This article brings up an interesting argument: Manned space missions are more dangerous and costly than mechanical ones. “Intelligent” robots and satellites can do a pretty good job exploring other planets, they’re much less fragile than humans, and you don’t have to worry about bringing them back safely.
The romance of manned missions aside, does it make better sense to concentrate on sending out lots of probes instead of trying to get humans back into space?
One response to “Are Manned Missions Passe?”
>>Manned space missions are more dangerous and costly than mechanical ones. “Intelligent” robots and satellites can do a pretty good job exploring other planets, they’re much less fragile than humans, and you don’t have to worry about bringing them back safely.
The romance of manned missions aside, does it make better sense to concentrate on sending out lots of probes instead of trying to get humans back into space?<<
Outside of (very occasionally, when the portents are perfect and the haruspices belch in sacred sequence) hurling an outmoded shuttle into LEO, isn’t this a synopsis of NASA policy over the last several decades?