Space Station Saved By a Toothbrush?

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Space Station Saved By a Toothbrush?

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday September 5, 2012 @02:07PM from the break-out-the-emergency-floss dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Denise Chow reports that two spacewalking astronauts successfully replaced a vital power unit on the International Space Station today, defeating a stubborn bolt that prevented the astronauts from properly installing the power unit on the ISS's backbone-like truss with the help of some improvised tools made of spare parts and a toothbrush. Astronauts Sunita Williams and Akihiko Hoshide started by removing the power box, called a main bus switching unit (MBSU), from where it had been temporarily tied down with a tether, then spent several hours troubleshooting the unit and the two bolts that are designed to secure it in place on the space station's truss. After undoing the bolts, the spacewalkers examined them for possible damage, and used improvised cleaning tools and a pressurized can of nitrogen gas to clean out the metal shavings from the bolt receptacles. 'I see a lot of metal shavings coming out,' Hoshide said as he maneuvered a wire cleaner around one of the bolt holders. Williams and Hoshide then lubricated a spare bolt and manually threaded it into the place where the real bolt was eventually driven, in an effort to ensure that the receptacle was clear of any debris. Then the two applied grease to the sticky bolt as well as extra pressure and plain old jiggling until finally 4½ hours into the spacewalk, Hoshide reported: 'It is locked.' When Hoshide reported that the troublesome bolt was finally locked into place, the flight managers erupted in applause while astronaut Jack Fischer at Mission Control told the astronauts 'that is a little slice of awesome pie.'"

131 of 179 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

This is why we need people in space by jmorris42 · 2012-09-05 14:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

And this is why robots aren't going replace people anytime soon. One little thing goes wrong with an unmanned mission and either a major subsystem is written off or the entire mission is a failure. People are able to do thigs robots aren't going to be able to do for quite a while longer. And it gets even worse as soon as you go beyond full duplex radio range. If you have to send a command, wait for a result, try something else, repeat until you scream, things get really slow the second you aren't executing preplanned directions without errors.
And people can perform physical actions we have yet to build a robot to do reliably. Sure they can put thousands of bolt on one after another on an assembly line but how many could deal with this one stuck bolt? None. Now try to build one that can open up a panel and troubleshoot wiring or plumbing.

--
Democrat delenda est
1. Re:This is why we need people in space by gagol · 2012-09-05 14:18 · Score: 1
  
  I agree machine learning are not there yet, but this field is progressing. I would not be surprised if this capability would be reached within a lifetime.
  
  --
  Tomorrow is another day...
2. Re:This is why we need people in space by crmanriq · 2012-09-05 14:21 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  You are missing the obvious difference:
  Robots don't use toothbrushes.
  Notoriously poor dental care. It's almost like robots are, um, ... British.
  Why do you think the cybermen just use speakers? And the daleks hide inside their little trash cans?
  
  --
  If it's worth doing, it's worth doing for money.
3. Re:This is why we need people in space by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 14:32 · Score: 1
  
  Except that with robot missions "We had to scrub the mission because of an unexpected problem... oh well, at least we've got another three, and we're still under budget."
4. Re:This is why we need people in space by CheeseTroll · 2012-09-05 14:32 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Perhaps, but a robot wouldn't have had a toothbrush in space, would it?
  
  --
  A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
5. Re:This is why we need people in space by whoever57 · 2012-09-05 14:47 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  And this is why robots aren't going replace people anytime soon
  A robot might not have cross-threaded the bolt in the first place (why do you think there were metal shavings in the threads?)
  
  --
  The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
6. Re:This is why we need people in space by INeededALogin · 2012-09-05 14:51 · Score: 1
  
  +5 Awesome
7. Re:This is why we need people in space by SuperSlacker64 · 2012-09-05 14:57 · Score: 1
  
  Sooner or later though, they will all have problems. Murphey's Law will see to that.
8. Re:This is why we need people in space by adolf · 2012-09-05 14:58 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  A robot might not have cross-threaded the bolt in the first place (why do you think there were metal shavings in the threads?)
  Galling. If you haven't experienced it yet, you just haven't yet turned enough bolts.
  
  --
  Kid-proof tablet..
9. Re:This is why we need people in space by Paul+Slocum · 2012-09-05 15:03 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I'm not much of an expert, but I can think of more human missions that have failed (expensively and tragically) than robotic missions that have failed. And the mars rovers have lasted dramatically longer than expected. Plus, getting the rover unstuck from the sand shows that you can fix tough problems that require improvising even with a robot.
10. Re:This is why we need people in space by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-09-05 15:03 · Score: 1
  
  American robots aren't much better.
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
11. Re:This is why we need people in space by timeOday · 2012-09-05 15:19 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  True, but not everybody's success rate is the same. One good trick is to start by turning the screw backwards until you feel it click, then start tightening.
12. Re:This is why we need people in space by johnny+cashed · 2012-09-05 15:37 · Score: 1
  
  Even better is to higbee the first thread like they do on fire hydrant and aerospace electrical connectors.
  
  A 38999 series connector is a good example of this.
13. Re:This is why we need people in space by jamstar7 · 2012-09-05 15:42 · Score: 2
  
  And the ISS would be down 25% of its total powre budget for months to come.
  
  Let's face facts. The only way to make space safe for robots is keep them close enough to humans for repairs. Otherwise, one tiny component fails, so does a significant portion of the mission.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
14. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-05 15:45 · Score: 2
  
  oh well, at least we've got another three, and we're still under budget."
  Um, not the NASA in our reality. They're almost never under budget and they never build four copies.
15. Re:This is why we need people in space by jamstar7 · 2012-09-05 15:46 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Take a look at the overall mission records to Mars. About half the missions have failed spectacularly, compared to what, half a dozen manned missions that ended in death? I'm including Apollo 1 and a couple known Russian meatshots, btw.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
16. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-05 15:48 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  You've got some flawed reasoning there, because if robots made the offending part it wouldn't have had metal debris in it.
  It's worth noting at this point that there's a good chance the errant part was made by machine. Perhaps not a robot in the technical sense, but not a human either.
17. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-05 16:03 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Then you are indeed not much of an expert. Mars missions are notorious for failure. Manned missions despite their many flaws are not. For example, there have been four in-flight accidents that killed astronauts out of perhaps 200-300 manned missions over the past 50 years. In comparison, 26 of the 50 unmanned missions to Mars have failed.
  
  This is not intended to be an apples to apples comparison (going to Mars is a wee bit harder than achieving orbit and doing a few things for a few days). I'm just pointing out the far greater number of failures on the unmanned side.
18. Re:This is why we need people in space by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 16:17 · Score: 1
  
  +5?
  That's a big slice.
  Hey, it is "awesome pie" after all...
19. Re:This is why we need people in space by EETech1 · 2012-09-05 16:17 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  It is very easy for some CNC machines to tell if it has a dull or broken drill bit, or tap. I don't think it would take that much to add that capability to many of today's robots.
  We had servo controlled torque wrenches with process monitors on a robotic production line where I worked that could also tell you way more about how that bolt (torque and turn) tightened than most observant skilled wrench operators (yes there is a skill to feeling a bolt tighten) and almost anyone that does it for 8 hours straight. Every bolt, every time, perfectly tightened, or rejected!
  The logic to determine the failure (bolt, threads, nut, washer, or part interference) was there, and normally spot on, I doubt the programming to rework the various parts would add much to the complexity of today's state of the art assembly (line worker replacement) robots.
  Cheers! to our manual labor (job) eliminating robot overloards!
20. Re:This is why we need people in space by Bacon+Bits · 2012-09-05 16:57 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  You've got some flawed reasoning there, because if robots made the offending part it wouldn't have had metal debris in it.
  It's worth noting at this point that there's a good chance the errant part was made by machine. Perhaps not a robot in the technical sense, but not a human either.
  More to the point, the argument that humans will create flawed tools while robots will not is false on it's face. Robots are tools made by humans. What's to stop the robot from being flawed in the first place?
  [Insert "it's turtles all the way down" reference here]
  
  --
  The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
21. Re:This is why we need people in space by gagol · 2012-09-05 17:14 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  A multitask space robot builder would probably pack cleaning brushes and advanced 3D printer.
  
  --
  Tomorrow is another day...
22. Re:This is why we need people in space by Solandri · 2012-09-05 17:38 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  The power unit is probably vital only because the ISS is manned, and having humans aboard means a higher power requirement. The thing about space is that the enormous launch costs (on the order of $5000 per kg at the low end) means many things you take for granted on earth (like a toothbrush and toothpaste) add horrendously to your overall cost. Estimates are that it takes about 2 tons of life support equipment to keep one person alive in space. So sending a single person to space incurs an extra $10 million in cost (ignoring consumables like food, water, and oxygen). For a fraction of that, you can just build your unmanned system with redundant backups for everything, including "vital power units".
  
  e.g. The cost of the manned mission to repair the Hubble Space Telescope cost almost as much as building and launching a replacement HST. If we'd had an unmanned launch vehicle other than the Shuttle capable of putting something Hubble's size into orbit, we could've put 3 HSTs into orbit for the cost of one Shuttle-launched HST and one repair mission. Remember the Solar Max repair mission? Ever wonder why aside from Hubble, that was the only repair mission conducted by the Shuttle? Because it was literally cheaper to build and launch a replacement satellite than to send the shuttle up to repair one.
  
  We're trying to run before we can walk. We should kill the manned space program for about 10 years, or at the very least drastically scale it back. Work on lowering launch vehicle costs. Once we get those costs down to about $1000-$2000/kg (Falcon comes close), then restart the manned program. The Shuttle and ISS wasted hundreds of billions of dollars just so we could brag "Look! We have people in space!" If that money had been spent instead on researching and developing cheaper launch vehicles, we could've potentially been putting a dozen people in space for the cost of putting a single person in space today.
23. Re:This is why we need people in space by gagol · 2012-09-05 18:37 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Non human payloads don't have the same levels of safety regulations...
  
  --
  Tomorrow is another day...
24. Re:This is why we need people in space by sFurbo · 2012-09-05 18:55 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  How big a part if the ISS's power budget is life support? How much lighter and smaller could it be if it did not have to accommodate humans? If there were no humans aboard, it would be much easier to shut of some systems temporarily or permanently in case of power problems.
  
  In short, humans make space travel large, energy-intensive and expensive. Sure, they also make it more flexible, but it is not a given that that outweighs the massively more complex operations they require.
25. Re:This is why we need people in space by stepho-wrs · 2012-09-05 18:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Except you are solving a known problem, after it happened.
  It's much harder to solve problems before they are known.
  It's much harder to build a robot that can solve unknown problems.
  
  What might be useful though is a general purpose manipulator that can be controlled by humans on the ground.
  Humans are useful because they have brains, eyes and general purpose hands, the combination of which can solve a huge number of problems.
  Give the robot cameras, hands so that it can pick-up and use other tools or even non-tools (ie whatever is laying around the craft but wasn't explicitly designed as a tool) and a link to a human controller.
26. Re:This is why we need people in space by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 19:20 · Score: 1
  
  Probably, Bender would have it.
27. Re:This is why we need people in space by azalin · 2012-09-05 19:20 · Score: 2
  
  Nice try, but if there weren't any humans on board, the power budget would have already been much lower to start with. Therefore the power loss would still have seriously impacted the mission.
  Machines make for cheaper space travel not only because the need less support, but also because you can afford to loose them.
28. Re:This is why we need people in space by Yoda222 · 2012-09-05 19:34 · Score: 1
  
  And if we compare robotic mars missions with human Mars mission, its 26 failures vs 0. Impressive records for human exploration.
29. Re:This is why we need people in space by t0p · 2012-09-05 19:42 · Score: 1
  
  Manned missions are, and have almost always been, LEO jaunts. Let's start sending people to Mars and see how many of them we kill. And any we miss, HAL can take care of for us.
  
  --
  http://ihatehate.wordpress.com
30. Re:This is why we need people in space by VortexCortex · 2012-09-05 20:05 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  True, but not everybody's success rate is the same. One good trick is to start by turning the screw backwards until you feel it click, then start tightening.
  WTF. You mean they WEREN'T doing it this way? I thought everyone did this -- It's how you start a screw.
  Oh to be an alien drifting along that orbit:
  "Look at the silly hairless apes, thwarted by a single simple screw.... Oh my, listen to them all cheering now. Congratulations you primitive little beasties, you've tightened an errant fastener in SPACE! Wow. Let's get out of here, at this rate it'll be centuries before they even discover reusable pop rivets."
31. Re:This is why we need people in space by ColaMan · 2012-09-05 20:45 · Score: 1
  
  I'd image it's quite difficult to 'feel a click' though chunky gloves. Especially in a fashion that ensures you continue to hold it securely between said chunky-gloved-fingers.
  Although 'dropping' the screw in orbit would be a hassle, in most cases you could just wait half-an-orbit for it to come back to you.
  
  --
  
  You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
  There is a lot of hype here.
32. Re:This is why we need people in space by LordSnooty · 2012-09-05 21:02 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks for pointing out what he was clearly implying.
33. Re:This is why we need people in space by Rogerborg · 2012-09-05 21:10 · Score: 1
  
  "Plumbing" is only needed if you ship spam in your can. Humans create a lot of opportunity for problems.
  I agree with you in principle, by the way - it's overcoming those problems that makes us more than just monkeys. But the practical argument is pretty tenuous.
  
  --
  If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
34. Re:This is why we need people in space by LordSnooty · 2012-09-05 21:25 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Having bad teeth matters not a jot when you're too fat to fit in your spacesuit. See, i can stereotype too!
35. Re:This is why we need people in space by TheLink · 2012-09-05 21:33 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I haven't seen manned missions to Mars yet.
  
  Are you making a valid comparison? Or are you from a different time.
  --
  
  Too many replies beneath your current threshold
36. Re:This is why we need people in space by thegarbz · 2012-09-05 21:33 · Score: 1
  
  The failures the parent is talking about have been largely due to a machine's inability to adapt to changing conditions, and or incorrect assumptions (a subset of which is programming error). The number of times a robot has accelerated forcefully into a giant rock floating in space without hitting the break is much larger than the number of times a human pilot has done the same thing.
37. Re:This is why we need people in space by Forty+Two+Tenfold · 2012-09-05 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  Any and all. Wikipedia:
  
  "Carthago delenda est" [...] The phrase was most famously uttered frequently and persistently almost to the point of absurdity by the Roman senator Cato the Elder (234-149 BC), as a part of his speeches.
  This is the gist of GP's signature.
  
  --
  Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
38. Re:This is why we need people in space by Neil+Boekend · 2012-09-05 22:31 · Score: 1
  
  No, dropping a screw would mean the screw slowly floats away. After you have waited half an orbit it will have traveled half an orbit +/- about a hundred meters (1/16 th of a mile) in the same direction. If you threw the screw away as hard as you could this would still mean the screw would go about as fast as you.
  Think about it, the space station travels at 7.71 km/s. If you want to wait a half orbit for it to come back, then I assume you think it would fall the other way around. That's a speed differential of 15.4 km/s (or about 10 miles/s). How would you propose to impart that speed?
  How would you try to catch the thing? How would the metal of the screw hold while you impart 15 km/s in the range of your arm? I'd imagine the metal would turn liquid at the acceleration force.
  
  --
  Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
39. Re:This is why we need people in space by ColaMan · 2012-09-05 23:10 · Score: 2
  
  Orbital mechanics is a difficult thing, which I shall freely admit to having only small amounts of clue about. However the following is as I understand it (and general consensus on the internet seems to agree)
  Losing a screw at 90 degrees vertically to your orbital velocity ('dropping' it towards earth, for example) merely perturbs its orbit - if you were in a perfectly circular orbit to start out with, the screw would now be in an elliptical orbit with an apogee and perigee. Wait half an orbit and it'll be coming past again on its way to/from apogee/perigee.
  Losing it to the left/right or your direction of travel however and you'd probably lose it for a long time.
  Losing it forwards or backwards is the equivalent of entering a transfer orbit like sending satellites from LEO to GEO - however when you're doing that with satellites to stay in the final orbit requires another burn to match the speed for your new altitude, so I don't know where it'd end up. But I'll hazard a guess that it will oscillate back to your current altitude, I just don't know where it will be at that point.
  
  --
  
  You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
  There is a lot of hype here.
40. Re:This is why we need people in space by Captain_Chaos · 2012-09-05 23:26 · Score: 1
  
  FOUR in-flight accidents? I'm only aware of the two Shuttle disasters. What are the other two (I'm assuming you're not counting Apollo 1)?
41. Re:This is why we need people in space by Charliemopps · 2012-09-05 23:31 · Score: 1
  
  The problem with your argument is, including a human increases the cost of the mission by and order of magnitude. If something goes wrong on an unmanned mission, you can scrap it and try again and still get away with spending less. I want to send humans to... but lets not make excuses. We need to send humans because that's the entire point of space exploration... WE need to travel to other planets. Not our robotic proxies.
42. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-05 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  As I said:
  
  This is not intended to be an apples to apples comparison (going to Mars is a wee bit harder than achieving orbit and doing a few things for a few days). I'm just pointing out the far greater number of failures on the unmanned side.
43. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-05 23:40 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Russia has a couple as well with its Soyuz. Parachute didn't deploy on one and decompression of the capsule for the other. Wikipedia says these were designated Soyuz 1 and Soyuz 11.
44. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-05 23:45 · Score: 1
  
  Or for that matter, even if the robot somehow wasn't originated by man, it would still be flawed by virtue of existence in a universe with entropy. A novel variation of Original Sin, I'd say.
45. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-05 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  While I agree in principle, it's likely that someone would, once there's a large number of human flights that have the opportunity to do so.
46. Re:This is why we need people in space by DarkOx · 2012-09-05 23:54 · Score: 2
  
  True, but not everybody's success rate is the same. One good trick is to start by turning the screw backwards until you feel it click, then start tightening.
  WTF. You mean they WEREN'T doing it this way? I thought everyone did this -- It's how you start a screw.
  
  Might take more time, but I always just start'em forward by hand unless they are in an inaccessible place on then end of an extension or something, then I use the method above. I have never cross threaded a hand started bolt or screw, the trouble with the above method is there are often lots of ways to make a 'click' or have it feel like the thread has dropped into place. Its a pretty good method but mistakes are still possible.
  
  --
  Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
47. Re:This is why we need people in space by RaceProUK · 2012-09-06 00:06 · Score: 1
  
  Probably, Bender would have stolen it.
  FTFY
  
  --
  No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
48. Re:This is why we need people in space by sapphire+wyvern · 2012-09-06 00:12 · Score: 2
  
  +1 for being named LordSnooty. Perfect match of username to post.
49. Re:This is why we need people in space by JoeMerchant · 2012-09-06 00:37 · Score: 1
  
  It's the difference between spending millions of man hours planning and executing the mission perfectly, and just cowboying up there to git'er done.
  NASA has been lacking in the Cowboy department since about 1969.
50. Re:This is why we need people in space by JoeMerchant · 2012-09-06 00:40 · Score: 3
  
  This particular bolt problem might have been solved by a team of thousands on the ground, but if you've got the people up there already, it's going to be faster and cheaper to use them than to do something clever with fabricators, manipulators, etc.
  By the time the robot fabrication factories get to be as capable as humans, they will be just as costly to launch into orbit and maintain there.
51. Re:This is why we need people in space by delt0r · 2012-09-06 00:43 · Score: 1
  
  Yea but nobody is dead... Wonder how much of all this hardware that is going wrong it just there to keep the meat bags alive?
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
52. Re:This is why we need people in space by delt0r · 2012-09-06 00:44 · Score: 1
  
  Why do we need machine learning? Surly we can tell them what to do remotely. Robots does not mean removing humans from the loop.
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
53. Re:This is why we need people in space by ciderbrew · 2012-09-06 00:50 · Score: 1
  
  Are we talking about the same type of pie?
54. Re:This is why we need people in space by ciderbrew · 2012-09-06 01:16 · Score: 1
  
  So long as they learn from each one it doesn't really matter. We got off the ground in 1903 and we are now putting nuclear power cars on another planet 100+ years on. It would be great to get to a stage when probes and rovers are really standard in the next 50 years.
55. Re:This is why we need people in space by Hillgiant · 2012-09-06 01:35 · Score: 2
  
  Precisely. I would rather send 10x as many missions and have half of them fail than send a mission where 90% of the payload is devoted to measures to keep the fragile, unnecessary biological components alive.
  
  --
  -
56. Re:This is why we need people in space by sunking2 · 2012-09-06 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  Without people you lose the need for many of those sub systems. The vast majority of 'maintenance' done on the station is on systems associated with life support. It's hard to keep people alive, and those systems are complicated. That said I'm all for manned flight, don't get me wrong. I just don't agree with above being the reason for it.
57. Re:This is why we need people in space by mcgrew · 2012-09-06 01:51 · Score: 1
  
  tl;dr version: robots can't hack.
  I'm continually amazed at the clever hacks NASA engineers come up with, like making a new tool out of other tools and a toothbrush. They saved the Apollo 13 astronauts from carbon dioxide poisoning with duct tape, among other things, and used a lunar lander as a return vehicle.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
58. Re:This is why we need people in space by jellomizer · 2012-09-06 02:29 · Score: 1
  
  This is one of the comments that needs a score higher then 5.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
59. Re:This is why we need people in space by jellomizer · 2012-09-06 02:33 · Score: 2
  
  Well what would be the point of a space station if it couldn't accommodate humans?
  The goal of the ISS is for humans in space. Life Support is ISS main mission.
  
  --
  If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
60. Re:This is why we need people in space by pnutjam · 2012-09-06 02:38 · Score: 1
  
  I would not be surprised if this capability would be reached within a lifetime.
  
  I would be.
  
  --
  Cheap storage VM.
61. Re:This is why we need people in space by morgauxo · 2012-09-06 02:47 · Score: 1
  
  Yes but why would a robot no matter how well it learns ever have a toothbrush on hand in the first place? For that matter, just think what would happen if a robot maintained space station required a fix using toilet paper!
62. Re:This is why we need people in space by morgauxo · 2012-09-06 02:51 · Score: 1
  
  What would be the point of a robotic space station anyway? Some earth observing satellites I get. Probes and rovers to other worlds as well as space telescopes all have their place but what is the point of a space station if not to give people a place to go? A robot can just orbit without a station, we call them satellites. Don't get me wrong by the first part... I do wish we were sending humans to other worlds too...
63. Re:This is why we need people in space by jamstar7 · 2012-09-06 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  I haven't seen manned missions to Mars yet. Are you making a valid comparison? Or are you from a different time.
  From the GP:
  
  I'm not much of an expert, but I can think of more human missions that have failed (expensively and tragically) than robotic missions that have failed. And the mars rovers have lasted dramatically longer than expected. Plus, getting the rover unstuck from the sand shows that you can fix tough problems that require improvising even with a robot.
  My point is, when a robot mission fails, everybody forgets about it in a few days except for the committee to investigate the failure and make recommendations on how to keep it from failing next time, assuming they can get a budget and mission for 'the next time'. When people die, it's all over the news for weeks, Congressional hearings are announced, the whole nine yards. You don't hear so much about the robot missions failing because nobody cares that much about robots. GP's position was that we had a better track record with the robots. We don't, not by an order of magnitude.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
64. Re:This is why we need people in space by jamiesan · 2012-09-06 03:43 · Score: 1
  
  And here...
  3.1415926535 8979323846 2643383279 5028841971 6939937510 5820974944 5923078164 0628620899 8628034825 3421170679
  is a little slice of irrational pi!
65. Re:This is why we need people in space by cellocgw · 2012-09-06 04:36 · Score: 1
  
  And this is why robots aren't going replace people anytime soon. One little thing goes wrong with an unmanned mission and either a major subsystem is written off or the entire mission is a failure.
  More or less, as other responders have pointed out. Me, I'd have designed any replaceable item ("LRU" in DoD-ese) such that the locking mech was independent of the item. In this case, for example, have the power supply made with through holes and mount on bolts which are part of the mating surface (like wheels on a car to the hubs). Even better would be to have both the box and the mount plate w/ through holes, so the bolt and nut are independent, easily replaced items. In this way, thread damage never affects replaceability.
  
  --
  https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
66. Re:This is why we need people in space by delt0r · 2012-09-06 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  Of course the reason they needed a clever hack in the first place was because the engineers had used different shaped CO2 scrubbers for the lander and the command module. Engineering at its finest. Not.
  
  --
  If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
67. Re:This is why we need people in space by LongearedBat · 2012-09-06 04:54 · Score: 2
  
  Then listen for the click. Space is so quiet that you could hear a pin drop.
68. Re:This is why we need people in space by jmorris42 · 2012-09-06 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  > If something goes wrong on an unmanned mission, you can scrap it and try again and still get away with spending less.
  Your argument works, but only to a certain point. A robotic mission requires zero defects and perfect foresight since, software excepted in some conditions, you have what you have and can't change it. The longer and more complicated the mission the lower the odds of achieving that go, which seems to be the crux of the problem with Mars missions. Even if each part/stage beats the fabled five nines of reliability, if you chain enough of those you get almost certain failure. Eventually you need the ability to fix things, adapt to the actual conditions you find yourself in, etc. That means people and as soon as you get beyond the Earth/Moon system the propagation delays make waldos impractical so the humans need to be in the same general area. If we had good enough waldos we might keep the humans in Mars orbit during the early stages.
  
  --
  Democrat delenda est
69. Re:This is why we need people in space by jamstar7 · 2012-09-06 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  No air in space. Thus, no sound. Star Trek et al to the contrary, you do not hear explosions in space.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
70. Re:This is why we need people in space by khallow · 2012-09-06 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  Entropy is sinful?
  Well, is it?
71. Re:This is why we need people in space by jamstar7 · 2012-09-06 08:38 · Score: 1
  
  Of course the reason they needed a clever hack in the first place was because the engineers had used different shaped CO2 scrubbers for the lander and the command module. Engineering at its finest. Not.
  Different contractors with different subcontractors and no communication between the two.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
72. Re:This is why we need people in space by couchslug · 2012-09-06 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  Non-human payloads can be expendable, unburdened by carrying meat tourists.
  If we want to explore space, we should perfect and send robots.
  Where we want to send tourists, don't call them anything different and send them knowing they are a burden.
  There is no rush to send humans. Send robots for a century, and the improved robots will better serve the humans who follow them.
  
  --
  "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
73. Re:This is why we need people in space by craigminah · 2012-09-06 11:12 · Score: 1
  
  Need to send Mike Holmes (from Holmes on Homes) up there to gut and redo the ISS.
74. Re:This is why we need people in space by Neil+Boekend · 2012-09-06 18:26 · Score: 1
  
  I misunderstood your use of "dropping". In orbital mechanics "dropping" gets a weird meaning. Now that I understand what you meant I can see that it is quite logical and well thought out.
  
  --
  Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
75. Re:This is why we need people in space by LongearedBat · 2012-09-06 23:16 · Score: 1
  
  Whooshed by someting that obvious?!? Of course there's no sound in space, nor is there any gravity for pins to drop.
Biggest Surprise by SuperKendall · 2012-09-05 14:09 · Score: 4, Funny

I'm more surprised that they have spare toothbrushes on hand than I am they were able to fix this.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:Biggest Surprise by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 14:16 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  after your second or third space-one-night-stand with the martians, you learn that its only polite to
  keep extra toothbrushes
2. Re:Biggest Surprise by gagol · 2012-09-05 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  Clean breath is probably very important to crew relationship in this closed space. Toothbrush are light, a couple spares dont cost much to launch.
  
  --
  Tomorrow is another day...
3. Re:Biggest Surprise by Burning1 · 2012-09-05 14:16 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, you know how it is... a couple of friends come to visit, and forget to bring their toothbrush home.
  Seriously though, toothbrushes are awesome. Always like having a couple spares around when I'm working with cars.
4. Re:Biggest Surprise by macraig · 2012-09-05 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  I *always* have extra toothbrushes for brushing non-toothy things.
5. Re:Biggest Surprise by GameboyRMH · 2012-09-06 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  I wonder if they cross-drill the toothbrushes for lightness before sending them up there.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Space station saved by ... Brains ... by davidwr · 2012-09-05 14:12 · Score: 2

Space Station Saved By Human Beings Using Their Brains And The Resources At Hand
There, fixed that for you.
Now this is not really news, is it?

--
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
1. Re:Space station saved by ... Brains ... by tragedy · 2012-09-05 14:57 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  It wasn't them, it was the inanimate carbon rod!
2. Re:Space station saved by ... Brains ... by b4dc0d3r · 2012-09-05 15:04 · Score: 1
  
  I was going to be a bit more biting, sarcastic, and insulting, so I'm glad you got here first.
  But you missed the part about the question mark at the end. I don't know, was it saved by a toothbrush?
  Pretty soon, everyone here will know about "Betteridge's Law of Headlines" and quit clicking on this nonsense. Until then, I intend to inform as much as I can, though I may repeat myself.
  Don't click on a question to find the answer.
3. Re:Space station saved by ... Brains ... by grumling · 2012-09-06 01:10 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.thephantomcity.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/20070629simpsonscarbonrod.jpg
  
  --
  "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
This is why we need V'Ger in space by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 14:19 · Score: 1

Voyager was a robot sent to do a man's job.
But what about.... by macraig · 2012-09-05 14:20 · Score: 1

So then... "canned air" and a toothbrush saved the ISS from an energy crunch and rolling blackouts?
all hail by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 14:24 · Score: 4, Funny

all hail the inanimate carbon rod!
Obligatory Simpsons by DarkBlackFox · 2012-09-05 14:26 · Score: 4, Funny

"It's an inanimate carbon rod!!" http://i.imgur.com/ijjIh.png
1. Re:Obligatory Simpsons by SOOPRcow · 2012-09-05 15:00 · Score: 1
  
  Honest to god that is the first thing I thought of when I saw this story. 3
2. Re:Obligatory Simpsons by DarkBlackFox · 2012-09-05 16:07 · Score: 1
  
  I'd be disappointed in Slashdot if I were the only one. Glad to see others thinking the same.
3. Re:Obligatory Simpsons by antdude · 2012-09-05 17:00 · Score: 1
  
  "In Toothbrush We Trust"
  What brand of toothbrush was it? ;)
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Not a paper clip. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 14:27 · Score: 1

They had to resort to a toothbrush because they didn't have any spare paper clips. They were all in use with the duct tape.
Thank you, Slashdot... by Schmorgluck · 2012-09-05 14:31 · Score: 2

Now I have the MacGyver theme music stuck in my head. Thank you oh so very much!

--
There's nothing like $HOME
1. Re:Thank you, Slashdot... by jd2112 · 2012-09-05 15:08 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  MacGyver
  
  In
  
  SPACE
  SPACE
  Space
  Space
  space
  space
  
  --
  Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
2. Re:Thank you, Slashdot... by Joe_Dragon · 2012-09-05 16:15 · Score: 1
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m45YqOin2sg
Yeah but how much did the toothbrush cost? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 14:37 · Score: 1

Yeah but how much did the toothbrush cost?
1. Re:Yeah but how much did the toothbrush cost? by game+kid · 2012-09-05 14:46 · Score: 1
  
  Would you like that figure in retail USD or government contractor USD?
  
  --
  You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
2. Re:Yeah but how much did the toothbrush cost? by PPH · 2012-09-05 14:49 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  You get one free with each toilet seat.
  Don't ask.
  
  --
  Have gnu, will travel.
3. Re:Yeah but how much did the toothbrush cost? by CubicleZombie · 2012-09-05 14:54 · Score: 1
  
  Throw in enough CMMI, and even a toothbrush gets expensive.
  
  --
  :wq
Toothbrushes by BuypolarBear · 2012-09-05 14:45 · Score: 1

Not just for fighting cavities!
1. Re:Toothbrushes by Mashiki · 2012-09-05 15:16 · Score: 2
  
  Hah. Toothbrushes, they clean, whiten, brighten and fix clutches and space stations.
  My first car was a '81 mercury lynx. The thing was a piece of shit. But it worked, it got me from point to point. But it used an old style mechanical clutch with no built in spacer adjustment. I fixed that with a toothbrush and some bailing wire. I got another 40,000mi out of that clutch, and by that time the car was dead.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
Spare? by PPH · 2012-09-05 14:46 · Score: 5, Funny

"Williams and Hoshide reporting in commander. We have good news and bad news. We managed to clear the threads on this power unit and complete installation. That's the good news. The bad news is that the only toothbrush we could find was yours."

--
Have gnu, will travel.
My faith in NASA has been restored by sabri · 2012-09-05 14:48 · Score: 5, Funny

American spaceship, Russian spaceship: all fixed with toothbrush!

--
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
1. Re:My faith in NASA has been restored by Alex+Belits · 2012-09-05 15:15 · Score: 1
  
  American spaceship, Russian spaceship: all fixed with toothbrush!
  As far as I know, Salyut and Mir didn't have screws hammered into threads at an angle. Bottles of vodka smuggled inside spacesuits on Progress, botched docking while "experimenting" with manual controls for no earthly (or space-y) reason -- sure. Stripped threads on the outside structures -- no.
  
  --
  Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
2. Re:My faith in NASA has been restored by nitehawk214 · 2012-09-06 01:26 · Score: 1
  
  American spaceship, Russian spaceship: all fixed with toothbrush!
  As far as I know, Salyut and Mir didn't have screws hammered into threads at an angle. Bottles of vodka smuggled inside spacesuits on Progress, botched docking while "experimenting" with manual controls for no earthly (or space-y) reason -- sure. Stripped threads on the outside structures -- no.
  COCHRANE: But I'm sure as hell's not going up there sober!
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
3. Re:My faith in NASA has been restored by shutdown+-p+now · 2012-09-06 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  Speaking of which, these astronauts would probably get expedited Russian citizenship if they were to apply for it. They have already clearly demonstrated that they are fully prepared to culturally assimilate, and have in fact already started doing so.
  (yes, I am a Russian)
Re:Wish I was there by guises · 2012-09-05 15:06 · Score: 1

I can't stop laughing at the bit about erupting in applause. Take some mundane task, add "in space" and it becomes noteworthy enough to get articles written about it.

Maybe some day we'll have a movie about replacing a power box. No, _the_ power box. Some day.
Good, now... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 15:17 · Score: 1

Now hunt down the machinists, engineers and managers responsible for a manufacturing process that left "lots of metal shavings" in a piece of life critical aerospace equipment and flay them alive as a lesson to all other machinists, engineers and managers.
Post the video on youtube, with a message officially obviating all current and future contracts with each and every subcontractor involved in this pathetic farce.
1. Re:Good, now... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-05 15:38 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Now hunt down the machinists, engineers and managers responsible for a manufacturing process that left "lots of metal shavings" in a piece of life critical aerospace equipment and flay them alive as a lesson to all other machinists, engineers and managers.
  Post the video on youtube, with a message officially obviating all current and future contracts with each and every subcontractor involved in this pathetic farce.
  Ah, yeah, except the metal shavings were probably from the first cross-threaded bolt that was carving out a new threading in the mounting. Although astronauts are known to be god-like in competence, without any additional information, it would initially appear to be a case of operator error when the original bolt was first attempted.
So basically... by Dahamma · 2012-09-05 15:40 · Score: 1

...they did the same thing that millions of people around the world do every day in their homes, garages, and workplaces - but in space!
1. Re:So basically... by Confusador · 2012-09-05 18:08 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think millions of people around the world lose their fingernails every day doing things like this.
2. Re:So basically... by Dahamma · 2012-09-06 04:16 · Score: 1
  
  No, many of them are little less careful and lose things less replaceable with their garage shenanigans...
Farm style engineering done right I reckon by DeTech · 2012-09-05 16:46 · Score: 1

Next comes the space grade bailing wire.
Slice by nigelo · 2012-09-05 18:40 · Score: 1

Awesome Pie, because the cake was a lie.

--
*Still* negative function...
The shavings, where did they go? by advocate_one · 2012-09-05 19:03 · Score: 3, Interesting

I hope they had some means in place to capture them like a magnet and some sticky paper... (a vacuum cleaner would have been useless there). Who knows where those shavings could get to if not captured...

--
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
1. Re:The shavings, where did they go? by cybernanga · 2012-09-06 01:58 · Score: 1
  
  Surely, a VACUUM cleaner is exactly what you need when operating in space, which is as close to vacuum as you are going to get? ;-)
  
  --
  www.Buy-Proxy.com - A "buyer-driven" global marketplace.
2. Re:The shavings, where did they go? by gman003 · 2012-09-06 03:28 · Score: 1
  
  As the ISS isn't actually all that high up, they'll probably re-enter in a few weeks and burn up within seconds.
3. Re:The shavings, where did they go? by GameboyRMH · 2012-09-06 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  I actually cover a magnet with saran wrap and run it over my car's lug nuts to remove any metal shavings that might be on there (the nuts themselves, I blow out with compressed air). This would be a good practice to follow on the ISS.
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Re:Oh please. by azalin · 2012-09-05 19:24 · Score: 1

you mean like this?
Took 2 people and 4½ hours? by petes_PoV · 2012-09-05 20:17 · Score: 1

If they'd said they couldn't do the job for a couple of weeks they'd have been made honourary life members of the plumbers union.

--
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
The metal shavings that are left floating in space by Taco+Cowboy · 2012-09-05 20:46 · Score: 1

Wouldn't those metal shavings become very dangerous space debris that can damage other space-crafts?

--
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Hmm by lightknight · 2012-09-05 20:59 · Score: 1

I have a silly question. Were those metal shavings there as a result of the astronauts' attempts to secure the bolt, or were they there due to improper cleaning before leaving the manufacturer's premises?

--
I am John Hurt.
Just another example of.... by Sqreater · 2012-09-05 23:44 · Score: 1

...why you don't have engineers do technician's work. For next time: http://www.ehow.com/how_6387657_remove-loctite-screws.html

--
E Proelio Veritas.
Saved by a toothbrush? by maroberts · 2012-09-06 01:21 · Score: 1

Pink or blue?

--
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
Howard Wallowitz by FacePlant · 2012-09-06 02:37 · Score: 1

Way to go Fruit Loops!

--
My Heart Is A Flower
The Hitchhiker's text adventure taught me by Arancaytar · 2012-09-06 02:51 · Score: 1

Never ever, even if it's the end of the world, leave your house without a toothbrush.
They had like 14 tools... by Conspiracy_Of_Doves · 2012-09-06 03:33 · Score: 1

... all stuffed into something that one of the astronaut's aunts have him. If they hadn't had the toothbrush, THAT would have been the thing they needed.

--

Technoli
Re:Terminology by wiedzmin · 2012-09-06 04:25 · Score: 1

Russians would have just hammered that bolt in with a hammer and let the next guy figure out what to do with it. That's the Russian way.

--
Bow before me, for I am root.
Re:3d printing? by GameboyRMH · 2012-09-06 08:24 · Score: 1

...any tool that wouldn't break while being made of plastic or weak sintered metal. And the fumes should make things interesting.

--
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel