Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T05:49:13.977Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

17 - Integrated analog mission design for planetary exploration with humans and robots

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2009

By
Kelly Snook ,
Brian Glass ,
Geoffrey Briggs  and
Jennifer Jasper
Edited by
Mary Chapman
Kelly Snook
Affiliation:
NASA Johnson Space Center/KX, Houston
Brian Glass
Affiliation:
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field
Geoffrey Briggs
Affiliation:
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field
Jennifer Jasper
Affiliation:
NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field
Mary Chapman
Affiliation:
United States Geological Survey, Arizona
Get access

Summary

Introduction

For reasons of cost and risk, planetary exploration since Apollo has been carried out by robots with the human input made from Earth. Given communication time delays and the manifest limitations of robots, the pace and quality of such exploration could be greatly improved if humans were more directly involved. Exploration continues using increasingly advanced robotic technologies including those intended to begin the subsurface exploration of the planets. Before such missions will be undertaken we need assurance that these new technologies work adequately under appropriate terrestrial analog conditions. Eventually, humans will re-enter the picture with in-depth exploration of the Moon and Mars as their principal focus. However, such human explorers will not be able to achieve the global reach needed to answer the many questions scientists pursue for a planet as large and diverse as Mars. So, how should humans and robots work together optimally? Can advanced robots tele-operated by humans at short light distances approach the scientific productivity of a trained, yet suit-encumbered, astronaut? To answer these questions, researchers must define scientific return and find ways to compare the productivity of different human–robot exploration systems. Analogs can be used to develop the full range of possible human and robotic exploration systems using metrics that allow us to quantify the effectiveness of each.

Some important outstanding exploration issues that high-fidelity analog missions can inform include:

  • Development, testing, and demonstration of exploration hardware, including surface habitats and extra-vehicular activity (EVA) systems.

  • Selection of landing sites that maximize access to resources and scientifically interesting terrain.

  • […]

Type
Chapter
Information
The Geology of Mars
Evidence from Earth-Based Analogs
 , pp. 424 - 456
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akin, D. (2001). Robotic capabilities for complex space operations. American Institute of Aeronautics Adminsistration Space 2001 Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico, August 2001, (abstract) 4538.
Braham, S. (1999). Canada and analog sites for Mars exploration. Second Canadian Space Exploration Workshop (abstract).
Bresina, J. (1999). Increased flexibility and robustness of Mars rovers. 5th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space (i-SAIRAS), Noordwijk, The Netherlands, June 1999 (abstract).
Clancey, W. J. (2004). Automating CapCom: pragmatic operations and technology research for human exploration of Mars. In Martian Expedition Planning, ed. Cockell, C.. AAS Science and Technology Series, vol. 107, pp. 411–30.Google Scholar
Coates, A. (1999). Limited by cost: the case against humans in the scientific exploration of space. Earth, Moon, and Planets, 87, 213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, L. (2000). Connecting robots and humans in Mars exploration. Concepts and Approaches for Mars Exploration, July 2000, p. 118 (abstract).
Gilbaugh, B., Glass, B., and Alena, R. (2001). Mobile network field testing at HMP-2000. 2001 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana, March 2001 (abstract).
Glass, B. J. and Lee, P. (2001). Airborne geomagnetic investigations at the Haughton impact structure. Abstracts of Papers Submitted to the 32nd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference. Houston: Lunar and Planetary Institute, CD 32, Abstract 2155.Google Scholar
Hoffman, S. (2001). The human exploration of Mars: the reference mission of the human exploration study team. NASA Johnson Space Center, online document at: http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/HumanExplore/Exploration/EXLibrary/EXdocuments.htm
Jessburger, E. K. (1988). 40Ar-39Ar dating of the Haughton impact structure. Meteoritics, 23, 233–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MEPAG Committee (2004). Scientific Goals, Objectives, Investigations, and Priorities for Mars Exploration, ongoing, ed. Taylor, J.et al. Published online: http://mepag.jpl.nasa.gov/reports/index.html.Google Scholar
Muehlberger, W. R. (2003). Geological training of astronaut during the Apollo Era. Workshop on Analog Sites and Facilities for the Human Exploration of the Moon and Mars, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, May 21–23, 2003 (abstract).
Neal, C. (2001). Geological investigations of Mars: the human factor. Workshop on Science and the Human Exploration of Mars, Lunar and Planetary Institute, January 2001, Lunar and Planetary Institute Contribution 1089, p. 154 (abstract).
Pedersen, L. (2002). NASA Exploration Team (NEXT) Space Robotics Technology Assessment Report, Computational Sciences Division, NASA-Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California.
Scott, D. and Hajnal, Z. (1988). Seismic signature of the Haughton structure. Meteoritics, 23, 239–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Remote Science Team Report (2002). Haughton Remote Science Experiment 2002, NASA-Johnson Space Center, November 2002, ed. K. Snook.
Snook, K. (2005a). Technical Report of the NASA Oceanographic Analog Missions Project (NOAMA). National Aernautics, & Space Administration Technical Memorandum (submitted).Google Scholar
Snook, K. (2005b). A review of analog studies and lessons learned, 1960–2004. National Aernautics & Space Administration Technical Memorandum (submitted).Google Scholar
Spudis, P. and Taylor, G. J. (1992). The roles of humans and robots as field geologists on the Moon. 1992 Symposium on Lunar Bases and Space Activities, NASA Johnson Space Center, 1992, p. 307 (abstract).
Wettergreen, D., Bapna, D., Maimone, M., and Thomas, G. (1999). Developing Nomad for robotic exploration of the Atacama Desert. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 26, 127–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×