Robotic suit gives shipyard workers super strength(newscientist.com) |
Robotic suit gives shipyard workers super strength(newscientist.com) |
That's depressing. I don't know why many US industrial firms seem so slow to do their own training, but instead complain about a shortage of skilled workers. There's not much point in spending a lot of money training in some highly specialized area like heavy robotics if you don't know where the demand is.
i.e. driving on major roads around NYC, visiting schools, looking at houses, etc.
"Wow, it looks like it's half finished"
"Everything is so dirty"
"It's all covered in graffiti and falling down"
etc., etc.
Apparently up until 1981, the US had the Construction differential subsidy program [1][2] that subsided shipbuilding construction. During the Regan administration, the US eliminated subsidies whereas countries in Asia did not. Now the top 10 shipbuilding countries are in China, Korea, or Japan [3][4].
Outside of a few exceptions, such as a 1920 law forcing US-based natural gas to only be transported on American made/manned ships [5], the US shipbuilding industry has one customer: the military. Without additional subsidies it's unlikely the US can effectively compete with places like China, which continue to increase subsidies for shipbuilders [6].
In this political climate (especially post-Solyndra, post ethanol-subsidy) I think it's unlikely the federal government would increase subsidies for a private industry. On one hand, this might not be a bad thing: Chinese-subsidized industries don't always work out the way they planned (e.g., the construction of ghost towns). However if the military doesn't keep the industry up-to-date technologically, a shipbuilding tech gap could form, which might impact national security.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Shipbuilding_Program
[2] http://www.marinelink.com/article/shipbuilding/the-future-am...
[3] http://www.marineinsight.com/marine/marine-news/headline/top...
[4] http://thediplomat.com/2012/11/u-s-navy-take-notice-china-is...
[5] http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/20/boom-in-natural-gas-pro...
[6] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/09/us-china-shipping-...
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ichcc.pdf
If you have better data, I'm happy to take a look at them, but in my limited association with high-tech Japanese manufacturing this was basically the canonical example of "Ridiculously untrue things the Americans believe about us."
The thing that I find more worrisome is the fact that little squishy people will be handling things that are so heavy that, if fumbled, would carry enough momentum to rip right through them. Imagine letting a 250 kg piece of metal slip -- if it hit your flesh, that's a problem. Once the strength of these suits gets high enough to handle loads like that I think we'll have to see more actual exoskeleton armor to protect the pilots.
Iron Man: Ralph Mosher, an engineer working for General Electric in the 1950s, developed a robotic exoskeleton called Hardiman. The mechanical suit, consisting of powered arms and legs, could give him superhuman strength. Mosher subsequently made a simpler version that permitted him to sit in his chair and pick up refrigerators.
http://www.hizook.com/blog/2010/09/07/telepresence-robots-ne...
Shouldn't factory workers be able to do that anyway? Or even 60kg.
The most common complaint that I hear is that between climbing and harnesses, flexibility suffers. Adding in an exoskeleton would probably not be the best idea in that case.
I sure wouldn't want to drop 100kg of weight on my foot from 1 meter :)
I was talking about walking around foreign cities compared to walking around cities in the US. The difference is stark.
The U.S. is so far ahead of the rest of the world in almost all defense technologies that it's a hard pill to swallow politically that there could be one relatively-small segment (non-nuclear surface warships) that we'd be better off actually buying from our closest allies.
We export so much defense equipment to our allies, that you'd think it would be okay to maybe possibly import one thing that's built better and cheaper elsewhere. But no, we'd rather subsidize our shipyards to continue churning out ships designed in the 1980s...
It's roughly analogous as if the rise of Honda and Toyota in the 1960s ran all the U.S. car manufacturers out of business.
On the other hand, there's plenty of competing companies that could bail out / buy (parts of) Google (or some other company) if they got into trouble - see MySpace and Digg and major web companies like that that became obsolete and effectively went out of business.