Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Space Businesses

Droids for Space? Startup Plans Satellites With Robotic Arms For Repairs and Collecting Space Junk (msn.com) 19

The Boston Globe reports on a 25-person startup pursuing an unusual solution to the problem of space junk: "Imagine if every car we ever created was just left on the road," said aerospace entrepreneur Jeromy Grimmett. "That's what we're doing in space." Grimmett's tiny company, Rogue Space Systems Corp., has devised a daring solution. It's building "orbots" — satellites with robotic arms that can fly right up to a disabled satellite and fix it. Or these orbots could use their arms to collect orbiting rubble left behind by hundreds of previous launches — dangerous junk that's become a hazard to celestial navigation...

Rogue Space aims to catch up fast, with help from Small Business Technology Transfer funds from the SpaceWERX Orbital Prime initiative. Created by the U.S. Space Force, Orbital Prime seeks to build up U.S. private-sector firms that can protect national security by maintaining military satellites and clearing hazardous space debris.

Its first 10-pound, proof-of-concept satellite will launch later this year, the article points out, "to test sensors and software to confirm the system can identify and track other satellites." But "the real excitement will begin later this year" when the company launches a prototype that's four times larger that will "use maneuvering thrusters to test the extremely precise navigation needed to approach a satellite."

And then in late 2024 or early 2025 the company will launch its 660-pound satellite "with robotic arms for fixing other satellites or for dragging debris to a lower orbit, where it will fall back to Earth."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Droids for Space? Startup Plans Satellites With Robotic Arms For Repairs and Collecting Space Junk

Comments Filter:
  • by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Sunday April 30, 2023 @02:57PM (#63487156)

    As anyone who's passed astrodynamics 101, or not even flunked that badly, will gladly tell you, orbits that aren't at the same inclination are basically mutually inaccessible. So every "cleanup" will require a dedicated launch into a specific rendezvous orbit targeted at the specific piece of debris to be deorbitted.

    For future launches, requiring a deorbit capability at end of life is almost certainly cheaper. For existing junk...might be cheaper to just track it and avoid it. My point is that unless launches get way the fuck cheaper (thus creating more junk!), the cleanup bot will have limited (nonzero, but limited) applicability.

  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Sunday April 30, 2023 @03:00PM (#63487162)

    ... satellites with robotic arms that can fly right up to a disabled satellite and fix it.

    Are many (most?) satellites even designed to be repaired, especially in space. Perhaps this could be a design consideration going forward, but I imagine not so much so far.

    Also, how may different kinds of screwdriver heads will these things have to carry -- slotted, Phillips, square, Torx, hex, sockets -- in various English, Metric sizes etc... Then, how many of us have dropped a screw? Imagine doing that is Space.

    • No. In fact almost anything that flies has potted bolts and epoxies everything else too, to survive launch vibrations.

      Just this afternoon I fucked up putting together a piece of ikea furniture and had to take it apart and redo it. Threadlock went flying everywhere as I did. Now let's unleash that into space!

  • Repair satellite breaks down in orbit, not designed to be repaired in orbit.

  • Advances in robotic technology are pathetic. Many tasks that we think of as robotic are done by humans, because we can't build a robot with the required dexterity. I don't know whether humans are too stupid to figure it or whether the task itself is impossible to perform. A robot is not good at any task that involves complex finger and hand configurations. Many companies have tried to automate, for example, simple kitchen activities. They can't do it. They can't even reliably pick up a burger from a flat su

    • we can't build a robot with the required dexterity.

      Seems you've been asleep at the wheel because we're already made robots with sufficient dexterity. https://techxplore.com/news/20... [techxplore.com]

      I'm only commenting on the claim that we can't make robots with the required dexterity.

  • Overly complicated (Score:4, Informative)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Sunday April 30, 2023 @03:48PM (#63487224)

    Satellites almost certainly aren't repairable, so ditch the robotic arms... well, simplify them into a single-task tool designed for grasping (make them pincers?). Simplify the overall design to focus on de-orbiting.

    Given you'll need one of these satellites for each piece of space junk you want to de-orbit, though, I doubt this whole idea makes sense anyway. I imagine the founders of this company already know this, and the company's real purpose is simply as a hoped-for buyout target (and, until then, to collect good salaries off investors for as long as possible).

  • Fixing ancient satellites is a moot point. A better idea is to simply deorbit the defunct satellites but that requires a lot of fuel. The problem becomes that having more fuel requires needing more fuel to move. I suspect a better strategy would be to go to a target satellite and pierce the fuel tank, taking as much fuel as possible then sling it into a decaying orbit before moving to the next target. It would require that you plan out the order of satellites to visit as not all have fuel.

    • A better idea is to simply deorbit the defunct satellites but that requires a lot of fuel.

      Not always. Both NASA and EAS have been experimenting with long, conductive tethers that accelerate satellites to either increase or decrease their orbits. Space tethers demonstrate deorbit capability [aiaa.org]

      Securing a 800 meter tether (10 Kg?) to a satellite and allowing dynamic and atmospheric drag to deorbit them wouldn't need any additional fuel.

      EAS 35Km, 7Kg tether experiment [esa.int]

      • Securing a 800 meter tether (10 Kg?) to a satellite and allowing dynamic and atmospheric drag to deorbit them wouldn't need any additional fuel.

        There hasn't been much success with space tethers. Also, with the length and diameter that they are proposing, I'm not sure we have a material that won't break.

        Anyway, it's a possibility in theory meaning it could take decades to develop.

  • I agree with other posts that repairing random satellites in orbit is far-fetched at best, but I think the de-orbiting function has potential. They could use an electromagnetic linear actuator to push the designated satellite down, while the equal and opposite reaction would lift the orbot to a higher orbit, lengthening its stay in space and reducing its fuel use.
  • Remember, if you try to use the term "Droid", Lucasfilm will eat your whole world...

  • A robotic satellite with a "Sanford & Son" sign on it.

    Only then will I believe that space salvage is a thing.

  • I want to see a satellite hunter that looks like a cross between a butterfly and a frog. The wings would be solar arrays to power it, and it would leap from satellite to satellite - each leap transferring momentum, slightly slowing the most recent launch point as the hunter jumps to the next one.

    It could keep this up for a long time, just providing retrograde kicks to satellites as it travels around the Earth. Maybe use those wings as solar sails to periodically bleed off some accumulated velocity as cond

  • I can't help but think if there's a way to clean up Earth's orbit there's a reason to clutter it. Engineers: "Bosses we successfully removed all garbage from our orbit what problem do we solve next!?" Board of directors: "have you considered polluting the orbit of Earth?" Engineers: "I guess it's time to jump out that window now."
  • Created by the U.S. Space Force,

    and

    to test sensors and software to confirm the system can identify and track other satellites."

    Like we fall for the nonsense it would be used for reparing other defunct sattellites. These sattellites are there to sabotage other sattellites.

Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Mother Nature cannot be fooled. -- R.P. Feynman

Working...