Slashdot Mirror
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."
While its true that robotics can perform a lot, they cannot think. They cannot perceive and they aren't intuitive. Many of the tweaks, changes, evaluation and such require a human touch. This is something that is totally omitted from this article.
Besides, those that venture into space do so because they want to. They know the risks but this is the path of live they have chosen.
The narrow minded people who write this way are the ones we don't need to hear from anyway. We need to hear from the explorers and those who experience life (and yes, tragedy). For it is these people who allow mankind to achieve greatness. Those who write articles like this are not the ones who lead mankind to greater achievement and purpose.
Bill Catz
Seems to me that one of the primary reasons for having living, breathing people in space is to see how people can/will adapt to the rigors of outer space. We sent monkeys and dogs originally for safety reasons, but eventually we wanted to know what would happen to humans. Dogs and computers couldn't describe the heightened sense of awareness and euphoria that space travel seems to inspire in homo sapiens.
Basically, astronauts are the lab rats we keep sending into space to get the ball rolling.
The thing that amazes me is that in this day and age, we would still need to take 10-20 years to build a replacement system for the shuttles. Seems to me modern materials and high-end CAD/CAM would've cut the time to less than 5 years, tops.
On the other hand, its been pretty sad that especially in this country, commerical interests -- who stand to make untold billions off of space-based initatives -- haven't bothered to sink a dime into their own private efforts, but instead have milked at the public teat...just like every other time it seems. Personally, I'm hoping things like the X Project and other private space efforts start to pay off and show the way to letting some of us realize our personal desire to depart the cradle of life and move out into the backyard that is our universe.
Here's hoping...
This years budget for the U.S. Military is $400 Billion. Diverting only 2.5% of that budget (for just one year) would give us a workable space elevator.
The uneducated (on this topic) or pessimistic will tell you it can't be done. But we have the technology we need, and could have a working space elevator within 10 years (according to NASA's own study) for an estimated $10 billion (to as high as $40 billion, still insignifigant over 10 years).
This would lower the cost per pound to space (low earth orbit) from around $7,000 to as low as $5. For a fatty like me this means I could go to space on vacation for $1,100. Space would be accessible by all, even washed out boy-band members. Telecommunications costs would be a fraction of what they are now, because launching a satellite would be the cost of a car, instead of as much as the satellite itself. New technologies (similar to GPS, Iridium phones, internet anywhere cheaply) would come out of the woodwork.
The only thing we need for this to succeed, that we don't already have, is a government (or private funding) committed to it's success.
As a sidenote, this could eliminate our reliance on oil by making electricity next to free, with no pollution and without building more dams or nuclear reactors.
Just my $.02, but I really hope it happens. It's a common sense thing for the human race to commit to, and has a better chance of drastically improving life on earth for all than just about anything. Science would flourish, pollution would be almost eliminated, space travel may become possible, etc.
I can't believe others haven't been jumping all over this...
/.'ers wanted people to _live_ in space, not just visit occasionally. The current space program just doesn't have this in their sights. The space station is a step forward, but it does nothing to remedy the central problem of no gravity.
Instead of squandering untold fortunes to keep launching outdated technology, why don't we take a time-out, spend half that money on R&D for a new generation of space tech, and spend the other half to pay down our national debt/dole out benefits to the people...
I thought
Where are the rotating space stations which replace gravity with centrifugal force? Where is any innovation is overall space station design? Where are new shuttle designs? They're all waiting for money which is being spent on the old tech.
I feel like we're still running DOS 5 and implementing 64-bit math in software because it would just cost too much to redesign from scratch.
Engineers and programmers unite! Its (past) time to refactor the space program.
I love space exploration, but unfortunately, I can't currently love NASA, their political problems has caused them to lose touch with reality. I for one, would willingly support increasing their budget if I thought they were using it to efficiently generate new useful knowledge. Instead of outdated, political, men in space, goals. Wake up NASA! the world has changed, give us results, not Buck Rogers!
Its clear that travel in space is going to be dangerous for a long time. The good news is we dont need to do it much. The dumb problem is NASA believes it must to survive politically. I contend that is a big fat mistake. That mis-assessment is killing some of our best people. We should only ask those with "the right stuff" to go when we have a destination in mind worth the significant and real risk, of losing their lives. I don't include running soap bubble experiments and other PR related feeble excuses to send the first into space. Did we really want to kill the first teacher into space, or the first Israeli, for this nonsense. We all have to realize we are a long way from needing a space station, for anything other than feeding our space opera, sci-fi fantasies. Get real.
Robotics is here. Remote and semi autonomous control is here. NASA management, thinks in terms of the technology it designed the shuttle with thirty years ago. Cheaper, faster, better, off the shelf, works. Yes we will have a few dumb mistakes like Mars Climate Orbiter, so what, No One Died. I read the Mishap Investigation Board report, it was mostly management cost cutting snafu's. The JPL folks navigating the thing were set up to fail by dumb PHB's (yeah they goofed it up too, but overworked, underfunded, folks will make mistakes). Imagine if that same mistake had lost us the first crew en-route to Mars. Robotics produces good, cheap science in space. Robot probes will boldly go where... You get the idea. Sojourner proved this. Beagle2, Spirit and hopefully Opportunity, will probably settle the issue. The long duration surveyors orbiting Mars right now have produced data thats invaluable in assessing that planet, including discovering water, this for a cost, and risk level, unattainable if humans were involved.
I want to see NASA re-focus their budget on on designing and launching small, cheap probes for a host of long duration missions. Robots should be used to explore truly interesting locations. Finally, they should be used to prepare the target environment for any human visit or colonization attempt. No career astronaut should feel obliged to risk long duration space travel, for NASA's PR and politics.
We should boldly go..., when we know there's somwewhere really worth boldly going to..., where the target has been surveyed and prepared for us by our Robots. Then our Astronauts may consider it worth the risk, to go where none have gone before.
Go Opportunity!
There is no god; get over it already! Never exchange a walk on part in the war, for a lead role in a cage.
Even before Columbia was destroyed, NASA was losing the skilled workforce through attrition. The problem extends further than just NASA. Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine has had a series of well-considered articles on "The Crisis in Aerospace" over the years.
But NASA seems to be in a particularly tough spot on this issue. The combination of decades-old technology, endless paperwork, and job insecurity makes it very difficult to attract and retain top engineers to work on Shuttle and other manned space projects.
It's sad that none of my NASA and contractor friends will support the Intl Space Station as anything but a means of retaining capability. In other words, we're marching in place until something better comes along.
Human exploration of space can happen naturally in a few centuries, when the technology has caught up with human desires.
Yes, but technology doesn't grow in a vacuum. It grows to address a problem only when exerted a problem. To use an imperfect but still appropriate analogy, you can't say, "I'm too weak to lift weights. I'll wait until I'm stronger, and then do it."
Long term: our great grandchildren will be living on mars. Probes don't live, they're just expensive remote controls. The dinosaurs never got around to going anywhere... what is our excuse? Or are we just going to wait for the next big thing (meteor, or whatever)?
"Sorry, but the long term survival of our species costs too much."
"Oh, bummer. Then I guess I'll just go watch reality tv."
We've been napping in cradle Earth long enough; we can't quit now that we're learning how to crawl.
These continued calls to abandon NASA and "let private enterprises take over" sicken me. If private enterprises want to take over they can do so, without the need to abandon NASA first. The simple fact is that private enterprises have done exactly *nothing* that could be called "space exploration" so far. There are no private space shuttles, nor any private expendable launchers that can take any meaningful payload to a meaningful orbit.
As soon as private enterprises start offering the same sort of services as NASA does I agree it may be time to shut it down. Until then there is simply no alternative. Shutting it down prematurely will simply mean that the USA loses access to space. If you believe that's acceptable, hey, fine with me. The Russians, Europeans, Chinese, and Indians will love you for it.