Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV!roberts
From: roberts@CMR.NCSL.NIST.GOV (John Roberts)
Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: New Shuttle computers
Message-ID: <9103112033.AA09943@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov>
Date: 11 Mar 91 20:33:17 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology
	formerly National Bureau of Standards
Lines: 34


>From: dil@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Perry G Ramsey)
>Newsgroups: sci.space.shuttle
>Subject: Re: New (!?!?!?!) Shuttle Computers

>To be a little more fair, they have a very complex vehicle. It is
>important to make sure that changes don't affect the system in unexpected
>ways, so it takes a lot of integration engineering and testing to do that. 

Good point.

>Besides the fact that NASA is supposed to be pushing technology if their 
>existence is to have any value to the taxpayers.  The state of the Shuttle GPC
>indicates pretty clearly that the current
>NASA (at least the manned space side) is scared to death of anything new. 
>That, though, is the ultimate state of any hidebound bureaucracy:  it's
>better not to make a mistake than not to accomplish anything.

That's what Congress consistently tells them with respect to manned
spaceflight, so it's hard to blame them for taking that attitude.

NASA does push computer technology on the ground, and (I believe) in
flight control systems for experimental aircraft such as the X-29.
But the Shuttle is not primarily intended as a testbed for flight control
systems - it does push technology in several areas (such as the SSME design),
but is also supposed to serve as an operational system. In this context,
I think they can perhaps be forgiven for not trying to use the very latest 
technology in *every* aspect of the Shuttle.
 
>Perry G. Ramsey           Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
>dil@mace.cc.purdue.edu    ***  IMAGINE YOUR LOGO HERE  ******

John Roberts
roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov