Re: Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- From: Eric Chomko <pne.chomko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:08:31 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 28, 11:42 am, Space Cadet <kaw...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 28, 7:51 am, "hall...@xxxxxxx" <hall...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Obviously a robust and great design, why havent we put out a
production run?
Some could be sent to more hazardous landing areas that could offer
better science return:)
If we sent 10 more and 2 didnt make it so what, the remaining 10 could
do great science.
have controlling done by select colleges and universities with nasa
over site once the primary mission is complete.
send some to places where liquid water may have caused landslides, and
other interesting spots.
what amazes me is this has never been mentioned anywhere
Well, You can only launch spacecraft to mars every 26th months
And launchers are expensive and I think they only have so many pads
they can launch from
plus at least the next few launch windows for Mars they have missions
planned for already
One (Phoenix) is scheduled to land, in what is believed to be a frozen
water region, in May (25th I think).
It will NOT be a rover but a lander like the days of Viking. It will
try to find water right where it is.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- From: BradGuth
- Re: Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- From: Brian Thorn
- Re: Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- References:
- Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- From: hallerb@xxxxxxx
- Re: Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- From: Space Cadet
- Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- Prev by Date: Re: sci space policy targeted by disinformation experts?
- Next by Date: Re: sci space policy targeted by disinformation experts?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- Next by thread: Re: Why not more spirit and opportunities?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|