| > which I assume is much harder and more expensive Manned space missions are significantly more expensive (and complicated) than robotic missions. (Otherwise, we'd be sending a lot more people into space.) Let's do a little bit of back-of-the-envelope Googling: From https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-apollo > The United States spent $25.8 billion on Project Apollo between 1960 and 1973, or approximately $257 billion when adjusted for inflation to 2020 dollars. From https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-the-mars-expl.... > The Mars Exploration Rover (MER) mission cost $1.08 billion. Of that amount, $744 million was spent on spacecraft development and launch; $335.8 million was spent on 15 years of mission operations. So it looks like "manned" space missions cost at least 100x the cost of sending a robot. |
Mars is orders of magnitude harder to land on because of its atmosphere, stronger gravity, and the need to keep your robot healthy on the long trip over.