![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Can anyone refer me to papers/reports which study
when one might need manned spaceflight? What tasks can't robots do? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
wrote: Can anyone refer me to papers/reports which study when one might need manned spaceflight? What tasks can't robots do? There are lots of them. For example, suppose we want to find out if an asteroid can be mined for a mineral, or can be made habitable. A robot can find out, possibly very slowly, that the mineral is there, but cannot consider the problems of excavation, refining, etc. Nor can it decide on the spot which alternative methods to use for constructing temporary or permanent living quarters. Nor could they investigate whether people could live in the Moon or in asteroids, which may well be the proper place for some of mankind to live in the future. Robots cannot even do a good job of surveying Mars. Robots cannot think, and if one needs a half hour round time to communicate, it is necessary to be very careful near the edge of a cliff or a slope. So robots moving at one mile per day explore little. It is true we can often use robots more cheaply than humans, but all of our machines are sub-imbeciles, no matter what their speed. Judgment is often needed. -- This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University. Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Herman Rubin" wrote in message
... Robots cannot even do a good job of surveying Mars. Robots cannot think, and if one needs a half hour round time to communicate, it is necessary to be very careful near the edge of a cliff or a slope. So robots moving at one mile per day explore little. The two Mars rovers are often touted as a pair of cheap, unmanned, missions able to cover more terrain than a lander. While true, they do move very slowly. Over the years, they have covered distances that are still very small when compared to what the Apollo astronauts did in the (obviously manned) lunar rover. It's also interesting to note that with a man on the spot, equipment like the lunar rover can be made a lot "dumber" than an unmanned piece of equipment. The man in the suit can be the control system, communications system, and even the maintenance system for the equipment. I believe I recall one of the rovers getting an improvised fender, installed by an astronaut on the spot. That's more than a bit difficult to do remotely. Here's a reference (I love Google): http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missio...7/surface_opp/ The above shows a nice "traverse map" showing how far the Apollo 17 astronauts were able to travel with the lunar rover as well as a close up picture showing the "repaired" fender. The other thing to note about manned missions is that you typically plan on bringing the astronauts back at the end of the mission, so adding "sample return" to the mission is far easier than trying to design it into an unmanned mission. An unmanned sample return mission would be a very good mission to fly to Mars, but this mission always seems to be just beyond the limits (technical and cost) of what an unmanned mission can do using today's launch vehicles. Jeff -- A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein .. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 2, 8:18 pm, wrote:
Can anyone refer me to papers/reports which study when one might need manned spaceflight? What tasks can't robots do? In a biologically toxic, physically extreme and often gamma plus X-ray saturated environment, unless you're talking about a one-way human style expedition as having no budgetary or time limitations of getting that expendable astronaut onto such remote locations, whereas instead rad-hard and robust robotics are not likely 1% the cost, as well as in most instances representing the one and only viable option. In other words, 10 robots for 10% the cost of one astronaut seems far better, of much faster deployments and by far cheaper per required science feedback. .. - Brad Guth |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 7, 6:41 am, "Jeff Findley" wrote:
"Herman Rubin" wrote in message ... Robots cannot even do a good job of surveying Mars. Robots cannot think, and if one needs a half hour round time to communicate, it is necessary to be very careful near the edge of a cliff or a slope. So robots moving at one mile per day explore little. The two Mars rovers are often touted as a pair of cheap, unmanned, missions able to cover more terrain than a lander. While true, they do move very slowly. Over the years, they have covered distances that are still very small when compared to what the Apollo astronauts did in the (obviously manned) lunar rover. It's also interesting to note that with a man on the spot, equipment like the lunar rover can be made a lot "dumber" than an unmanned piece of equipment. The man in the suit can be the control system, communications system, and even the maintenance system for the equipment. I believe I recall one of the rovers getting an improvised fender, installed by an astronaut on the spot. That's more than a bit difficult to do remotely. Here's a reference (I love Google): http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missio...7/surface_opp/ The above shows a nice "traverse map" showing how far the Apollo 17 astronauts were able to travel with the lunar rover as well as a close up picture showing the "repaired" fender. The other thing to note about manned missions is that you typically plan on bringing the astronauts back at the end of the mission, so adding "sample return" to the mission is far easier than trying to design it into an unmanned mission. An unmanned sample return mission would be a very good mission to fly to Mars, but this mission always seems to be just beyond the limits (technical and cost) of what an unmanned mission can do using today's launch vehicles. Jeff -- A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein . Most any terrestrial science technology can be safely deployed upon the likes of Mars. However, of far better worth than even peeing on a hot rock, is to send a robotic rigid airship to cruise efficiently around Venus, well below them acidic clouds. You folks do realize it's not nearly as humanly or rather ET insurmountable as we've been told, and most certainly not technologically insurmountable for robotics. Would you like to see for yourselves? .. - Brad Guth |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A good beginning is a half done! Keep up the good work! RunescapePower leveling, an Online Action RPG Age of conan A mix of a deep, story-driven single-player experience and a massive and brutal multiplayer, Making Runescape Money Guide, age of conan gold. If you don`t love yourself you can`t be yourself.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Monday, April 7, 2008 10:41:21 AM UTC-3, Jeff Findley wrote:
(snip) It's also interesting to note that with a man on the spot, equipment like the lunar rover can be made a lot "dumber" than an unmanned piece of equipment. The man in the suit can be the control system, communications system, and even the maintenance system for the equipment. I believe I recall one of the rovers getting an improvised fender, installed by an astronaut on the spot. That's more than a bit difficult to do remotely. (snip) Careful there. Fixing the LRV fender is not a good example of an advantage of manned missions. That fender wouldn't need fixing if an astronaut hadn't broken it in the first place. Your point is still valid. A person can fix equipment on the spot and the equivalent capability is next to impossible for unmanned missions givent the current technology. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
3 single playing nine games a href="http://www.dallascowboysjerseys2012.us/12-felix-jones-jersey"Felix Jones Jersey/a
07 season superior defensive jock by the pony discharge 3 only playing nine games 07 seasonable was the a-one defensive contestant pony repudiate 2011 02 19 at 09:12 NFL official website Views: 0 Comments (0) Friday Indianapolis Colts owner Jim - Ilse announced with the 2007 opportunity ripe, the NFL Defensive Player of the Bob - Saunders termination. "We would like to as a consequence of all incredible contribution of Sanders, he steals to his pre-eminent defensive participant honors in the Wonderful Move," Ilse said in a statement. In fact, the get's agitate is not surprising. Sanders and the party won the guild's first-rate defensive player honor, signed a five-year $ 37.5 million squeeze, but in the next three seasons, he only participated in nine games of the undistorted season. The Colts last summer and gage sentry Antoine - Beixi Ya, signed a four-year, $ 27 million contract; originally Sanders replacement Melvin - Britt has step by step grown into a qualified starter; while the Colts are silent In tried and Peyton - Manning signed a long-term contract, the crew did not have enough span to shield Sanders. Nourishing Sanders was a given of the superior defensive players in the league. 2005 season, he participated in 14 games, ration the Colts to the dawn of the season, 13-game winning stroke, and All-Star recompense the ahead time. The 2006 edible knee wrong, so he solely participated in the four games of the cyclical salt, but the Colts defensive power to significantly improve his comeback in the playoffs, and is a passkey agent in the Colts to gain a victory in the Super Bowl that season. Sanders to restore the trim of the 2007 edible, participated in 15 games, all-star again, and transform into the beginning bride to gain a victory in the paramount defensive player of the year awards in the account of the Colts players. Sanders himself had acknowledged his reckless style of wing it belittle may curtail his NFL career, and some fans the same demand The Colts allow Sanders to visit on the bench as a starter in the playoffs when. Proved to the fans of the recommendations or justified, in the next three seasons, Sanders constantly troubled on injuries, irrevocably Ilse made and the sentence to discharge. Sanders seven NFL seasons, a unalloyed of 373 times to intercept, 3.5 bounce, 2 phoney dippy the ball and regain puzzled the ball three times and six steals. (Leon) Helping to: Sina microblogging, happy everyone watercress titillating Recommended Photos - the playoffs fans furor in Photo-NFL the strongest nauseous yahuo Photo the - crow inflexible defensive zenith Photo - the Brady 6 convey the array childish Photos - Testy Contention protect decent spear Photos - Giants at simplicity preparing packets Photos - experts advocate rush of Thibaud Photos - Broncos to adapt [Article Forums route and small Print Closed the talk Saints are eliminated image = 'prety damned quick' whammy defensive coordination members hesitation of leaving the crew coach Rams screen off playoff smudge omnibus the dust has settled Pro Pan hero team strong-willed that Conservationist Bay was gum up non glory considerable receiver defensive Worse Saints lose unified person can proudly leave 5 minutes 2 touchdowns he do can Thibaudet and Brady gap where the assault line gamble is decisive in the intention is the strongest spear or shelter Lee NFL nauseous and defensive smash looming Lan Fort Arena Snow thoughtful fans to participate in the clean-up on exuberance forward-looking: Packers Changzheng elementary trace Giants vengeful toward the Callow Bay Review cowboy bloodbath perfection of narrow-minded game now unrealistic seven weeks Short: quarterback bench insolvent unrivalled ceaseless behind impure parameter the American Beckham burden sworn contestant swank NFL the primary quarterback Demiurge 933 yards total interval NFL into a new era Brady earn host five ace attacking band: new and primordial eagle blameless Nationalist cluster gratis agent signing Reflect: The provocative diagonal is the most sought-after (ready-made updates) Ten efficacious responsibility paramount superstar ranking Brady defeat Manning Deng Ten leftist fall Brown Dolphin Hutch clear-cut advantages swept the first ? a href="http://www.dallascowboysjerseys2012.us/25-tony-romo-jersey"Tony Romo Jersey/a
__________________
Hats For Mens |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In an ideal world the majority of space missions would be manned as more work and science is done and is more interesting to witness. The problems are that of cost and safety. The current space economy is not up to the task of manned flight beyond LEO. We can still send robots to still do "something" interesting and keep progress moving forward.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5/7/2008 2:03 PM, BradGuth wrote:
On Apr 7, 6:41 am, "Jeff Findley" wrote: "Herman Rubin" wrote in message ... Robots cannot even do a good job of surveying Mars. Robots cannot think, and if one needs a half hour round time to communicate, it is necessary to be very careful near the edge of a cliff or a slope. So robots moving at one mile per day explore little. The two Mars rovers are often touted as a pair of cheap, unmanned, missions able to cover more terrain than a lander. While true, they do move very slowly. Over the years, they have covered distances that are still very small when compared to what the Apollo astronauts did in the (obviously manned) lunar rover. It's also interesting to note that with a man on the spot, equipment like the lunar rover can be made a lot "dumber" than an unmanned piece of equipment. The man in the suit can be the control system, communications system, and even the maintenance system for the equipment. I believe I recall one of the rovers getting an improvised fender, installed by an astronaut on the spot. That's more than a bit difficult to do remotely. Here's a reference (I love Google): http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missio...7/surface_opp/ The above shows a nice "traverse map" showing how far the Apollo 17 astronauts were able to travel with the lunar rover as well as a close up picture showing the "repaired" fender. The other thing to note about manned missions is that you typically plan on bringing the astronauts back at the end of the mission, so adding "sample return" to the mission is far easier than trying to design it into an unmanned mission. An unmanned sample return mission would be a very good mission to fly to Mars, but this mission always seems to be just beyond the limits (technical and cost) of what an unmanned mission can do using today's launch vehicles. Jeff -- A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein . Most any terrestrial science technology can be safely deployed upon the likes of Mars. However, of far better worth than even peeing on a hot rock, is to send a robotic rigid airship to cruise efficiently around Venus, well below them acidic clouds. You folks do realize it's not nearly as humanly or rather ET insurmountable as we've been told, and most certainly not technologically insurmountable for robotics. Would you like to see for yourselves? . - Brad Guth ================================================== ======= How about *above* the acid clouds? Seems to me, Venus might be a good place for a city buoyant like a blimp, floating above the clouds. I don't know the atmosphere pressure gradient there, but from sf writing I've seen, I've an impression a near-Terra atmosphere pressure exists there above the clouds, making the floating city feasible. Like in Star Wars. A large conical reflector, and a lot of tech, would make a sub-Mercury orbital station possible. Might be named Vulcan, of course. Titeotwawki -- Martha Adams [Sun 2013 Jun 02] |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight | Greg Kuperberg | Policy | 48 | July 31st 03 12:53 AM |
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight | Rand Simberg | History | 7 | July 29th 03 10:04 PM |
The End of U.S. Manned Spaceflight? | Joseph S. Powell, III | Space Shuttle | 0 | July 29th 03 08:15 PM |
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight | Hallerb | History | 1 | July 28th 03 04:34 AM |
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight | OM | History | 1 | July 26th 03 11:15 AM |