Wait, do normal printers need gravity to work? If I were to find one and flip it upside-down, would it continue functioning normally?
Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
11–20 of 80 posts
Re: Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was pretty stuck by that, too, and it made me wonder if maybe I don't understand or underestimate the value of paper transmission. I suppose if radio communication is good but flaky, or for persistence of instruction, like procedures, then it would be good for them to be able to print. But at such a cost!
I guess with modern googles one would just pack an "ipad" equivalent tablet. If one worries about accidents and freak space particles disabling it give them 3. If one still worries one can develop a "space rated" tablet. But probably at those radiation levels one should also start worrying about the crew's health. But of course that is projecting our current capabilities back in time. I looked it up and the "Osborne…
Right it clearly was the best choice for the time the shuttle was developed but just shows how removed from the 1960s and 70s we are today.
My earlier point about payload weight was probably the wrong focus. Mission success and maximizing what the crew can accomplish in orbit are greatly facilitated by one way text from ground control, and doubtlessly paid for the 60 pounds
Astronauts were already used to Telex weather reports as pilots so existing UX. And the crew specialists all had PhDs and thus were experts at reading typed paper. So no training on yet another shuttle subsystem.
The teletype could be effectively shared between crew - just tear off the paper. A portable computer could only be used by one or two people, AND would need to be radiation hardened and aerospace qualified.
Re: Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
#13X (twitter) is useless for threads unless you're logged in. How can I read this thread?
Yeah somebody should mirror it. In general I dont understand why people post things like this on X. Its a horrible platform.
For some; for technically dumb people like me, it's the only platform that's easy to use.
Re: Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
#14I am fascinated they used 60 pounds and a large amount of space for this teleprinter. At 30K per pound of payload that is $1.8 million per flight. Really shows how important reliable printed updates were considered. And all the flaws of the printer that were managed around - turning it off to save power and prevent it overheating with specific tones.
The thing that immediately jumped into my head is coded military use. Especially since they mention the printer being based on a military design.
It's still rather obscure, if not still secret, just to what extent we were actually using the shuttles in their intended military capacity.
But when designed, the military use was expected to be much much higher than what panned out.
This printer would be high on the list of the weight budget, to the point that I wonder if it wasn't critical protocol to some still secret military use, similar to the teletype nuke codes / orders on a sub.
Running over the audio system also makes me curious if it was strictly unencrypted comms, or if it could plug in to a decrypted steam. Were they clear broadcasting coded messages, or encrypted-broadcast clear messages (or both or neither).
IIRC, NASA used to have at least some 'private' comms with astronauts that were in the clear, but they basically just didn't rebroadcast to the public or publicize those currently used frequencies, and just sort of trusted those in the know not to listen in.
Re: Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
#15Wait, do normal printers need gravity to work? If I were to find one and flip it upside-down, would it continue functioning normally?
Inkjets need a gas cartridge.
Re: Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
#16Wait, do normal printers need gravity to work? If I were to find one and flip it upside-down, would it continue functioning normally?
Not exactly a primary source but according to this thread: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=10617.0
"Toner is held to the paper in a laser printer by electrostatic attraction (opposite charges attract), not gravity. Along those same lines, in an inkjet printer ink droplets are fired at the paper, not just dropped, so once again I doubt gravity is an issue."
Re: Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
#17I am fascinated they used 60 pounds and a large amount of space for this teleprinter. At 30K per pound of payload that is $1.8 million per flight. Really shows how important reliable printed updates were considered. And all the flaws of the printer that were managed around - turning it off to save power and prevent it overheating with specific tones.
The thing that immediately jumped into my head is coded military use. Especially since they mention the printer being based on a military design. It's still rather obscure, if not still secret, just to what extent we were actually using the shuttles in their intended military capacity. But when designed, the military use was expected to be much much higher than what panned out. This printer would be high on the list…
[flagged]
Re: Space Shuttle teleprinter reverse engineering
#18I am fascinated they used 60 pounds and a large amount of space for this teleprinter. At 30K per pound of payload that is $1.8 million per flight. Really shows how important reliable printed updates were considered. And all the flaws of the printer that were managed around - turning it off to save power and prevent it overheating with specific tones.
Here's my guess. Government bureaucracy is probably very high for anything space related. So "based on the military's AN/UGC-74" could have helped get it through approvals. It would have ticked a lot of boxes for ruggedized parts, use in harsh environments, and so on.