Digest Number 52

In a message dated 3/22/01 12:09:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,
mejames@... writes:

<< Is not in competion with Mars. We should explore both, ultilize

both and colonize both.They're both part of the new & final frontier of
space.
I agree if we are talking robotic missions only. But the
moment manned mission to Mars comes into the picture then just like the space
station and other manned missions before it so much money will be sucked out
of the available budget that anything else will only get the leftovers. But
then as per my previous posting without some type of manned mission there may
not be as large a budget.
Which brings up the question: Would the High Frontier goal be betterserved by
a NASA focused on manned missions or on a NASA which has no manned missions?
I believe that a much smaller NASA without a manned mission program would be
better. Simply because there is a strong possibility that there would then
be more money to pursue something other than manned missions. And as I have
stated before real space commercialization will be robotic not manned.
(point for thought. Are there any manned platforms used for communications?
There could have been. Would it make any sense? The same reasons that there
are no manned communications satellites are the same reasons that
commercialization willbe robotic.)
Mitchell James >>

So you want to bring back the NASA of Jimmy Carter?