|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
Now imagine 20 of them crawling all over mars...... at about 9 years
old its a excellent tested design.. land some in more rugged areas.... modify the design a bit to pick up interesting finds and take them to a retrieval lander, to send them back to earth. isnt it amazing what a toaster can do heck soon they will be able to remote control refuel satellites |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message ... bob haller wrote: Now imagine 20 of them crawling all over mars...... at about 9 years old its a excellent tested design.. land some in more rugged areas.... And 20 of them would STILL cover practically no ground at all. modify the design a bit to pick up interesting finds and take them to a retrieval lander, to send them back to earth. Yeah, because 'modifying a bit' doesn't change that "tested design" at all. snort isnt it amazing what a toaster can do heck soon they will be able to remote control refuel satellites A guy on the ground with a 'Mars car' would get more done in a week. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn Something the bobbert doesn't get-or never will, Fred. Even Steve Squyres, the PI on the MER program, says that a human geologist on Mars can do in a day what takes a rover weeks to do. The bobbert is pathetic, really. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
"Matt Wiser" wrote in message news
Jeff, the bobbert, in his enthuasism for rovers, continously ignores the fact that each rover is hand-made, and that things like booster avability, range issues, and launch manifests, get in the way of his pipe dream. Not to mention his hostility towars any kind of human spaceflight. He's not quite the lunatic the guthlessball is, but he's at least good for some laughs. Funny thing is, I've seen Guth have a few lucid moments where he's posted something sensible. -- Greg D. Moore http://greenmountainsoftware.wordpress.com/ CEO QuiCR: Quick, Crowdsourced Responses. http://www.quicr.net |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
On Feb 1, 12:58*am, "Matt Wiser" wrote:
"Jeff Findley" wrote in message ... In article 347a9744-0a01-4b2f-99de-d7f5859908c8 @k6g2000yqf.googlegroups.com, says... Now imagine 20 of them crawling all over mars...... at about 9 years old its a excellent tested design.. land some in more rugged areas.... modify the design a bit to pick up interesting finds and take them to a retrieval lander, to send them back to earth. Your "I have a dream for toasters on Mars" is getting very, very old. isnt it amazing what a toaster can do heck soon they will be able to remote control refuel satellites I spent 10 days on the trail at Philmont Scout Ranch in New Mexico a year and a half ago as a member of a group of 8 Boy Scouts (youth) and 3 adult leaders. *Hiking amounted to about 4 to 5 hours each day, leaving the rest of the day to "explore". *In those 10 days, we hiked about 75 miles carrying 50 pound backpacks on our backs, which is more than three times the distance traveled by Opportunity. *In other words, we were hiking three times the distance in a *day* what Opportunity was driving in a *year*. Now imagine the distance that a manned Mars mission could cover if instead of walking, the astronauts traveled in a pressurized rover, equipped with an airlock and suits for EVA's. *Sound familiar? *It should. *NASA is looking closely at just such an architecture for manned surface operations. Jeff -- "the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer Jeff, the bobbert, in his enthuasism for rovers, continously ignores the fact that each rover is hand-made, and that things like booster avability, range issues, and launch manifests, get in the way of his pipe dream. Not to mention his hostility towars any kind of human spaceflight. He's not quite the lunatic the guthlessball is, but he's at least good for some laughs. rovers need not be made in small numbers, economy of scale could produce a hundred, and falcon versions send them on their way for a fraction of the cost of the original spirit and opportunity.. future versions of these robust rovers could collect samples, placing them in central locations for travel back to earth.. while it might be nice to send astronauts there are problems. humans will contaminate mars, we cant afford it, travel times are fr too long untill a nuke rocket is built, radiation of deep space is a big issue. theres probably a million problems sending astronauts that arent a issue for robotic missions.... and so what if the rovers are slow? we can replace them when they break and length of exploration really doesnt matter..... |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
Matt Wiser wrote:
Something the bobbert doesn't get-or never will, Fred. Even Steve Squyres, the PI on the MER program, says that a human geologist on Mars can do in a day what takes a rover weeks to do. The bobbert is pathetic, really. I want to see boots on Martian ground in my lifetime (boots with human feet in them, with the rest of the human there in a suit as well...) but I am curious about how much it costs to put a rover on Mars for weeks versus a human geologist for a day. Lets say it takes three weeks to do with a rover what a human geologist could do in a day. Is getting a human geologist to Mars (and I presume back again) more or less than 21X the cost of a rover mission? rick jones -- Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought. these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
On Feb 1, 1:19*pm, Rick Jones wrote:
Matt Wiser wrote: Something the bobbert doesn't get-or never will, Fred. Even Steve Squyres, the PI on the MER program, says that a human geologist on Mars can do in a day what takes a rover weeks to do. The bobbert is pathetic, really. I want to see boots on Martian ground in my lifetime (boots with human feet in them, with the rest of the human there in a suit as well...) but I am curious about how much it costs to put a rover on Mars for weeks versus a human geologist for a day. *Lets say it takes three weeks to do with a rover what a human geologist could do in a day. *Is getting a human geologist to Mars (and I presume back again) more or less than 21X the cost of a rover mission? rick jones -- Process shall set you free from the need for rational thought. these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... Well a human one day on mars will be a nice LOOK WHAT WE DID, but little science return;( Given earth mars travel times with chemical rockets you talking of a multi year mission that will cost mega bucks. nuclear rocket can cut that time a lot.... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Opportunity toaster:( has traveled 22 mars miles
Rick Jones wrote:
I want to see boots on Martian ground in my lifetime (boots with human feet in them, with the rest of the human there in a suit as well...) +1 but I am curious about how much it costs to put a rover on Mars for weeks versus a human geologist for a day. Lets say it takes three weeks to do with a rover what a human geologist could do in a day. Is getting a human geologist to Mars (and I presume back again) more or less than 21X the cost of a rover mission? The same question that came to *my* mind. Viking cost about a billion 1970s dollars - adjusted, that's more than Curiosity [1], I believe. Apollo ran to ~24 billion 1969 dollars. Surveyor cost half a billion. So manned:moon seems to be about 20/30 times more expensive than unmanned:mars. I'd guess that manned:mars would be an order of magnitude more expensive than unmanned:mars. Put it this way: for the cost of a manned Mars mission, you could put a *lot* of rovers up there. [1] Other data: Spirit & Opportunity cost about a billion USD. Curiosity about 2.8 billion. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity, now in its seventh yearon Mars, has a new capability | Sam Wormley[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | March 24th 10 04:30 AM |
? I traveled INFINITE miles by car this year ( 2009 ). | Semmalon | Misc | 1 | January 8th 10 10:14 AM |
I traveled INFINITE miles by car this year ( 2009 ). | Semmalon | Misc | 0 | January 1st 10 01:21 PM |
I traveled INFINITE miles by car this year ( 2009 ). | Semmalon | Misc | 0 | January 1st 10 01:17 PM |
Opportunity on Mars | Lawrence Sayre | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | January 25th 04 08:40 AM |