Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!lll-crg!seismo!cmcl2!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: Scuttle the Shuttle?
Message-ID: <571@lanl.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 1-Feb-86 01:52:48 EST
Article-I.D.: lanl.571
Posted: Sat Feb  1 01:52:48 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Feb-86 05:42:11 EST
References: <8601301636.AA04800@s1-b.arpa> <11632@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: jlg@a.UUCP (Jim Giles)
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 50


>In article <8601301636.AA04800@s1-b.arpa> dietz@SLB-DOLL.CSNET (Paul Dietz)
>writes:
>>The third myth: that manned missions can accomplish things economically
>>that can't be done by robots.  This is true in the long term (unless AI
>>really succeeds), but in the short term (read: for the rest of this
>>century, at least) there is little that can be done in space
>>economically that robots and teleoperated manipulators can't do better.
>>Repair and maintenance of spacecraft in earth orbit, mining the moon,
>>exploration of the planets, manufacturing in low earth orbit are all
>>better done by robots and remotely controlled manipulators, simply
>>because they don't breath or eat, don't die of radiation from solar
>>flares, and can be launched by supposedly less reliable expendable
>>boosters, can be controlled from the ground 24 hours a day and can be
>>left in space for years.

I keep fairly close tabs on AI and robotics.  There is no way with
today's technology to build an automaton that could have repaired
the Solar MAX satellite.  Much less - capture and return disabled
satellites.  Teleoperation doesn't help this much, the problem is
at least partly one of dexterity.  Robots are marvelous things (I
wouldn't follow developments in the field if they weren't of interest)
but they aren't yet anything near a good substitute for a human
technician.

Not all of the tasks performed by the shuttle missions require human
intervention - in fact, I've never thought the shuttle should be
used for satellite launching (unless the satellite requires on site
assembly or adjustment).  As a satellite repair capability though it
is likely to remain unsurpassed for decades.  Think how much more
reliable deep space probes could be if they could receive a post
launch check before being sent out of earth orbit.  They would be
cheaper too, since the human crew can do some of the assembly in
space (instead of the present system of building in automatic systems
to extend antennae, pop launch shrouds, power up sensitive equipment,
etc.).

You made another point about robots being better than humans through
the end of the century.  This is exactly backward.  I am willing to
believe that robotic technology may become reliable enough in the
future not to require much in the way of human backup.  But in the
short term (read: to the end of the century, at least) there are
many things that can't be done by robots or teleoperated manipulators.
They can't think, they can't improvise special purpose tools, they
can't come up with different ways to grapple a wayward satellite, and
they are just as likely to malfunction as the equipment they were
sent to repair or maintain.

J. Giles
Los Alamos