Re: Hypothetical massive spacecraft question

From: Michael Smith (smithm_at_SPAMBLOCKnetapps.com.au)
Date: 08/09/04 

Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 10:36:12 +0100

On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:59:08 +1000
David Findlay <david@davsoft.com.au> wrote:

> Here's a hypothetical question. Assuming all the problems involved in
> getting there were solved, could a team of 250+ scientists plus crew,
> working in an artificial gravity environment on board a ship in orbit
> of an interesting target(Jupiter, Saturn) do more/better/quicker
> science, than what is currently done?
>
> Provided they had appropiate resources, working in shifts 24/7, with
> probes and shuttles that could be sent to interesting locations. The
> robot exploration people always say that robotic missions can do
> better than human manned missions. Maybe they're correct at the
> moment, but would such a mission as describe above perform better?
> Thanks,

As long as the money is available, and assuming that your crew don't mind working in a risky environment, the science return from humans on the spot will always be better than that from robots.

If you can afford to wait longer for your results, and appreciate a much lower cost, then robots are the way to go. 

-- 
Michael Smith
Network Applications
www.netapps.com.au   | +61 (0) 416 062 898
Web Hosting          | Internet Services