Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA's Drone For Other Worlds

Posted by Soulskill on from the rovers-need-a-pal dept.

An anonymous reader writes: A group of engineers is building a new drone. What sets this apart from the hundreds of other drone development projects going on around the world? Well, these engineers are at the Kennedy Space Center, and the drone will be used to gather samples on other worlds. The drone is specifically designed to be able to fly in low- or no-atmosphere situations. Senior technologist Rob Mueller describes it as a "prospecting robot." He says, "The first step in being able to use resources on Mars or an asteroid is to find out where the resources are. They are most likely in hard-to-access areas where there is permanent shadow. Some of the crater walls are angled 30 degrees or more, and that's far too steep for a traditional rover to navigate and climb." They face major challenges with rotor and gas-jet design, they have to figure out navigation without GPS, and the whole system needs to be largely autonomous — you can't really steer a drone yourself with a latency of several minutes (or more).

30 comments

  1. I can't wait by RatherBeAnonymous · · Score: 0

    for the first alien to shoot one down with it's plasma shotgun. Will it be arrested for discharging a firearm inside a populated crater?

    1. Re:I can't wait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I've learned anything from John Carter it is that gun laws are pretty lax on Mars.

  2. Why go without GPS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems to me that a rudimentary GPS setup around Mars would be of some use. Why not build that first?

    1. Re:Why go without GPS? by chilenexus · · Score: 1

      24 additional satellites added to the 5 currently orbiting mars will add a level of complexity to any new probes sent - they have more obstacles to avoid on their approach. The good news is that the gps ones will be broadcasting a gps signal, so it wouldn't be too hard to design a new craft to avoid those 24. 24 new launches to Mars could give the private space launch business a boost. Or would we try to send all 24 in one or two bundles? Can we be sure they won't interfere with the Martian's gps system? We don't want them breaking out their PU-238 Space Modulators....

    2. Re:Why go without GPS? by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 2

      A cubesat launcher modified with manoeuvering thrusters so it could do multiple deployments would work. The question is how small and low-power can you make the atomic clocks?

      In practice though, You could get away with some lower orbit probes and synchronize your manouevers to only those times they're overhead providing positioning coverage.

    3. Re:Why go without GPS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      These things aren't going to be traveling around the planet. At best they may travel a few miles away from their lander, at that distance some low powered radio beacons, some inertial sensors and a gyro should be enough for positioning. I'd be far more concerned with their propulsion systems. They seem to be on the fence about the propulsion systems they're planning to use, they talk about cold gas jets, then they talk about rotors. I suppose it could be dependent on where the probe is being sent. Rotors may work on Mars and they are definitely the better system from a reliability/reuse perspective but they would be useless on most asteroids which is probably where the cold gas jets probably come in.

    4. Re:Why go without GPS? by Rei · · Score: 2

      On the Moon or Mars they wouldn't reach very far. But a RTG-powered version on Titan would have unlimited range (although may need to land periodically to recharge its flight batteries). And even a rocket or gas jet version would have quite significant range on an asteroid.

      Such a design is obviously going to be very mission sensitive, hence the need for different propulsion systems. Some missions would benefit significantly as well from wings to allow for long distance flight on bodies with atmospheres (Venus, Titan, maybe Mars, etc). A couple worlds, such as Titan, might benefit from landing floats. And so forth. But that's where rapid prototyping tech (such as 3d printing) becomes useful - they engineer the base model and then can play around with variants with ease. Hopefully in the end they'll have a sample collector module with a workable version for almost any body in the solar system. And for the interests of science, we really need something like that, a universal adaptable drone module - to be paired with a universal adaptable ion tug module, one of a couple variants of a universal adaptable reentry / landing modules, and the same for adaptable ascent modules.

      It's impressive what science can be pulled off on the surface of another world. But it's nothing compared to what we can do here on Earth with a sample return.

      --
      Also, I can kill you with my brain.
    5. Re:Why go without GPS? by bobbied · · Score: 2

      It seems to me that a rudimentary GPS setup around Mars would be of some use. Why not build that first?

      GPS is pretty dependent on ground stations which monitor each satellite in the constellation and provides "corrections" to the whole system for it to work. It also requires a minimum of 3 (usually more like 5) satellites to be in view to come up with a location solution. So, you are talking about a bunch of independent satellites with some remote monitoring capability from the surface to fix positions and keep the system accurate enough. That's a LOT of very expensive infrastructure to get to Mars..

      Simpler solution is to just go with a Loran type system. Drop 3 or more fairly simple devices onto the surface that transmit a bit of coordinated RF and you have a solution to easily navigate within the line of site of the transmitters. It's really just the precursor of GPS and gets you pretty good relative location information.

      Even better, would be to use a RADAR system and previously obtained map data like many cruse missiles use. It only requires precision terrain elevation data which can be easily obtained from ONE orbiting probe, and allows you to give the "flying" vehicle some autonomy in navigating from point A to point B. As you can obtain more precision terrain information you can further refine your data set and go more places with better and better assurance you know where you are.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:Why go without GPS? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1
      GPS is nice when you are trying to drop a shell down an enemy gun barrel, but not required when driving off road. IRUs have worked well (and still do) in commercial aircraft.

      And why aren't rovers considered drones? They are semi autonomous vehicles with rudimentary obstacle avoidance and steering.

    7. Re:Why go without GPS? by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      Titan has low gravity and a thick atmosphere. A pedal-powered plane would get you into the air quickly (as you suffocate and freeze to death).

    8. Re:Why go without GPS? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      From the sound of it they're trying to make a system versatile enough to work on asteroids not just Mars.

    9. Re:Why go without GPS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know the size difference between a satellite and a planet? Hitting a spacecraft in orbit would be difficult even if you were intentionally trying to. Imagine a dart board a mile wide, with a bullseye the size of a grain of rice. And you throw the dart from a thousand miles away.

    10. Re:Why go without GPS? by Rei · · Score: 1

      Indeed, Titan the easiest large world to explore by drone, so long as they tolerate the cryogenic conditions. A highly efficient version could potentially fly continuously just on RTG power (there have been proposals along these lines), although anything adapted to deal with the added weight / inefficiency of hardware to carefully land, collect samples, carry them, etc would probably have to use flight batteries.

      --
      Also, I can kill you with my brain.
  3. Manned flight by Mantrid42 · · Score: 1

    To all the naysayers: this is why we need to put people up there.

    1. Re:Manned flight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To fly drones? I mean, I'd love to watch the Martian Drone Cup 5000 and would even pre-order it on PPV, but maybe we should work on building support for the local FPV Racing league first?

    2. Re:Manned flight by Mantrid42 · · Score: 1

      To climb the 30 degree grades.

      But I suppose they could do both.

  4. If you think that's impressive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Northrop Grumman's planning an interplanetary drone for Venus.

  5. Drones? by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

    We used to call that probes. Everything is drone or isn't these days.

    --
    Achille Talon
    Hop!
    1. Re:Drones? by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      Not just any drone! A 3-D printed, Internet of things drone

  6. I built one for the Mars Society by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    I built one for the Mars Society, how do I give them one? http://www.robots-everywhere.c...

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
  7. Re:Oh please! Oh please! by bobbied · · Score: 1

    Make it look like a big black rectangle! Please!

    I'm sorry, I can't do that Dave.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  8. NASA lied about moon missions; what else? by Thing+1 · · Score: 0

    Recent NASA info says we can't get past the Van Allen belts -- the radiation will fry a person.

    So, how did the Apollo 11 astronauts get through? Answer: they didn't.

    Stanley Kubrick was hired to fake it. Then he was murdered 3 days after revealing this in an interview (just before "Eyes Wide Shut" came out, which he contractually forced it to come out on the 30th anniversary of Apollo 11).

    See the hints in the Shining: "A11 work and no play makes Jack a dull boy."

    Note carefully that the typewriter did not show "All" -- it's "A11", as in "Apollo 11".

    I don't trust Masons. They take a blood oath saying all previous and future oaths are subservient to this (Masonic) oath. Every single Apollo astronaut was a Mason.

    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  9. It's called RADAR terrain following.... by bobbied · · Score: 2

    You can do this using exactly the same technology that cruse missiles use, terrain following.

    All you need is precision terrain/elevation data and you can create a vehicle that can navigate safely from Point A to Point B using a terrain mapping RADAR. You just match the RADAR image to your known terrain map and voilà, instant location, elevation and orientation information that you use to correct your inertial navigation system. Preplan your probes route and activities and say go to that waypoint, land, do science, and return to base when done.

    "But we don't HAVE the necessary elevation data yet!" you say? I thought we where in the process of collecting detailed elevation data from Mars. Plus, if you have even a small amount of data which is detailed enough to land the craft with, you can make flights and collect additional terrain data using the very same RADAR you use to navigate with and expand your detailed dataset further and further away from your starting point over time. So you'd fly using the inertial navigation system past areas you knew, collect data and return to the area you already know, send the collected data to earth for post processing and receive an expanded detailed terrain map in return then do your detailed science in this new area. Wash, rinse and repeat as many times as possible.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  10. The obvious question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How will a drone work where there is NO atmosphere?

    1. Re:The obvious question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The article shows two prototypes, one with fan ducted fans (replaced with large bladed fans for worlds with some atmosphere?) and one with air valves and what I believe are high pressure air tanks which would probably be more suited to extremely low/no atmosphere worlds with low gravity. If you Youtube "ICBM kinetic interceptor" you should find some interesting videos of a roughly cylindrical object in a warehouse with a bunch of nets doing some pretty amazing hovering/movement, same idea but in a low gravity environment it would need much less thrust so compressed air should be enough for short jaunts.

  11. We're going to need a GPS-like system there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you doubt it?

    So why delay solving the issue when it will simplify so many other projects?

    1. Re:We're going to need a GPS-like system there... by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      Such as? What requires 30m accuracy in the fog? GPS is mostly used for not getting lost and we already know where all the landers/rovers are down to a few centimeters. GPS also needs constant updating from fixed ground stations due to satellite drift.

  12. Re:Oh please! Oh please! by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    "Enterprise" is a long-standing name for naval ships that goes back well before sci-fi as genre even existed.