|
|
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> On Apr 16, 3:10 pm, Stupot <ten.no.edonre...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Greg Crinklaw wrote:
>>> Stupot wrote:
>>>> As much as I admire these big projects, sometimes I wonder if the cost
>>>> / benefit ratio would be better simply by launching 8 more MERs.
>>> That would not satisfy the science goals. Do you guys think MER was a
>>> piece of cake? Come on! Why is everyone so fickle and cynical,
>>> apparently equal proportions?
>> Well, I'm trying not to be cynical, just pragmatic!
>>
>> Of course MER would not satisfy the science goals of the MSL, but
>> they're not meant to, and they would still gather a whole lot of good
>> science. Just taking advantage of the economies of scale and what has
>> been learnt from the first two MERs, plus a degree of redundancy.
>> Meanwhile, the new technologies on the MSL have more time to be
>> developed and tested, so that one huge basket with lots of eggs in it
>> isn't so fragile.
>>
>> --
>> Stupot http://insignity.blogspot.com
>
> Well said.
>
> I suspect delays will continue and funding will improve under a
> Democratic Administration.
The sad part is that is sounds like they've already done so
much thrashing around trying to carve the actual project up
to fit the specified budget that it's probably too late to go
back and undo the damage even if the funding does eventually
improve.
-dave w
|
|