NASA Tests Hardware, Software On Armadillo Rocket
porcinist writes "On June 23 NASA successfully tested hardware and software on an Armadillo Rocket. With the end of NASA's Constellation program in sight, NASA is starting to focus on new, innovative exploration programs like Project-M. This project is meant to land a robotic humanoid on the moon in a thousand days. To meet this goal NASA teamed with Armadillo Aerospace and Draper Labs (the lab responsible for creating the original Apollo Guidance Computer) to integrate and flight test a real-time navigation system in only seven weeks. This might be the fastest thing NASA has done in 30 years. Maybe NASA is taking Obama's new vision to heart."
There's a charming video of him giving a talk at nasa about how really rocket science isn't as hard as people claim.
Two things. First, the humanoid is the result of millions of years of recent evolution. It's a solid design. Sure, you probably can come up with a better design, but why throw away what already works? That's wasteful. Second, we have millennia of human technology designed for the humanoid form. Why throw that away either? Same argument about waste applies.
Until human beings actually go somewhere "out there", it is not exploration. It is investigation.
Sending a robotic device to the moon is good preliminary investigation, but until people go back there, exploraion will not have restarted.
Mars is completely unexplored. A lot of time & money has been well used on investgating it but the next stage needs to start.
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
Two things. First, the humanoid is the result of millions of years of recent evolution. It's a solid design. Sure, you probably can come up with a better design, but why throw away what already works? That's wasteful. Second, we have millennia of human technology designed for the humanoid form. Why throw that away either? Same argument about waste applies.
Sure, on Earth. We haven't been living in space for millions of years, but under the Earth's gravity, the atmosphere, etc. Space is an entirely different environment and we would likely have developed entirely different in that environment. The tools argument is the most valid of the lot, but realistically we could/already have designed something better to accomplish tasks.
#define true false
For one thing, the humanoid form was not designed, it evolved, and it's hardly optimal even for it's own environment.
It works for its environment. The human evolved to solve many of the same problems that robotics designers have to deal with in space. It doesn't matter if the process was designed/intentional or not. It's free work that already happened. Plus there are a few billion humans around who already use the form in question.
"millennia of human technology designed for the humanoid form" - yeah? Like what? Chairs, toilets, car seats, bicycles, ?
Yes, also hand tools, mechanical interfaces, building designs, transportation systems, etc. Or are you going to claim that the end state for human development of the Solar System is going to be the occasional box with instruments to some distant location?
Something like it with all the joints involved is certainly not going to be optimal for a harsh, dusty environment such as the lunar surface. Designs like the mars rovers with their multiple balloon tires and low center of gravity would be perform better in low G.
Whoa. Dust in space? We have dust on Earth. How do we keep it from getting into human joints? Skin... whoa. So what can balloon tires manipulate on Mars? Right, they're just for transportation and not a real argument against the humanoid form. If there were humans on Mars, they'd probably have multiple balloon tires and a low center of gravity too just as they do on Earth. Did someone forget about the automobile?
Yes, Obama is all about killing NASA. In his first year, he bumped up the budget 2 billion. He has taken NASA back to its roots of doing the RD and advanced systems that private companies do not want to do. And he has focused NASA on doing the ground work for monster projects; Such as a fuel depot. Or an inflatable Space Station (lowering costs a great deal, and increasing safety). Automated docking for the fuel depot. Multiple types of space-rated engines;
OTH, W bumped the budget in 2006, while pushing a nightmare system starting in 2004.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
The idea is telepresence. (...) Of course, the problem is lag, which will utterly prevent any immersion anyway. I think it's dumb, too. (...)
You make it sound such an evidence that I almost did not take notice; a bit over a 2 seconds time lag (back and forth) "utterly" prevents any immersion?
Not so sure... Telepresence was also my first thought, and I think this is not dumb at all. Thinking about it, I think this is genius: you get all the advantages of man space exploration without the cost. You get the vital (in terms of funding) wow factor. Furthermore the technology you develop for that might have very useful applications on earth.
Not dumb, not dumb at all.
Two things. First, the humanoid is the result of millions of years of recent evolution. It's a solid design.
Yes, that explains why birds, snakes, dogs, horses, lizards, etc all have humanoid shapes, and use humanoid methods of locomotion. Face it, bipedalism is rare for a reason. If you want all terrain evolutionary designed locomotion, look to the insects.
Second, we have millennia of human technology designed for the humanoid form. Why throw that away either?
Part of that technology base is an invention called "The Wheel". It has proven excellent where mobility and stability have been required. Furthermore, it doesn't need a lot of extremely complex, real time force feedback, orientation and gravity sensors, and computers to run. See, while humans have had millions of years to evolve, robots haven't. I hope this thing will be able to get up when it slips on a rock and falls down the side of a crater. I've never seen video of a humanoid shaped robot being able to get up while on a slope. Oh, and let's not forget the power requirements. Is a robotic walking gait less of a drain on batteries than a rocker-bogey system?
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
With the mandated end of NASA's old, tired, bureaucratic programs, all the desk jockey administrators are out looking for a better free ride. Who knows, maybe they'll go to Wall Street.
In any event, NASA is being left with a bunch of frustrated old farts who were then, and are now, Engineers (capital "E" on purpose). When you turn Engineers loose, and don't saddle them with endless paperwork, they start thinking up things.
And sometimes these things are total disasters. That's the way engineering works.
And then, sometimes these ideas are completely and totally brilliant. "Hey, Joe, what if we take this soggy wheat, grind it up, and bake it into loaves?"
Never forget NASA's greatest disasters were predicated upon management overruling their own engineers. "Too cold to launch? Don't be Silly." "We had a meeting and decided that that big chunk of ice didn't cause any damage, so why should we ask the military to photograph it?"
If we fired 80% of NASA's management, we might have a Space Agency back. You know, people who do jaw dropping things, as opposed to people who print nice glossy viewgraphs of hypothetical jaw dropping things. Just consider, if the Russians hadn't launched the first ISS module, NASA would likely still have an Origami space station -- all paper and cleverness.
Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.