NASA - Robotic Repair Of Hubble 'Promising'

mykepredko writes "According to CNN, using a robot to repair/update the Hubble observatory is much more feasible than NASA originally believed. According to the article, the desires for keeping Hubble operational, while keeping shuttle astronauts safe seems to be the impeus for suggesting robotic repair of the satellite. The article goes on to discuss 'Robonaut' and 'Ranger robot', two machines which can approximate the capabilities of a space-suited astronaut. I'm wondering if these robots could be used for the ISS assembly/maintenance, minimizing crew EVAs while maximizing assembly time and hopefully reducing costs."

Comments

Other uses

[hfis]

Aside from being used to reduce costs by limiting the number of astronaut EVA's on the ISS, I wonder if these robots could be sent to the moon/mars? I am not exactly sure of their entire ability, but surely semi-intelligent robots could be built on their framework that could be subsequently used to build bases and buildings on celestial bodies? It would be much cheaper than sending a human crew to do it, that's for sure.

Re:Other uses

[Avian visitor]

I doubt that these android robots can even stand upright on the surface of any planet. If they were designed for operation in zero gravity their framework is probably to weak to support the full weight.

The article does not mention that, but I think these robots will be remotely controlled from the earth. This is the simplest way to do it in earth orbit. Why bother with a complicated computer intelligence, when you can use a human operator? Of course, this wouldn't work for mars because of the time lag.

Also I wonder what kind of a power supply do they use? If they are really the size of a man, they don't have plenty of room for bulky fuel cells, which means that their autonomous time must be pretty short.

This is sad.

[amitofu]

How are we supposed to send humans to the Moon and Mars if we are afraid to send them into Low Earth Orbit?

There is evidence that it is actually safer to send astronauts to the Hubble than it is to send them to the International Space Station.

I am sure a robot could do the job, but where does it leave humans in the long run if we don't take risks ourselves. Will we leave exploration of the universe to the Von Neumann Machines and maroon ourselves on Earth?

robotic exploration, automated

[keez]

Seven years ago, I remember reading an article in Popular Mechanics (the article's long gone, unfortunately) about an idea for a completely autonomous robotic system to explore and develop space.

The plan was to construct a simple network of small mining robots that ran on tracks that they themselves laid down. Minerals mined would initially go to the construction of more tracks, track-riding robots, micro-smelters, and power sources (solar or otherwise). In this way, you could construct a self-sufficient mining operation with minimal initial investment that would grow at an almost exponential rate, given sufficient local resources. Land on an asteroid, send minerals and metals out of it a year or two later - avoid the gravity well entirely.

At the time, though, it was just an idea and we didn't have the tech to pull it off. You need some relatively sophisticated AI decision techniques to deal with the nitty-gritty details of such an operation, as we're finding from even such comparatively simple things as the mars rovers today, and it's hard to reproduce the robot-critters on the spot. It's for reasons like the first, though, that I originally got interested in CS and majored in it, and I think we're getting close. Depending on this Hubble work and similar projects, robotics may have finally caught up too.

Instead of worrying about how to get the materials into orbit to build in space, we should start using what's already there. Here's to hoping.