8 ms·
> there is no activity for which a robot could be developed at great expense to do that activity That expense is still orders of magnitude lower than sending h
by usrbinbash 2y ago
> there is no activity for which a robot could be developed at great expense to do that activity
That expense is still orders of magnitude lower than sending humans.
And even IF launch costs go lower (and that's a big if), it wouldn't change the equation: If I can send more into space for my money, then sure, I could launch astronauts and their water supply and space toilets...or I could use that capacity to launch more, bigger, and more capable robots.
- pfdietz 2y agoSo, that explains why the private effort to service the HST wants to send up a robot. Oh wait. That's totally wrong. They're proposing a mission to send up people to do the maintenance. Because that's far cheaper than developing robots to do it would be.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- usrbinbash 2y agoThis discussion is about space exploration, not maintenance tasks close to Earth.
- pfdietz 2y agoWell, when we explore on Earth, do we use robots, or do we have people involved? Let's ask some field geologists. When exploration hardware is maintained on Earth, is that maintenance all done with robots, or do people do the maintenance?