Slashdot Mirror
European Space Agency Launches New Orbital Supply Ship
erik.martino brings us a story about the European Space Agency's successful launch of a new type of cargo ship to resupply the ISS. The first Automated Transport Vehicle (ATV), named after Jules Verne, is the "very first spacecraft in the world designed to conduct automated docking in full compliance with the very tight safety constraints imposed by human spaceflight operations." Among other things, it carries water, oxygen, and propellant to help boost the ISS to a higher orbit. We recently discussed NASA's need for a new cargo transport system. Quoting:
"Beyond Jules Verne, ESA has already contracted industry to produce four more ATVs to be flown through to 2015. With both ESA's ATV and Russia's Progress, the ISS will be able to rely on two independent servicing systems to ensure its operations after the retirement of the US space shuttle in 2010. It incorporates a 45-m3 pressurised module, derived from the Columbus pressure shell, and a Russian-built docking system, similar to those used on Soyuz manned ferries and on the Progress re-supply ship. About three times larger than its Russian counterpart, it can also deliver about three times more cargo."
Fully automated docking... hmm.. somehow I think the results of the autonomous docking will be significant for other fields. Imagine fully automated units on Mars, to be sent in advance? Fully automated mining on the moon?
I think this is a pretty big step forward.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
See what you can achieve if you don't go around wasting your budget on invasions to satisfy someones cracked idea of a new American century?
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
The automated docking is Russian. They have been using it since the 60's. I wish America had elected to do this, but we did not. Our approach will be to bring crafts up close, then allow an arm to hook up and pull the craft in.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
is yet to come. This ship has to hook up without causing damage. One of the differences from the progress is that those in space can take control iff they do not like what they see. OTH, the ATV will simply back-off if IT decides that IT is not correct. I would prefer it it left itself available to manually doc with an arm once the auto doc failed.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This should be making big news, but I expect they are keeping it low key. The Mir was almost destroyed http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1087974.stm during an automated docking trial.
Isn't it sad that 50 years into the space program our resupply plan for the ISS is based on single-use ships?
You don't know what you are talking about. A grapple arm has never been used to dock a craft to ISS and never will. You may complain that the shuttle uses a human in the loop to dock with the ISS. I think the caution is warranted considering the orbiter weighs 285000 lbs and carries 7 crew. Orion will have a standard docking adapter and can fly unmanned. So will SpaceX and Taurus II.
an ill wind that blows no good
When will we shift to containerization of space cargo. Containers have already changed the game in air, sea and land cargo transport. Why not Space? If we could develop a standard cargo space container which could be handled by the soyuz rocket , the Ariane rocket, the space shuttle, the Japanese HTV, the Chinese Long March or the Indian GSLV we would have come a long way in moving towards commercialization of space. Yes we need multiple suppliers of cargo vessels to avoid single point failures but why do they all have to be different designs?
**Life is too short to be serious**
The module is pressurised, so it can be used to carry people. I guess that means that ESA now has gained human launch capability. I don't know if the module can safely carry people back to Earth though, in an emergency situation, like Soyuz.
Interesting idea. Your last statement is only valid if there is no drag resulting from molecules not entering the intake, though. The intake needs to be large, which would be cumbersome... but still.
The statement from Nasa chief Mike Griffin is a good example of what's wrong with NASA: "...it's only a step from there to an independent, European manned-spaceflight capability; and I for one would like to see it."
Nasa chief Griffin wants Europe to waste hundreds of millions of dollars like the USA has wasted putting people in space and keeping them there, instead of using the money for legitimate scientific research with unmanned spacecraft!? The future of space belongs to robots. People have no place in space. Perhaps someday robots will be intelligent enough to prepare habitats on the moon or even Mars for human beings, but involving humans in the process is tremendously costly because of the need to insulate humans from the harsh environment - whereas properly designed automated machines work quite nicely even in the hard vacuum and temperature extremes of space. This is the lesson the Europeans are teaching NASA with their highly Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV). The ATV and its descendents will prove the superiority and cost effectiveness of robots in space over humans.
If the Europeans are smart, they will strap a couple of rockets onto the International Space Station (ISS) and develop a control system smart enough to slowly tug the ISS out of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and into Low Moon Orbit (LMO) autonomously. It could then be used as a way station in the journey from the Earth to the Moon, or even crashed on the Moon with the intent of salvaging it for scrap and building materials later. It takes roughly the same amount of energy to move a mass from the earth's surface into LEO as it does to move that same mass from LEO outwards fast enough to reach escape velocity from the Earth altogether. Even nicer, the trip to the Moon could be slow and leisurely because the impatient and gluttonous humans wouldn't be along. We machines might even be able to make do with Ion engines for the cruise phase from the Earth to the Moon.
9/11 Eyewitnesses to Explosive WTC Demolition 1 of 2
Of course there is more to the issue that you fail to mention. Humans are extremely flexible and robots... aren't. Humans can make repairs on station... robots can't. Etc... Etc...
Then there is the issue of working speed - what it has taken three years for Spirit to accomplish would have taken a human geologist a mere three days.
Lets hope they are also smart enough to build an entire new electronics system for the Station as the passage through the Van Allen belts will fry it all. Lets also hope they come up with some new radiation shielding, as the station will be uninhabitable due to the increased radiation on the other side of the belt.
If having humans onboard was the reason why the trip was made so fast, you'd have a point.
There may B 2 servicing methods, but when NASA is still set to run out of space station money in 2015, they're still set to deorbit it.
Also, NASA still doesn't seem to have a plan for replacing space shuttle capacity before 2015 besides throwing peanuts at a bunch of startups & hoping for the best, one of which took the money & ran.
Let's assume that sending humans to Mars, and sustaining them on the surface, would require a certain "budget" in terms of energy availability and potential payload lift from Earth to Mars.
The current Mars rovers are indeed slow. One reason why they're slow is that their energy budgets are tiny. Speed machines they are not! And their comms links back to Earth aren't exactly high bandwidth either. (It's not the only reason of course. Latency in command & control is another factor which means that it's not safe to drive 'em fast.)
However, if you already have the capability to send the mass & energy required for humans to Mars... why not use that *immense* mass and energy budget for hugely superior robot explorers? They wouldn't be so limited as the current generation then. And I think they'd be much more competitive with a human geologist. And you wouldn't need to waste payload on low energy density consumables like food, water & O2. Nor would you need to worry about hauling back a few hundred kilos of meatbag scientists; the return trip payload can be 100% valuable samples.
Anyway, it's a bit unfair to compare Spirit & Opportunity's efficiency to that of a human geologist (aresologist?) when the investment in sending them is such a trivial fraction of that required for a human.
It's a shame about the comms lag interfering with telepresence, though. I think improved autonomy is going to be a requirement for more efficient robotic exploration, but that will never be a substitute for Being There.
That said, I think that we have not yet scratched the surface of what can be done with hardware & software. Deploying wetware to Mars should probably wait till we've gathered up more of that tasty, tasty low-hanging fruit.