Ares I - Launch Vehicles for Creationists

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:06:39 -0800 (PST), Ian Parker
wrote:

If you can put your hand on your heart and say that by 2020 (Moon
base) or 2031 (Mars landing) robots will have full human manual
dexterity, it becomes hard to justify having humans in these areas. If
on the other hand you can argue convincingly that there will be jobs
humans can do on the Moon/Mars that robots will not be able to do by
the stated dates you have made a convincing case for a Moon base/
Manned Mars expedition .....

No one can say either way. And I'm not against sending unmanned
missions AT ALL. That's an aritificial dichotomy. Yes, we can learn
a lot from them, but they are also precursors to manned missions.

To me the difference between manned v. unmanned is the difference
between seeing Big Ben this live web cam of London:

http://www.camvista.com/england/london/bigben.php3

..... and standing across the street from it in person. Yes, if you're
not in England -- or even not in London -- it will be substantially
cheaper to view the web cam. But going there in person has an
emotional impact looking at a picture doesn't have. And the
multi-billion travel and tourism industry proves that people are
willing to go places in person, shelve out the face time, even though
in this day and age they can view almost any location on Earth by
sitting at their computers and searching for a web cam.

Sending a crew to Mars means you can send scientists who will be in
that enviroment and see it with their own eyes. And remember a Mars
mission can not land, plant the flag, and take off immediately ....
not if they want their ship to interesect Earth when they get to
Earth's orbit. A "short duration mission" has to stay on Mars for
60-100 days (although you need a massive course correction going out
or coming back; that's where they talk about a flyby of Venus on the
way home for a gravity assist). A "long duration" mission will have
to stay on Mars for 455 days -- about a year and a half! That's a LOT
of field geology. And they can be along robots and AIs to help them.

So yeah, we can send just robots and save a lot of money. And you can
spend all your vacation time sitting at your computer looking at
webcams. Good luck selling that to the family who's been chomping at
the bit to go somewhere since January!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Michael Gallagher wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:06:39 -0800 (PST), Ian Parker
wrote:

If you can put your hand on your heart and say that by 2020 (Moon
base) or 2031 (Mars landing) robots will have full human manual
dexterity, it becomes hard to justify having humans in these areas. If
on the other hand you can argue convincingly that there will be jobs
humans can do on the Moon/Mars that robots will not be able to do by
the stated dates you have made a convincing case for a Moon base/
Manned Mars expedition .....

No one can say either way. And I'm not against sending unmanned
missions AT ALL. That's an aritificial dichotomy. Yes, we can learn
a lot from them, but they are also precursors to manned missions.

To me the difference between manned v. unmanned is the difference
between seeing Big Ben this live web cam of London:

http://www.camvista.com/england/london/bigben.php3

.... and standing across the street from it in person. Yes, if you're
not in England -- or even not in London -- it will be substantially
cheaper to view the web cam. But going there in person has an
emotional impact looking at a picture doesn't have. And the
multi-billion travel and tourism industry proves that people are
willing to go places in person, shelve out the face time, even though
in this day and age they can view almost any location on Earth by
sitting at their computers and searching for a web cam.

Sending a crew to Mars means you can send scientists who will be in
that enviroment and see it with their own eyes. And remember a Mars
mission can not land, plant the flag, and take off immediately ....
not if they want their ship to interesect Earth when they get to
Earth's orbit. A "short duration mission" has to stay on Mars for
60-100 days (although you need a massive course correction going out
or coming back; that's where they talk about a flyby of Venus on the
way home for a gravity assist). A "long duration" mission will have
to stay on Mars for 455 days -- about a year and a half! That's a LOT
of field geology. And they can be along robots and AIs to help them.

Can't be done unless you invest a lot of money (~ $1 Trillion) and/or a
lot of time (20 to 30 years). Sorry reality sucks, but it's all we have.

So yeah, we can send just robots and save a lot of money.

And time.

And you can
spend all your vacation time sitting at your computer looking at
webcams.

Of alien planets, including extrasolar planets, which we can't go to
anyways unless we invest even more money and more time. I think I'll go
for the great web cams for the near future. Waiting anxiously for Dawn.

Good luck selling that to the family who's been chomping at
the bit to go somewhere since January!

Rational people understand their mortality. You ain't going camping on
Mars, and there are no Cowboys and Horsey's on the moon. Reality again.