Manned VS Unmanned

From: Stephen Bolton (
Date: Thu Feb 06 2003 - 08:19:49 EST

  • Next message: George Roberts: "Re: Unidentified subject!"

    >On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 18:00:07 -0400, you ("Stephen Bolton"
    ><>) wrote:
    >When I look at what the manned LEO program has returned VS what could have
    >been a program with bigger space telescopes and a complete robotic
    >exploration of our solar system (because, face it, the manned space steals
    >from the unmanned space budget) I get upset. I'll take the return from the
    >Hubble over the return from the entire STS/ ISS program.
    Do you think that a robotic mission could have possibly applied the mirror
    correction to the Hubble?
    No, of course not. Repair of the Hubble has been the one shining moment (OK
    3 shining moments) in the history of the program. But, no STS and:
    1. The mistake with the grinding of the HST primary mirror doesn't get made
    because the budget included enough money for post grinding all up testing.
    2. Make the mistake anyway, but launch a new and improved space telescope
    every 2-3 years utilizing latest technology.
    Lets move this to
    Unsubscribe from SeeSat-L by sending a message with 'unsubscribe'
    in the SUBJECT to

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 06 2003 - 08:29:13 EST