Space Robotics Market?

[sanman]

"Dual Use" is the phrase used to describe technologies which are politically sensitive, due to their ability to be used in civilian applications as well as critical military applications. Re-applying it in a space-related context, where are the best opportunities for businesses involved in civilian markets to re-purpose their products for space applications?

For instance, I've been reading lately about underwater robots being used by the oil and gas industry in exploring the ocean bottom as well as in repairing and maintaining oil-well equipment down there. That market seems to be quite hot right now, due to high oil prices. Likewise, undersea robots are used for laying communications cables and pipelines.



I was thinking that the tele-robotics expertise by such businesses would be highly useful in developing robots for prospecting on the Moon, Mars, asteroids, etc. Sure, the pressures go to the opposite extreme and you have to worry about radiation-hardening, etc. Recognizing the obvious differences between space and the deep sea, there are nevertheless a lot of commonalities about operating vehicles remotely in hostile environments to perform critical operations where humans cannot easily go.

I also recall that when the very costly Mars Phoenix Lander was having trouble with the basic task of scooping dirt into its ovens, the grad students involved in the design were moaning that they were never given enough time or money to develop better solutions, etc. And I remember netters posting that someone with someone from the mining industry would have been able to design a better way of scooping that dirt than a bunch of PhD's without real world experience.

Wouldn't an undersea robotics company be able to design and validate a lunar rover more cheaply than NASA would? When I see SpaceX, OSC, and now Bigelow coming forward with their space solutions at much lesser cost, it makes me think that the moment is ripe for someone to do something similar for space robotics, which will be of vital importance for space operations, just as much as habs or launch vehicles. Wouldn't there be a similar opportunity for a cost disruption in space robotics?

[Solman]

 I question whether cost is the problem. MDA's Space Infrastructure Servicer has a projected cost of 300 million dollars and yet no customers as yet. Robonaut is onboard the ISS and has not been used as yet has it? Also it has not been configured or equipped for use outside the station even, which is where it might have the greatest utility.
 There is no plan by NASA to even demonstrate ISRU and no plans by them for mining anything is there?
 Personally, I would love to see focus on the development of a sustainable tele-robotic based space transportation/ mining/manufacturing infrastructure using asteroid, Moon and dead sats in GEO but this, for whatever reasons, does not seem to be a priority.

[sanman]

Well, arguably if the market isn't strongly established yet, then neither are there any entrenched players who would be harder to disrupt.

The more the cost of space robotics systems could be brought down in advance, then the more quickly they become viable choices to facilitate space activities.

Just from reading about underwater ROVs, it seems like there are enough similarities that they could become a useful base from which space-based
ROVs could be developed more cheaply:







Perhaps an Open ROV could lead to an Open ROVer, which could be useful as a general-purpose utility unit capable of operating on the lunar surface. In parallel, perhaps a space-based version could be developed by extending a cubesat platform.

Development activity from an open source community could lead to more innovative solutions and a wider pool of expertise.

[Solman]

 Sorry to sound pessimistic - on reflection cost always matters and experience with ocean ROV's seems quite relevant.
 Here's hoping new players will bring space tele-robotics foreard.