The Pros And Cons Of Robotic Missions

When it comes to whether we should be focusing on sending humans on future missions, with the support of robotic missions or sending exclusively robotic missions there’s a lot of different we must consider. How much will the mission cost? How much time will be put into this? What are the risks? What are the advantages? Neil Degrasse Tyson states in the video that for every human you put in space, you can put hundreds even to thousands of unmanned probes and it would be less expensive. If that’s the case why do we keep considering humans on future missions? I’m not saying that sending humans on future missions should just be completely left out of the program. During the TAM conference, the argument that adding humans to future missions raises attention to the missions which then could increase funding to the project. Which in a way is true. People will start wondering if the people in the mission will die …show more content…
Another thing we must consider is how devoted are we into exploring space? The Cold War was a crucial catalyst when it came to space exploration. Because there was tension between the U.S and the Soviet Union, competition to get the first man on the moon or any sort of advancement in space was crucial. During this era, political issues between these two countries is why we saw so many space missions. As the years went by, the space program began to die down. I’m not saying that space programs are dead but instead they aren’t as common. If that’s the case wouldn’t you want to send multiple robotic missions to make most of your time instead of just doing one human mission? You’d get a lot more date back from robotic missions because you wouldn’t really worry about Unless we manage to get into the same political situation that we were in back then, I don’t see why we would choose human over robotic missions when we want to get the most out of them without it being as expensive as human