On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:59:08 +1000
David Findlay wrote:

Here's a hypothetical question. Assuming all the problems involved in
getting there were solved, could a team of 250+ scientists plus crew,
working in an artificial gravity environment on board a ship in orbit
of an interesting target(Jupiter, Saturn) do more/better/quicker
science, than what is currently done?

Provided they had appropiate resources, working in shifts 24/7, with
probes and shuttles that could be sent to interesting locations. The
robot exploration people always say that robotic missions can do
better than human manned missions. Maybe they're correct at the
moment, but would such a mission as describe above perform better?
Thanks,

As long as the money is available, and assuming that your crew don't mind working in a risky environment, the science return from humans on the spot will always be better than that from robots.

If you can afford to wait longer for your results, and appreciate a much lower cost, then robots are the way to go.
--
Michael Smith
Network Applications
www.netapps.com.au | +61 (0) 416 062 898
Web Hosting | Internet Services