On 1 Oct 2005 23:17:51 -0700, "zoltan" wrote:

Our current concept of space exploration is too much like the way we do
things on earth. Space station assembly involved many hours of EVA,
astronauts in spacesuits trying to finish before their air supply runs
low. Our idea of lunar exploration entirely mimics earth activities.
The lunar lander encapsulates the astronauts. It lands on the moon,
they climb down a ladder, walk or stumble around in the dust, collect
samples, maybe drive around in a rover vehicle. In the end they climb
back and fly home.

I think it would be much more efficient to encapsulate the astronauts
in a confortable robotic vehicle that has manipulator arms to collect
samples, air conditioning, life support, communications, consumables,
motors, etc. We already have a lot of experience with such vehicles
from undersea exploration.

The astronauts could stay within their vehicles for long periods of
time, they could drive around and collect samples, look for water ice
and other resources. When they are finished they could dock their
vehicles to the ascent module and fly into orbit. There is no need to
ever wear spacesuits.

Assembly of large structures in the future may be better done in space
by astronauts flying around in their robotic vehicles that have
manipulator arms.

I have spent many years developing force reflecting teleoperation
systems that allow the operator to feel the forces that the robot arms
feel. This technology works very well when the time delay is short, the
operator is not far from the robot.

In general any acivity in space or on another celestial body could be
more effectively performed by designing robotic life support vehicles
around the individuals involved. This same principle applies even to
most environments on the earth, such as military activities.

I believe these vehicles can be more cheaply developed and built than
spacesuits, they can also save weight overall.

The astronauts can spend more time working, they can exert larger
forces, observe minute details better. They are also safer from
meteorite impacts and equipment malfunctions.

If you're going to do that, why do the astronauts have to be on site?
Seems like it would be cheaper and safer for them to run the show from
the space station or a nearby vehicle or base.

--
Josh

"It was amazing I won. I was running against peace and prosperity
and incumbency." - George W. Bush