Sorry, there was an earlier version of this post where I misattributed
Crystall, A.L.'s comments to Andrea Leistra. Please just ignore that post,
if possible. Here's the real deal:
Andrea wrote:
>> I'd like to think that we can use this experience, of living in space
>> for extended periods, to move on to better things; a return to the
>> Moon, and someone on Mars. I'm twenty-four, and nobody in my lifetime has
>> gone beyond Earth orbit. I find that unutterably sad. Maybe,
>> hopefully, this is the start of something.
Dan wrote:
> Andrea, is there any reason for this besides the romantic factor. I think
> that going to the moon and mars is an exciting idea, and has great emotional
> value. But, from a scientific standpoint, I cannot see much benefit in
> manned missions. In short, my only reasons for favoring the missions are
> their entertainment value for me.
But surely it would be more efficient to actually have reasearchers and/or
technician astronauts on site, rather than working through robotic probes
that are hundreds of thousands of kilometers away.
The way things are now, one mistake with measuring units can doom a whole
mission, and all the experiments that are on it. It's like trying to
tie your shoelaces with little mechanical hands that are set on *really*
long poles. Possible, but really, really difficult.
Crystall, A.L. wrote:
>> There are teams out there developing commercial reuseable launch
>> vehicles that will probably be ready before NASA's efforts. And how long will it be
>> before some of those multinations decides to establish, say, a Mars base.
Dan:
> I'd guess 500 years. What commercial value can a mars base have?
What commercial value does any frontier have? None, until the proper
financial arrangements and transportation systems are in place. Mars is a
rocky planet, after all, with most of the same mineral wealth that earth has.
(And there's no natives to subdue or environmentalists to get in your
way.)
There's probably lots of ways to make money out of Mars. They may not be
easy or quick, but I bet they're out there.
Andy:
>> They can afford it, and it would probably pay itself off in pure
>> scientific research before long.
Dan:
> Real scientific research is rarely done by companies now. In my field,
> practically all the big oil companies that use to fund research
> have reduced their efforts to a small fraction of what they use to be. Drug
> companies do R&D, but with definite goals in mind. Its not really pure
> research.
That's a good point. Governments will probably have to be involved in
space exploration for years to come.
Andy:
>> Not to mention the shere PR value!
Dan:
> But what company will shell out the cost for the PR value. What would the
> cost be, 100 billion? That's a big investment in PR to make back.
Andy:
>> As much as I hate the idea of the big companies cashing in on space, I
>> think they will, and sooner rather than later!
Dan:
> Communications has been profitable from close to the beginning. Is anything
> else in space profitable if you factor in the whole cost of the satellites?
I don't know, but I bet there's lots of things that could be done to make
money. It would take time and commitment, though. Virtues that aren't
exctly synonomous with corporate culture.
Kevin Street
