively but they're still somewhat owners manuals
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 20:23:06 GMT
Quote me I have no idea what you are talking about, sorry. And speaking of that, modern jets used to have onboard navigators until a generation ago. the second guy in the cockpit was NOT a navigator, and modern jets means jets from now. "The Air Force later assigned a rated Air Force Navigator qualified as a weapon/targeting systems officer (later designated as weapon systems officer or WSO) in the rear seat instead of another pilot." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-4_Phantom_II"...occasionally two navigation crew members for some flights, was responsible for the trip navigation... As sophisticated electronic and space-based GPS systems came online, the navigator's position was discontinued..." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_navigation Modern can be today, or the recent past as opposed to the distant past. So the 1950s would be "modern times" as opposed to let's say the Middle Ages. My meaning was clear from the context. Modern mod·ern ˈmädərn/Submit adjective 1.relating to the present or recent times as opposed to the remote past. "the pace of modern life" synonyms: present-day, contemporary, present, current, twenty-first-century, latter-day, modern-day, recent "modern times" noun
|
|
|
Post by deltav on Mar 3, 2017 20:26:04 GMT
Nooooo you use the manual to train. You do know Jets and the Space Shuttle do have owners manuals too right? I mean they're called flight manual and operations manual respectively but they're still somewhat owners manualsYou think someone can become a nuclear reactor tech just from reading a book? I thought we were talking about scif not fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 3, 2017 20:27:06 GMT
ok you got me there deltav but the 1950s were two generations ago, a WSO does not fly a plane and bombers have more then 2 crew anyway
|
|
|
Post by bdcarrillo on Mar 3, 2017 20:27:22 GMT
It's hard to cite modern facts on space travel. We hardly do anything except bus people to the ISS and fling probes about.
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 20:28:12 GMT
the second guy in the cockpit was NOT a navigator, and modern jets means jets from now. "The Air Force later assigned a rated Air Force Navigator qualified as a weapon/targeting systems officer (later designated as weapon systems officer or WSO) in the rear seat instead of another pilot." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_F-4_Phantom_II"...occasionally two navigation crew members for some flights, was responsible for the trip navigation... As sophisticated electronic and space-based GPS systems came online, the navigator's position was discontinued..." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_navigation Modern can be today, or the recent past as opposed to the distant past. So the 1950s would be "modern times" as opposed to let's say the Middle Ages. My meaning was clear from the context. Modern mod·ern ˈmädərn/Submit adjective 1. relating to the present or recent times as opposed to the remote past. "the pace of modern life" synonyms: present-day, contemporary, present, current, twenty-first-century, latter-day, modern-day, recent "modern times" noun Lol you're still pulling definitions out on people when you don't like their argument? The point of the second man in a contemporary two person military aircraft was that the air force didn't like having a guy attempt to fly something going 2+ mach and fiddle with the computerized systems. Back when you had to manually guide guided munitions you can't fly a plane and a bomb at the same time, so you had a second guy do it. That second guy happens to be pretty board all the time if all he does is stare at main battle tanks on a thermal imaging screen for 0.00000001% of his military career so they give him other jobs like navigation because you don't want the pilot driven suicidal from the GPS screaming RECALCULATING every five seconds. last bit was rhetorical dont quote me on itNooooo you use the manual to train. You do know Jets and the Space Shuttle do have owners manuals too right? I mean they're called flight manual and operations manual respectively but they're still somewhat owners manualsYou think someone can become a nuclear reactor tech just from reading a book? I thought we were talking about scif not fantasy. No there's still an instructor. But they have textbooks. And please edit instead of double posting.
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 3, 2017 20:28:14 GMT
Nooooo you use the manual to train. You do know Jets and the Space Shuttle do have owners manuals too right? I mean they're called flight manual and operations manual respectively but they're still somewhat owners manualsYou think someone can become a nuclear reactor tech just from reading a book? I thought we were talking about scif not fantasy. yes, you can know whats going wrong and how to fix it by reading a book, a trained tech might not have to SCARM but you might have to, still better then a meltdown
|
|
|
Post by bdcarrillo on Mar 3, 2017 20:29:06 GMT
Nooooo you use the manual to train. You do know Jets and the Space Shuttle do have owners manuals too right? I mean they're called flight manual and operations manual respectively but they're still somewhat owners manualsYou think someone can become a nuclear reactor tech just from reading a book? I thought we were talking about scif not fantasy. That's how airplanes and engines are repaired, how bombs are built and loaded. By the book. Step by step. Memorization is prohibited.
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Mar 3, 2017 20:29:50 GMT
Now have that same guy talk on a cell phone, while driving, while trying to play around with a gps. What are the chances this guy is doing any of those tasks well? Very low. Now have the guy hand the phone to his wife, and the gps to his daughter. How much better are things now? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Astrogation is infinitely more complex than driving a car. Interpreting sensor data is infinitely more complex than using a GPS. And monitoring and communicating with 100 or even thousands of ships/stations/etc is infinitely more complex than talking on a cell phone. So is this logical that one person can do it without AI? Really? Are you also going to split the driver's duties? One person to operate the gas pedal, one person to operate the brakes, one person to operate the steering wheel, one person to operate the gear shift... Oh yeah, basically all cars have automatic gear shifting now. Ain't that grand? There are many duties that can be automated. The previously-mentioned gear shift in a car is one of those. The list of duties that can be automated is constantly growing. Fully self-driving cars exist now. Executing planned orbital burns is another automatable task, easily. Planning burns may or may not be automatable (I'm sure that it is, much like GPS), but that can be done at a person's leisure. Having a person specifically dedicated to planning orbital burns will give them absolutely nothing to do 99% of the time. Thus, it is a task that should be bundled together with a bunch of other duties. Flying a plane is also much more complex than driving a car. There is sensor data to make sense of: altitude, bearing, airspeed, fuel amount, etc.; there are many more controls available, and there is communication with ground control. That's why you need a lot more preparation for flying than for driving. But you do not need more people; a commercial plane with human lives in its hands will still only have one pilot and one copilot, and it does fine if one of the two is unable to function (that is precisely the purpose of having two). A plane will spend the vast majority of its time on autopilot, in fact. Don't tell me that spaceships will not have autopilot, because it is obvious that they will; computers are far more reliable than people at repetitive tasks. "On a 2.5 hour domestic flight, autopilots and flight-management systems typically do about 95 percent of the work. For maximum efficiency, autopilots are typically engaged after takeoff, at about one or two thousand feet, and pilots don’t take over again until the plane is lined up on final approach, a few thousand feet above the airport." “We are quite confident that technologically, the toolkit is filled. With respect to a commercial airplane, there is no doubt in our minds that we can solve the problem of autonomous flight.” www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/03/has-the-self-flying-plane-arrived/472005/
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Mar 3, 2017 20:31:18 GMT
It's hard to cite modern facts on space travel. We hardly do anything except bus people to the ISS and fling probes about. I mean, if you believe in it, we put people on the moon without smart computers, the space shuttle had 20 pounds of computer on board imagine what modern computers could do
|
|
|
Post by David367th on Mar 3, 2017 20:32:03 GMT
Memorization is prohibited. You clearly haven't taken any secondary education. Memorization is all we're allowed.
|
|
|
Post by vegetal on Mar 3, 2017 20:32:30 GMT
+1 on the training. Any kind of "field" repair would be done remotely via drone, no need to make a dangerous EVA with a crew member to fix a leaking radiator or something.
Also, most importantly, you are assuming that nuclear-tech technicians are rare. Man, we are talking about a civilization capable of sustaining hundreds of thousands of people on the far reaches of the solar system. You BET that reactor technicians are widespread, average joes. The same for other "high-level" tech. There's nothing outlandish in operating a reactor or a ship's plumbing, if you had appropriate training.
There's also the matter of the time scales we are dealing with. Some engagements take several days or even months. That alleviates the workload a lot.
|
|