From: jrfrank@ibm-pc.borg.retro.com   
      
   gewi001@phy.auckland.ac.nz (Greg) wrote in   
   news:ea789d.0401251634.527aa83d@posting.google.com:   
      
   > henry@spsystems.net (Henry Spencer) wrote in message   
   >> Definitely not.  Some of the more ambitious designs have a goal of   
   >> equaling the capabilities of a spacesuited astronaut, but they're not   
   >> there yet.   
   >   
   > Underwater construction rovers on oil rigs and pipelines etc.. have   
   > largely replaced deep sea divers for most new construction work. Its   
   > not by very dexterous robots but by deliberately avoiding structures   
   > that need very dexterous robots, ie special nuts and bolts with large   
   > clearances and highly specialised manipulators.   
      
   Which HST most definitely does not have.   
      
   > One big difference is that there is a lot more experience with   
   > underwater construction and maintenance than equivalent space   
   > activities. Also the  rovers don't have the weight constraints (they   
   > are very heavy) and still cost a lot (about $5M). Older rigs still   
   > need to use divers but usually smaller crews with rover aids.   
   >   
   > The point i wish to make is that it would be better to meet half way   
   > between highly dexterous robots and structures specifically designed   
   > to be constructed and maintained by robots. IMHO of course.   
      
   A valid point for future spacecraft, but alas it will do HST no good.   
      
      
   --   
   JRF   
      
   Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,   
   check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and   
   think one step ahead of IBM.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)