...Robotic vs. Manned Space Flight? It's a Tie!

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:45:31 -0500, "Jorge R. Frank"
wrote:

Counterexample: The USSR did a sample-return lunar mission back in the
Apollo era.

I'm pretty sure it was limited to quantities too small to be considered
"exploiting", at least in any useful economic sense of the term.

....IIRC, it wasn't enough to fill a Shlitz' Malt Liquor or a Colt-45
can at the time.

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[

OM wrote:
...IIRC, it wasn't enough to fill a Shlitz' Malt Liquor or a Colt-45
can at the time.


It certainly wasn't much, in one case most of the soil fell out of the
drill as it was putting it into the return capsule and they only got a
couple of tablespoons back.
Because of this, they changed the drill's design and had it run down
rails to the surface rather than swing out on a arm, like in the
original version.
Here's the original design: http://www.zarya.info/Diaries/Luna/Luna16.php
....and the improved one: http://www.zarya.info/Diaries/Luna/Luna24.php
What was really fascinating is how the Luna sample return missions
landing sites were chosen...the Soviets backtracked the trajectory of
something that would land in the USSR if launched vertically from the
surface of the Moon at a given velocity and location, and then landed
the sample return missions at those spots - greatly simplifying the
design of the ascent stage, as it only had to fly straight up from its
landing site, rather than maneuver, as it returned to Earth. I forget
the name of the mathematician who figured out you could do this, but he
received a very high award for coming up with the concept, as it was
something that got the mission inside the payload capabilities of the
Proton booster and greatly upped the chances of a successful sample
return to Earth.

Pat