Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Space Robot Maker MDA Nets Hubble Repair Contract

Posted by michael on from the send-in-the-robots dept.

hyperlinx writes "MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates Ltd. said on Wednesday it has signed a $154 million deal to help NASA's controversial repair mission to fix the aging Hubble Space Telescope. The Canadian firm that built the Canadarm robotic arm technology used on NASA's space shuttles won the contract 'to provide a potential information and robotic servicing solution' in a rescue project being eyed for 2007."

9 of 36 comments (clear)

  1. Define "repair"? by helioquake · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What exactly does this robotic mission promise to accomplish?

    I don't mean to be negative (if they can, great!), but it is not exactly an easy job to unscrew bolts and fastners by hand, even on ground!

    I forgot what is built in as a modular unit without many mechanical parts to support. Solar panel and batteries may be replaceable with care. But can someone tell me if a gryoscope can be replaced without using Philip screwdriver? I know that some science instruments are fastened with bolts. I'm not holding my breath that $154M robotic mission can replace the STIS or install the COS for the Hubble.

    Anyway, if they can fix the Hubble, great. I'd even call that the replacement of solar panels, batteries, and gryoscopes would receive a "successful" tag.

  2. Why not a manned mission? by kinema · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now that new fuel tanks for the shuttle have been completed why not a manned mission? Will the satellite fail before the next launch scheduled for May or June?

  3. Which kind of space robots do they make? by nekoniku · · Score: 2, Funny

    Pusher robots or shover robots?

    --
    "It's a wonderful idea. But it doesn't work." -- Tad Danielewski
    1. Re:Which kind of space robots do they make? by Ben+Struferga · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bending Units

  4. local article by mike.newton · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's an article from the Vancouver Sun with some additional details.

  5. Too dangerous by benhocking · · Score: 3, Informative

    You might think it is worth the danger (I do), but the current reason that the Hubble is off limits for the space shuttle (even after it finally gets the green light again) is that the orbit of Hubble is such that if something goes wrong similar to what happened to the Columbia shuttle (and if it is detected) they would not be able to get to the ISS. The advantage of getting to the ISS is that there is an emergency escape vessel (a Soyuz) that they can use to get to Earth. I've tried finding a link on Google confirming my memory, but have failed to find one that spells this out explicitly, so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt.

    --
    Ben Hocking
    Need a professional organizer?
    1. Re:Too dangerous by Vellmont · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, because we _just_ discovered this Space Shuttle thing was dangerous 2 years ago february. I've never bought that argument, and I don't buy it now. We've know the thing is dangerous since its creation. Since when did the human race (or at least the US) turn into a bunch of whiny little gits that don't want to take any risk of "people dying"? How many people have died for a far smaller payoff like climbing Mt. Everest? The astronauts are willing to do it, and the Shuttle itself probbably couldn't be repaired in orbit at the space station anyway.

      The real deal is the administrators are covering their collective asses. No one wants to go down in the media shitstorm if a Shuttle is lost repairing hubble. Another casualty of our reactive media-wacko society.

      --
      AccountKiller
  6. MDA did not build the Canadarm by breem42 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "The Canadian firm that built the Canadarm"

    Yes, MacDonald Dettwiler did buy Spar Aerospace, who built the "Canadarm", but the company otherwise has little to do with it. They are, however, involved in some of the robotics of the ISS (called "Canadarm 2").

    BTW -- few people other than Canadians (of which I am one) call it the "Canadarm".

    Tony in Vancouver

    --
    If the answer is war, you are asking the wrong question
  7. Re:For 154 million, I'll go fix it by grozzie2 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Can't less than $154 millions hire people who would happily sign a responsability waiver for NASA, board the oh-now-so-deadly shuttle and go fix Hubble personally?

    It may hire some people to ride the thing, but, it wont come near filling it up with fuel and getting it out to the pad, never mind an actual launch. Prior to all the new safety rules, that cost 500 million a trip. All the new rules probably pushing that up to nearly a billion dollars per flight now.