The point isn't what we can do ut what we can do VS what is the cost, cost-effectiveness in one word. Manned operations tend to cost A LOT, so they may very well end up not being cost-effective even if humans do way better than bots.The Romulan Republic wrote:Regarding the use of robots vs humans for exploration, I recall Zubrin's argument is basically that we could accomplish more with people there than with robots. When I consider the limitations on modern robotic, I'm inclined to agree, though I am of course no expert.
In case of planet exploration, the main issue is that humans cannot travel to very distant regions without significant support (which means you will have a maximum range from your base as the outer limit of survey teams at a significantly short distance). Rovers can do it without issues, and don't need to come back.
Humans and bots should be ideally emplyed together as both have strenghts that supplement each other's weaknesses. Robots do the recon (and leg) work, humans the problem-solving one.
Placing a base on Mars and having the people in there control directly the robots is much easier way to survey everything than sending oversized space-capable camper vans in all directions. (since the only annoyance is the light lag, once the bots have manipulators and good cameras, they can become a waldo in no-time)
Cool, but does not outweight Mars's drawbacks imho.-Mars has a cycle of day and night closer to Earth's, so you can grow plants with natural light, unlike on the Moon.
Meh, the colony will not get self-sufficient in less than a couple centuries (it won't be anywhere near a fire and forget like North America colonization was, that's a significant amount of shipping required for spare parts and even relatively simple machinery). They will lack the sheer numbers to build and mantain any kind of infrastructure needed to manufacture most high-tech equipment that is critical for their own survival, like say electronics or even fucking space suits.-Mars has more of the resources present that are needed to run a civilization.
Would be more useful finding something to trade for such necessary imports. Otherwise it's going to become hard to keep the colony supplied without handwaving in a home nation on Earth that pays everything for kicks.
I still think that hard vacuum is way better work with than Mars's crappy atmosphere and huge sandstorms.Basically, the Moon has the fact that its closer, and other than that Mars is a superior place for colonization.
You still have to run from CMEs (need to scatter bunkers or you get rad-killed every now and then) and space radiation protection is nonexistant (although this last one may not be horribly bad, humans thrive in much more irradiated places on Earth).
I personally think no planet in the solar system is worth the effort to truly colonize.
In any case you have to drop so much stuff from the above to start up everything (and so much to keep it running) that making a space station in Earth Orbit with bulky/heavy stuff thaken from the Moon becomes ridicolously more attractive.
Added to my to-do list. Hoping to find them at the pubblic library.Anyway, like I said, there's a lot more detail in the books, and I strongly advise you to read them.
