Remember - this isn't a direction for Mars exploration...it's a suggested direction by some scientists. Even the lead scientist of MER admits that it's time for a bigger and better Rover.

MER was fantastic - I agree. I love what they've done, I love the design, I love it's achievments. It's gone and done exactly what we wanted and more. BUT...there isn't much more the platform could teach us when put elsewhere - yes, pretty pictures, but they don't justify $400M a pop. We need something bigger, with reliable power, better mobility, more advanced instruments. That's what MSL will be.

Someone who knows far more about such matters than I had this to say..

"Given the very limited ability of the MER system to land at interesting places, I'd wonder about the science return of this. Plus, it's become somewhat obvious that the mobility of the MER system in soft, sandy areas is pretty limited. Science advisory groups should be recommending science, not engineering solutions in search of problems.....Of course, they may not be talking about the MER EDL system but only about the rover proper. But that's a whole different set of engineering tradeoffs, and the resulting vehicle may look little like MER in the end. MER's heritage is in subsystems, not necessarily in the overall vehicle design."

There IS need for a multi-probe attack on Mars...but cheaper, stationary, Met + Seis vehicles in the Netlander mould rather than MER's.