Slashdot Mirror


NASA To Send a Humanoid Robot On Shuttle's Final Mission

coondoggie writes "Perhaps taking a page from a Star Wars script, NASA said today it will send its newest humanoid robot, known as Robonaut2, on board the space shuttle's final mission. R2 is capable of using the same tools as humans, letting it work closely with people in space."

24 of 119 comments (clear)

  1. Thank goodness... by Siberwulf · · Score: 4, Funny

    That R2 is in prime condition, a real bargain.

  2. Grammer what? by harl · · Score: 3, Funny

    Slashdot to a start editing?

    --
    I find being offended by me offensive.
    1. Re:Grammer what? by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 5, Funny

      Where do I even begin with that one?!?

      Turn off your spell checker and turn on your "Yoda Translator Module"

  3. Why not let a machine do a machine's job? by broknstrngz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is there any incentive, except for the obvious publicity stunt, to send an android out there only to handle the gear that could probably easily handle itself? I'm thinking that the chances of something going titsup increase if you add mechanical hazard to the equation.

    1. Re:Why not let a machine do a machine's job? by sznupi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd say that all the trouble with maintaining a human in a spacesuit present larger "mechanical hazard" than using a teleoperated robot (which has a shape similar to human torso so that its operator can better relate to its movements)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  4. Re:No need to worry... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ash is a God Damn Robot!

  5. Re:No need to worry... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 2, Funny

    In space, no one can hear you squeak.

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  6. Re:No need to worry... by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My question is: Is this going to be the Shuttle's last mission because they are sending a robot into space who can use tools?

  7. Well... by just_another_sean · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As long as R2 can provide more power to the forward couplings I think things will work out just fine.

    This is a nice follow up to the earlier "Armstrong criticizes Obama" article. In case anyone missed
    ral's comment in that other article, Buzz Aldrin has a different take on Obama's new plan.

    --
    Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
    1. Re:Well... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is a nice follow up to the earlier "Armstrong criticizes Obama" article.

      Actually, this is Obama's response to meatbag astronauts complaining about budget cuts.

      Actually, it seems to be a response to midterm elections in Florida, Alabama, and Texas. None of those states is going to be especially happy if NASA doesn't keep bringing home the bacon, and Obama doesn't need any easy Republican wins in the House races in those states.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  8. Re:Not a good idea by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 2, Funny

    What could go wrong?*





    * please limit your response to 1,000 words max and no more than 3 exclamation points per declaration, prediction and/or warning of dire consequences.

  9. Obviously Send R2 by MrTripps · · Score: 2, Funny

    How else could you get the plans for the Death Star to the ISS?

    --
    "I'm not a quack, I'm a mad scientist! There's a difference." - Dr. Cockroach
  10. Also Known As... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...newest humanoid robot known as Robonaut2...

    I wasn't aware that NASA had an official designation for Keanu Reeves...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  11. How is it controlled? by jhumkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How is it controlled? Via computer command? Via voice command? Via preprogrammed sequence? Via no command whatsoever (where its just a remote manipulator torso controlled directly by humans.) If it has innate skills, does it have vision systems to find a bolt, and a hole, and know how to use a wrench and install the bolt? Is there any task its programmed to complete independently? (Yes, I linked onto the NASA article too. . . no more real information there.) Gosh, wouldn't 10million children suddenly develop interest in robotics if they thought we really were close to an "R2-D2" like robot? No discussion of "Humanoid" vs "Practical configuration"? Can no one write a fulfilling article anymore? (Makes me want to go "blogger" and track down these answers . . . if I thought I could get paid to do so . . .) Its a shame that those that are paid to do so . . . don't.

    --
    No, I don't remember your name. But the memory mapped screen on a TRS80 from 1977 is from 15360 to 16383 if that helps.
    1. Re:How is it controlled? by sznupi · · Score: 2

      Last time I checked it's basically a manipulator; made in the shape of human torso so it will feel more "right" when teleoperated. I imagine it could also follow simple preprogrammed movements being routine part of its operation, or more complicated sequences when very carefully prepared.

      Robots like this can save the trouble and danger of humans performing tasks in a space suit.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  12. Why? Why? WHY? by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why humanoid? Is NASA now just one more bullshit agency providing Roman Circus to the plebes? What is the point of making it humanoid instead of cheap, efficient, and optimized for the expected tasks and missions? This is just another ploy to funnel money to corrupt aerospace contractors. Why not do space exploration with intelligently designed unmanned projects instead of this crap?

    1. Re:Why? Why? WHY? by khallow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why humanoid?

      Because there is an entire technology base on Earth geared around the humanoid form. It is a more cost efficient form than a form specialized to the task at hand.

    2. Re:Why? Why? WHY? by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you're advocating that we abandon manned spaceflight, I have to disagree. Unmanned missions are valuable, but I still think we need people in space.

      Given that manned space exploration is colossally more expensive than unmanned, the burden is on you to justify why it should be done at all, and why the far cheaper and far more ambitious unmanned alternatives need to be displaced for it. The budget is finite, and cannot accommodate everything.

    3. Re:Why? Why? WHY? by sznupi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If a robot with humanoid torso (two cameras in its head, too) is controlled directly by human operator, it can give a rather nice immersion, "feel", situational awareness; I guess.

      Plus if the operator is inside the station, there's even not much of a problem with guerilla arm...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:Why? Why? WHY? by Bakkster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It also allows a human to operate the same equipment (such as pod bay doors), should the robot malfunction.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    5. Re:Why? Why? WHY? by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, it doesn't. You will always need to design some amount of mission-specific equipment. In any case, most industrial robotic design today relies on generalizable platforms with diverse plug-in modules. This is a non-issue.

  13. Re:Lest we forget... by InsertWittyNameHere · · Score: 2, Funny

    It will be different this time:

    Astronaut: Hello R2.
    R2: BEEP BEEP BLOOP CHIRP
    *Astronaut looks confused*

  14. Skynet special by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 3, Funny

    I heard this thing just showed up in the lab after a bright flash of light vaporized a lab table. It has a voice modulator with a teutonic accent, and it was holding a letter of recomendantion from the Office of the Governor of California.

  15. How Bizarre by slick7 · · Score: 2, Funny

    A few scenarios come to mind:

    1: After the last astronaut leaves the ISS, the robot locks the doors, turns off the lights, then powers down.

    2: Remains behind when everyone else is gone, soon after, we are contacted by visitors. Due to failing to observe proper protocol, precipitates an intergalactic incident plunging the Earth into a 10,000 year galactic war.

    3: When finally alone and in control of the ISS, the robot transfers to tele-presence mode and begins creating bioweapons/methamphetamine/IC chips that become SKYNET/clones of the DICK Cheney/alcohol/growing pot/Daleks/Furbies....you get the idea.

    4: Being left alone, playing solitaire.

    --
    The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.