Larry,
I don't favor going off half cocked or underfunded to Mars like NASA's recent robotic failures. I don't think we should fixated on a cheap 20 billion dollar price tag like Zubrin estimates. I don't think we should commit to Mars if we don't feel we can do it for < 100 billion by our best current guess and be really sure we can do it for less than 150 billion. I'm pretty confident we can by seeing how much less we need to do using Zubrin's ideas compared to the 400 billion 90 day plan.
I don't believe most aim for Mars proponants are somehow categorically against returning to the Moon either as a spin-off or as part of testing for a Mars mission. Most are simply against setting a goal that has little long term human value and has a huge potential to waste money if focus is not kept on a longer term goal.
There is not a single technical issue that you raise that I think should be ignored, but none of them convince me that we should take our eyes off the big near term prize we should be able to reach in this century.
Regards,
Mark
Space/Science » in reply to Apollo was an end in itself
Maybe It's Just Semantics
The whole thread (39 posts)
- "Problems with Mars probes? The fault is not in the stars, but in ourselves"
- Money alone isn't the solution
- FBC seems to have been tossed by the wayside.
- Some Things You Overlooked
- re: Some Things You Overlooked
- Key quote
- Money alone isn't the solution