Jay, you have to weigh the cost and the benefits. It doesn't make any sense
to go now, the technology is not ready. The whole idea is election year
politics, its pathetic.

Mike
MU-2


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:HMmNb.69238$xy6.127599@attbi_s02...
Unmanned space programs accomplish much more at a fraction of the
cost.

Everyone seems to think of this as a zero-sum game, that we can EITHER
spend
it on manned exploration, OR on un-manned exploration.

Trouble is, NASA's budget is controlled by politicians who respond to
their
constituents. Unmanned exploration is about as exciting as studying for
the
instrument written, and excites precisely ZERO enthusiasm (the current,
rare -- and extraordinary -- Mars lander notwithstanding.).

Witness the failed "faster, cheaper, better" strategy that was forced upon
NASA by continual budget cut-backs -- cut-backs that were forced upon them
because their programs were lifeless, computerized, and boring. Without
"man" in the equation, NASA is just another yawn.

I submit that if we don't give NASA the mission of manned space
exploration,
their budget will continue to be whittled away, and even LESS will be
accomplished in the long run. Man belongs in space.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"