Manned vs. Unmanned Space Exploration

Manned vs. Unmanned Space Exploration

      

      In a 2012 article written by Adam Mann, the argument is raised as to the validity of either human or non-human space exploration.  The argument that has been raised by some is that anything a man can do a robot can do.  I disagree with this argument.  With today's current technology, robots can not complete the tasks required for space exploration in the same time frame as humans.  You can twist it any way you want: robots can tie knots, humans can tie knots; robots can pick up a rock, humans can pick up a rock.  This is not the context of this discussion.  This discussion address the analytical advantage that humans have over robots and therefore in that case, robots can not take the place of humans in space exploration with current technology of 2015 (Mann, 2012).

      All  resent planetary exploration has been conducted by robots.  So how does their work compare to that of past human exploration?  The manned Apollo missions alone produced over 2000 papers over the last 40 years.  In comparison, unmanned missions both from the Soviet robotic Luna explorers and NASA's Mars Exploration rover programs have each produced around 400 papers.  It took the Apollo 17 astronauts three days to cover 22 miles on the moons surface, in comparison, it has taken the Mars Opportunity eight years to cover the same distance (Mann, 2012).

      Humans have several advantages over robots.  Humans can adapt to changing conditions and make quicker decisions than robots due to the time delay to send a command from Earth to Mars.  Humans are more mobile than robots.  Comparing all current rovers in use, humans can drill for samples and employ larger instruments (Mann, 2012).

      Another argument is that the cost to send humans into space is far greater than sending robots.  If we are comparing apples to apples this statement is not true when looking at it from an economic standpoint of output.  All money spent needs a justification as to how well it was spent.  It is believed that total money spent on the Apollo mission was $2.09 billion as compared to $2.5 billion on the Mars Science Laboratory.  Therefore, comparing output from these two missions, 2000 papers vs. 400 papers, the manned Apollo missions were far more successful (Mann, 2012).

      Today, the underlying issues with manned vs. unmanned space exploration are latency and travel time.  Mars, being the closest planet to Earth, is on average 140 million miles from Earth.  With today's technology, it would take a spacecraft 162 days to travel that distance.  If we compare that with Pluto at its closet point to Earth, it is approximately 2 billion miles and would take a spacecraft today nearly 10 years to reach Pluto.  As far a transmission latency, it takes commands sent to Mars between 5 to 15 minutes depending on the distance Mars is to Earth.  The communication travel time to Pluto would be over 2 hours (Redd, 2014).

      So why is time and latency an issue?  For starters, the amount of time it would take a scientist to command a robot to tie a knot on the Moon would be ten minutes.  The same knot would take a human seconds to complete.  As for time, yes it would take a human the same amount of time to travel to Mars as would a robot.  However, a human on mars would would generate far more data for research yielding a much higher return on the money spent for the endeavor.  It is my belief that if we continue to utilize unmanned systems to explore our solar system, we will learn far less about it over the next hundred years.

      

References:

 Mann, A. (2012). Humans vs. Robots: Who Should Dominate Space Exploration. Wired. Retrieved 13 September 2015 from http://www.wired.com/2012/04/space-humans-vs-robots/

Redd, N. (2014). How Long Does it Take to Get to Mars?. Space.com. Retrieved 13 September 2015 from http://www.space.com/24701-how-long-does-it-take-to-get-to-mars.html

Underwater robots used for deep-sea mining

Underwater robots used for deep-sea mining  
    Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs) and Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs) are now widely being used in the offshore oil and gas sectors as well as new developments in their uses for deep-sea mining.  Progressing rapidly is the technology being utilized by these systems.  We are seeing an emergence from uses in oceanographic research to defense and and offshore energy sectors (Bogue, 2015).
    Unmanned maritime vehicles have begun to play an important role in the off-shore oil and gas industry, defense sector, search and rescue, underwater archaeology and environmental monitoring.  Many new uses of both ROVs and AUVs have been developed mainly driven by their improved capabilities due to various technological advances over the years (Bogue, 2015).
    The use of ROVs in underwater mining has increased due to research that shows that there is almost one thousand times more rare earth minerals on the sea floor that in recoverable on-shore reserves.  Three new unique mining vehicles have been developed to retrieve these deposits.  At depths of up to twenty five hundred meters, these vehicles will provide a production cutter, bulk cutter and a collecting machine (Bogue, 2015).
    In my opinion, these vehicles will serve as useful tools in the mining of our sea floors.  Their ability to recover rare-earth minerals essential in the manufacturing of electronic devices, vehicles, lasers and weapons will be extremely useful in that the impact to our on-shore reserves will be greatly reduced.
    Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUVs), because they operate autonomously and use their own power source, are faster than ROVs.  This is not however why they are being widely used, it is the quality of the data they gather that is truly driving their use (Bogue, 2015).
    New innovations have allowed the AUV to become more technologically viable.  Technology such as improved battery life, forward looking sonar and collision avoidance have all contributed to the now commercially available ROVs.  There has also been improvements in sensors such as the Micro-electromechanical System (MEMS) which has given us a single package device with three-axis autopilots that simplify navigation (Bogue, 2015).
    The AUV market has been responsible for a 67 percent growth in oil production over the past year (2014-2015).  They have also been used in disaster response as well as probing the sea-floor searching for Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370.  AUVs have proven the capability of locating planes on the sea-floor when they located the Air France flight lost of the cost of Brazil in 2009 (Bogue, 2015).
    The past fifty years has seen huge advances in underwater robotic technologies.  These technologies have shown invaluable to the off-shore mining and oil industries.  The emerging technologies from these advances will also prove valuable to the military, search and rescue, as well as oceanographic research.  Combined with new technological advances, ROVs and AUVs will undoubtedly improve our lives in the future (Rogue, 2015).
    The continued use of AUVs in off-shore mining is as well essential to our way of life in my opinion.  The amounts of untapped resources are enormous and we can't let them go to waste.  An obvious challenge for off-shore mining will be the ecological impacts on marine life.  We must ensure that as we develop these new technologies, we ensure that the impacts on marine life are minimal.
  

References:
Bogue, R. (2015). Underwater robots: A review of technologies and applications. Industrial Robot: An International Journal, 42(3), 186-191. doi:10.1108/IR-01-2015-0010