The Next Leap In Space Exploration

An anonymous reader writes "The crew of the space shuttle Endeavor recently returned to Earth as ambassadors, harbingers of a new era of space exploration. Scientists at NASA are saying that the recent assembly of the Dextre bot is the first step in a long-term space-based man/machine partnership. '"The work we're doing now -- the robotics we're doing -- is what we're going to need to do to build any work station or habitat structure on the moon or Mars," said Allard Beutel, a spokesman for NASA. "Yes, this is just the beginning." Further joint human-robot projects will "be a symbiotic relationship. It's part of a long-term effort for us to branch out into the solar system. We're going to need this type of hand-in-robotic-hand [effort] to make this happen. We're in the infancy of space exploration. We have to start somewhere and this is as good a place as any."'"

Evangelion?

[The Queen]

I wonder just how 'closely' together they intend to have us working? *shudder*

Overstated a Bit?

[trongey]

"Long-term space-based man/machine partnership"? Come on, they installed an assembly robot. Sure, it's a very nice one and pretty complex, but it's not like they fired up freakin R. Daneel Olivaw.

Not even close

[pla]

The crew of the space shuttle Endeavor recently returned to Earth as ambassadors

Er, no. Sorry.

They assembled and deployed the Ikea version of a semi-autonomous robot. Not even Darl could stretch that into returning as "ambassadors".

The "next leap in space exploration" will happen when we start sending out one-way manned missions. Until then, we've done nothing more than piddle around in the local sandbox and thrown some rocks at pigeons.

Re:We're in the infancy of space exploration Not!

[netsavior]

Come on, we been in space since the sixties, and exploring it even before then. Calling this the "infancy of space exploration" is simply inaccurate.

We were a seafaring people for about 6000 years before we discovered some of the islands of the world. Industrialization is in its infancy, we are currently in the pre-history phase of space travel.

Re:Overstated a Bit?

[zappepcs]

I'm with you on that one. A bit too anthropomorphic for my tastes, and I like hobby robotics. We are a long way from having to hold hands with a robot, they are little more than very expensive tools. Robots like the Aibo are little more than very expensive pets. Then again, some people think poison ivy looks pretty. There is no accounting for tastes. To my way of thinking, the robots we have sent to Mars already is an amazing thing so putting on in orbit is hardly a major leap forward in robotics technology. The whole hand holding things is rather sophomoric really.

Re:Yup!

[snowmenr4ever]

While the summary tends to allude to such future possibilities, this robot is a long ways away. It is a "human-robot project." Meaning that a human is required to perform the tasks, and that they are not automated. The Canadian Space Agency provides information on the robot. http://www.space.gc.ca/asc/eng/missions/sts-123/dextre.asp [space.gc.ca]

Doing operations with these robotics requires a communication link, which would first have to be built by automated robotics (which this is not) or humans; I for one believe we will visit mars personally by the time we have automated robotics that could perform the necessary tasks to create this type of comm-link.

Re:Space 1999

[FinestLittleSpace]

No we wouldn't. The problems are deep rooted in various areas aside from inevitable apparent bureaucracy in NASA.

- NASA is VASTLY underfunded, with it's funding being cut on key projects year by year
- Most of the American public don't give a crap about the pre-history of space, such as throwing up robots and plants and 'seeing what happens'. It's hard to gain funding if noone cares.
- The current presidency has no charisma or enthusiasm to push space travel, it is simply not in his interests.
- Space travel is expensive and overall, has very little capitalist pleasing return. When it comes to space, what money you throw up there certainly does not come down. Scientific merit is in hoardes, but it's hard to argue with wall street that it has any merit.
- Some space technology does not follow 'Moores Law' so sometimes progress slows considerably. In some fields such as propulsion we really are waiting for a breakthrough that is not just 'proven on paper'.
- Putting humans in space holds very little merit to many scientists. Even NASA don't want people getting sent up for no good reason.

There's 100 more reasons why we're not living some SciFi dream. I want my space habitat as much as any geek, but I know why I don't have it...

"symbiotic relationship"?

[AJWM]

Symbiotic relationship? Man/machine partnership? Ambassadors? Hand-in-robotic-hand? WTF?

It's a fancy toaster, guys, get over yourselves. It's like having a symbiotic relationship with a swiss army knife.

I'd expect this kind of mystical crap from people who don't understand technology and view it all through Clarke's 3rd Law filters ("indistinguishable from magic"), just as any other primitives do when imbuing things they don't understand with mystical spirits. So is Dextre the god of space robotics now? I weep for the NASA that used to be.

Re:It's just a machine

[geekoid]

You seem to forget how steam engines were, 'just a machine' but they changed the world.

Re:Standing on the shoulders of giants

[Thanshin]

I do wonder what their 'final aim' really is. Colonisation of mars? Or is all of this just prep work so we're ready when (if) we eventually make a breakthrough to interstellar travel?

I think it's more of a "defensive stance". They are keeping the space travel technology on a reasonable level to be able to react quickly if another country suddenly reveals a huge breakthrough.

If China suddenly starts to prepare a Mars colonization mission the USA will still have some people and enough infrastructure to keep the option of running for it.

If nobody makes a move, they can wait until a less expensive investigation route produces a result that makes missions cheap enough.

Re:Maybe I am in a bad mood today but..

[Thanshin]

What fills us with the need to go f*#k up another planet?

Why do you care? They are just big rocks.

We just need to learn to travel faster than our wake of destruction.

Re:We're in the infancy of space exploration Not!

[andphi]

Industrialization is in its infancy only if one makes a straight, one-to-one comparison between time elapsed since the first planted crop with time elasped since the first operational factory. I think that metric is flawed, as it assumes that a year in the 1st or 2d century BC has the same production and innovation value as a year in the 19th or 20th century AD. Industrial processes have brought agriculture as close to maturity as possible considering the variables (quantity of sun and rain, quality of soil). I do agree, however, that we are pre-historic in terms of space travel and are more like the first tribes of humans teaching themselves to knap flint than the tribes which followed them (and taught themselves to grow gardens).

Re:Yup!

[pleappleappleap]

It would be the first step in spreading humanity off of Earth. It would lead to a great advantage in the survivability of mankind.

Re:Space 1999

[BCGlorfindel]

Manned space travel would encourage the next 'big leap'. The one advantage of robotic missions over manned ones that really makes the difference right now is simply mass. The next 'big leap' IMHO is getting off of chemical propulsion, and the weight and mission time requirements for a manned Mars mission rather requires bigger thinking than just using more chemicals. It should hopefully see serious consideration for ion drives powered by something bigger than a battery, something like a nuclear sub reactor. Putting that kind of propulsion system in orbit could allow manned exploration of not only Mars but much more of the solar system as well.