Wormhole transit commands between the Captain and Engineer

I've always wondered what the reason was for the Captain of a ship making a transit to have to do the verbal back and forth with her engineer, and why the Captain is watching the readouts on how much power the forward sail is drawing etc. Would it make more sense to have this more automated? Or completely automated and run by computer command? Or to have the engineer watching readouts as opposed to the captain?

I've wondered about this since I read OBS, when Honor took Fearless through the junction to Basilisk. And I was reminded of this question when Ginger Lewis takes the Charles Ward through the junction to Lynx in SoV. I wasn't a registered user when I read OBS, but, now that I am....

It just seems like the possibility of human error, which is often mentioned by RFC about the margin of error that a captain has when calling out the appropriate command, bc no captain wanted to look sloppy when transitioning to sail (or words to that effect)

So, IS there a good reason for this, or is it just artistic license?

RFC is a naval historian.
Has always puzzled me in OTL as to how the Captain has to request the Chief Engineer to increase speed. Modern cruise ships command 200kt with a joystick.

I always assumed it was part of the drama of the setting, honestly. Because yes, modern vessels are rather automated in regards to power and steering.

I half expected there to be an info dump at some point about this, actually. Something to the effect of: Due to the twisting gravitational currents surrounding a wormhole, it was impossible for the computer to make the transitions for us. The computers could come close but not exactly enough, which is what made the transiting of a wormhole one of skill and art, not something of coldly precise mathematics.

Another reason which occurred to me was the evil answer of 'tradition'. For a long time when closing AC breakers, designers fought against having machines perform the task because of the chance of the breakers closing out of phase and blowing something up. Despite the fact that there were devices to make this possible without risk, designers stuck to how things had always been done for a long while.

Lastly, on the engineering front when asking for more power, much like in Star Trek, I figured that what is really happening is that the chief engineer is rerouting power from less essential things. Making decisions about grav plates, life support, lighting, etc etc being left on turned off in order to be able to supply absolutely every watt of power available to the sidewalls or nodes after battle damages have reduced their capacity. Plus, of course, the drama of it.

Fireflair wrote:I always assumed it was part of the drama of the setting, honestly. Because yes, modern vessels are rather automated in regards to power and steering.

I half expected there to be an info dump at some point about this, actually. Something to the effect of: Due to the twisting gravitational currents surrounding a wormhole, it was impossible for the computer to make the transitions for us. The computers could come close but not exactly enough, which is what made the transiting of a wormhole one of skill and art, not something of coldly precise mathematics.

Another reason which occurred to me was the evil answer of 'tradition'. For a long time when closing AC breakers, designers fought against having machines perform the task because of the chance of the breakers closing out of phase and blowing something up. Despite the fact that there were devices to make this possible without risk, designers stuck to how things had always been done for a long while.

Lastly, on the engineering front when asking for more power, much like in Star Trek, I figured that what is really happening is that the chief engineer is rerouting power from less essential things. Making decisions about grav plates, life support, lighting, etc etc being left on turned off in order to be able to supply absolutely every watt of power available to the sidewalls or nodes after battle damages have reduced their capacity. Plus, of course, the drama of it.

It's also possible that warship designers want a 'man in the loop' because if something goes wrong bringing up the sails the captain only has seconds to make an emergency evasion before hitting the wormhole and the ship being torn apart.

Forcing the captain and engineer to be hands on for the transition means they should notice any issues and react more quickly than if the thousandth routine computer controlled transition was suddenly interrupted by alarms indicating they had to take over and save the ship. (Warship designers probably not wanting the ship's computers to have the ability to autonomously make emergency maneuvers in such a constricted and dangerous spot)


But even if that's a reason, I suspect the main reason is RFC wanted the flavor of an age of sail captain (or sailing master) using their eyes and calling out orders to the crew on the rigging and sails - to fit in with the original Napoleonic warfare inspiration for the Honorverse.

Mycall4me wrote:I've always wondered what the reason was for the Captain of a ship making a transit to have to do the verbal back and forth with her engineer, and why the Captain is watching the readouts on how much power the forward sail is drawing etc. Would it make more sense to have this more automated? Or completely automated and run by computer command? Or to have the engineer watching readouts as opposed to the captain?

I've wondered about this since I read OBS, when Honor took Fearless through the junction to Basilisk. And I was reminded of this question when Ginger Lewis takes the Charles Ward through the junction to Lynx in SoV. I wasn't a registered user when I read OBS, but, now that I am....

It just seems like the possibility of human error, which is often mentioned by RFC about the margin of error that a captain has when calling out the appropriate command, bc no captain wanted to look sloppy when transitioning to sail (or words to that effect)

So, IS there a good reason for this, or is it just artistic license?

In-universe, I'd guess that it is automated, but crews often do some automated tasks manually for training purposes, the same way that modern airliners can land themselves, but pilots often do so manually when the conditions are good so they don't lose practice.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

Mycall4me wrote:I've always wondered what the reason was for the Captain of a ship making a transit to have to do the verbal back and forth with her engineer, and why the Captain is watching the readouts on how much power the forward sail is drawing etc. Would it make more sense to have this more automated? Or completely automated and run by computer command? Or to have the engineer watching readouts as opposed to the captain?

I've wondered about this since I read OBS, when Honor took Fearless through the junction to Basilisk. And I was reminded of this question when Ginger Lewis takes the Charles Ward through the junction to Lynx in SoV. I wasn't a registered user when I read OBS, but, now that I am....

It just seems like the possibility of human error, which is often mentioned by RFC about the margin of error that a captain has when calling out the appropriate command, bc no captain wanted to look sloppy when transitioning to sail (or words to that effect)

So, IS there a good reason for this, or is it just artistic license?

In-universe, I'd guess that it is automated, but crews often do some automated tasks manually for training purposes, the same way that modern airliners can land themselves, but pilots often do so manually when the conditions are good so they don't lose practice.

Well, maybe I might agree, except for one thing, in every book in the series that have a scene with a description of a wormhole transit (at least three) the do it just as described in a manual fashion.

Now retired, my last decade or so was in military aviation. We joked that the ideal flight crew was a pilot, a computer and a dog.
The pilot was there to reassure the passengers, the computer to fly the plane, and the dog to bite the pilot if he reached for the controls.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

Mycall4me wrote:I've always wondered what the reason was for the Captain of a ship making a transit to have to do the verbal back and forth with her engineer, and why the Captain is watching the readouts on how much power the forward sail is drawing etc. Would it make more sense to have this more automated? Or completely automated and run by computer command? Or to have the engineer watching readouts as opposed to the captain?

I've wondered about this since I read OBS, when Honor took Fearless through the junction to Basilisk. And I was reminded of this question when Ginger Lewis takes the Charles Ward through the junction to Lynx in SoV. I wasn't a registered user when I read OBS, but, now that I am....

It just seems like the possibility of human error, which is often mentioned by RFC about the margin of error that a captain has when calling out the appropriate command, bc no captain wanted to look sloppy when transitioning to sail (or words to that effect)

So, IS there a good reason for this, or is it just artistic license?

In-universe, I'd guess that it is automated, but crews often do some automated tasks manually for training purposes, the same way that modern airliners can land themselves, but pilots often do so manually when the conditions are good so they don't lose practice.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:In-universe, I'd guess that it is automated, but crews often do some automated tasks manually for training purposes, the same way that modern airliners can land themselves, but pilots often do so manually when the conditions are good so they don't lose practice.

Daryl wrote:Now retired, my last decade or so was in military aviation. We joked that the ideal flight crew was a pilot, a computer and a dog.
The pilot was there to reassure the passengers, the computer to fly the plane, and the dog to bite the pilot if he reached for the controls.

Is it correct that "modern airliners can land themselves"? It was my understanding that pilots almost always perform the landing. This is what the Pilot Institute website states:

Do Planes Takeoff and Land on Their Own?
Takeoff is always achieved manually. However, depending on the aircraft type and airport approach facilities, they can be landed automatically using an instrument landing system coupled with onboard equipment. However, given a choice, most pilots prefer to perform a manual landing.

Why is this?

Well, there are several reasons why autoland is good. Still, there are also many significant downsides to an airplane landing itself.

In short, when performing an autoland, the pilot gives control over to the autopilot. While the autopilot is normally extremely reliable, at the end of the day, it is just a computer.

And here’s the thing…

Computers lack the decision-making skills and natural ‘feel’ that comes from having a human being in the controls.

Autolands tend to produce less ‘refined’ results in landing than a human operator. While autolands serve a valuable purpose, they are used reluctantly and with great caution in most circumstances.

When is Autoland Used?
The flight crew will mainly elect to perform an automatic landing during poor visibility conditions. This could include landing in phenomena such as the following: –

Fog
Mist
Low Cloud
Blowing Snow
Haze
Dust storms
And these all often appear in the weather forecast!

Generally, the aircraft autoland system is only used when visibility precludes a visual landing. While pilots are experts in following an instrument approach procedure, they still rely on visual references to perform the final landing stages.

These visual cues can be hard (and sometimes impossible) to see if the visibility is poor.

The autopilot can perform a ‘formulaic’ landing on any runway equipped with a suitably certified instrument landing system (commonly known as an ‘ILS’).

Mycall4me wrote:Well, maybe I might agree, except for one thing, in every book in the series that have a scene with a description of a wormhole transit (at least three) the do it just as described in a manual fashion.

That's a biased sample. RFC only told us the story of when they did it manually; there was nothing to tell when the transit was mostly automatic.

That's not to say there's no human participation. I expect that there's still some set up before and the human-in-the-loop is monitoring the read outs to ensure everything is going according to plan. But that's boring and not worthy of retelling in the book.

Mycall4me wrote:Well, maybe I might agree, except for one thing, in every book in the series that have a scene with a description of a wormhole transit (at least three) the do it just as described in a manual fashion.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:That's a biased sample. RFC only told us the story of when they did it manually; there was nothing to tell when the transit was mostly automatic.

That's not to say there's no human participation. I expect that there's still some set up before and the human-in-the-loop is monitoring the read outs to ensure everything is going according to plan. But that's boring and not worthy of retelling in the book.

I am quite certain that the author was insistent that there would not be a purely automatic transit of a wormhole. So the sample is NOT biased; that is how the author intends to write every wormhole transit.

I think the reasoning is as follows: if a wormhole can be transitioned in a purely automatic way then there is nothing stopping the construction of a drone than can make a transition and he is adamant that such things will not appear in the Honorverse.