A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Science Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

When is manned spaceflight preferred?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 3rd 08, 04:18 AM posted to sci.space.moderated
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default When is manned spaceflight preferred?

Can anyone refer me to papers/reports which study
when one might need manned spaceflight? What
tasks can't robots do?

Ads
  #2  
Old April 5th 08, 03:35 PM posted to sci.space.moderated
Herman Rubin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default When is manned spaceflight preferred?

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  
Old April 7th 08, 02:41 PM posted to sci.space.moderated
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,012
Default When is manned spaceflight preferred?

"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  
Old May 6th 08, 02:28 AM posted to sci.space.moderated
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default When is manned spaceflight preferred?

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  
Old May 7th 08, 07:03 PM posted to sci.space.moderated
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default When is manned spaceflight preferred?

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  
Old June 22nd 08, 04:47 AM
gogoer114 gogoer114 is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Jun 2008
Posts: 3
Post Good writing

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  
Old June 27th 12, 02:22 AM posted to sci.space.moderated
Alejandro Zuzek[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default When is manned spaceflight preferred?

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  
Old September 18th 12, 07:05 AM
TaipttarTup TaipttarTup is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: May 2011
Posts: 21
Default

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  
Old March 24th 13, 01:04 PM
FOP-leechy FOP-leechy is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by SpaceBanter: Mar 2013
Location: Leeds
Posts: 1
Default

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  
Old June 7th 13, 09:03 PM posted to sci.space.moderated
Martha Adams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 371
Default When is manned spaceflight preferred?

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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight Greg Kuperberg Policy 48 July 30th 03 11:53 PM
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight Rand Simberg History 7 July 29th 03 09:04 PM
The End of U.S. Manned Spaceflight? Joseph S. Powell, III Space Shuttle 0 July 29th 03 07:15 PM
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight Hallerb History 1 July 28th 03 03:34 AM
Management, mandate, and manned spaceflight OM History 1 July 26th 03 10:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2018 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.