The Real Reason for Sending Astronauts into Space

Puneet writes "An article on New York Times discussing the need for astronauts for carrying out experiments in space. Too many of the planned experiments depend on crew operations when they could more effectively be done without them. In many cases, the crew is needed only to deploy an autonomous experiment."

Comments

Re:But

[knodi]

I don't mean to contradict you; I agree that the space shuttle is old, and that technology has marched an awful long distance since then. But my Real-time computing prof was one of the people who helped design the computer systems on the modern space shuttle. They're old 386s (5 of them), but they really are the best tool for the job.
1.) Since their circuits were larger, they were less vulnerable to space radiation.
2.) They were plenty fast enough for what was needed.
3.) Their faults and strengths and weaknesses are COMPLETELY known. NASA won't send up anything that they think they don't know everything about.

Whenever one of the computers makes a decision about something, two others also make the same decision. A fourth computer treats each of the three as a vote, and the majority rules. A fifth acts as a backup for the fourth. How's that for a stable system?

Yes, the space shuttle is old. But it's VERY well designed, and its flaws are poor fuel economy and it's weak material structure. Modern computers and all our other whiz-bang gadgetry aren't likely to be near as useful as a stronger or lighter construction material, or a better launch mechanism.