On Nov 6, 2:31�am, "David E. Powell" wrote:
On Nov 5, 9:40�am, |"





wrote:
On Nov 4, 3:38�pm, wrote:

There are already quite a few ground robot projects out the

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/10/tt-tt/

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/11/black-knight/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...obobug-goes-wa....

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/004408.html

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.o...ober/Pages/Qua....

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008...bot-packs-hun/

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009...lls-out-one-po....

http://www.defensereview.com/idfs-ne...ic-snake-aka-r....

Mars Rover technology is hardly needed.

Hey maybe it can work the other direction. Like the Hubble is a spy
satellite with altered optics aimed out instead of in.

Hubble wasn't a spy satellite but one of the more recent moon probes
was!

As for the rovers, rememeber they have to be self reliant on another
planet, many earth bound ones can use batteries that are replaced
frequently, be controlled by wire, etc. - not so the Mars rovers!

But the tech can be applied in space as lessons are learned, so your
point is valid indeed!- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

hubble was based on lacrosse spy satellite with different optics.

the platform was basically the same