🚀 go-pugleaf

I seem to have started things so let me continue:

There has been obe comment which needs to be refuted, and that
was the comment about the Moon being closer to the Earth than
the New World was to Chris.  Consider this, though, that we have
only sent pairs of men to the moon, not shiploads full.  I contend
that the distance comparison is NOT valid because of the numbers
of individuals involved.

To comment about money, etc:

Someone said that NASA spends a lot on Robotics.  But what is a lot?
We have a large NASA contract, but it is less than $2M/year.  The
total NASA budget for Robotics is probably less than $50M/year (does
anyone have the real numbers?)  The estimate (and keep in mind that
all NASA estimates always fall FAR short of reality) is $30B.  This 
is enough funding to sponser all Robotics related work for most of
a century! 

Now, don't get me wrong.  I think that man DOES belong in space.
Hopefully, our descendants will be able to walk freely on the surface
of Mars (or some other neighbor of ours).  However, considering NASA's
recent track record and diminishing public support, I feel that the
small budget that NASA has is better spent doing robotics.  Putting
man in space will not be economically feasible until NASA has some 
competition.


Finally, about the comment of a glamour mission to Mars to spark the kids:

This is similar to motivating kids to emulate great athletes.  Very
few individuals make it t the top in sports or as astronauts.  Rather,
sending advanced robotic technology can urge them on to become a team
player for one of these projects, a goal which is much more easily
achieved.

-- 
gerry roston, field robotics center
robotics institute, carnegie mellon university
pittsburgh, pennsylvania, 15213  (412) 268-6557
gerry@cive.ri.cmu.edu