Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the - Solar System ...

FIGURE 2.8 The Apollo 16 landing site photographed by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. SOURCE:
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/Arizona State University.
Human Landed Missions and Science
In popular culture, the term “robot” conjures up a fully autonomous, reasoning, anthropomorphic
creature such as envisioned in the Issac Asimov’s I Robot. However, in modern industrial and scientific
applications, robots are best at the “three Ds”: dull, dirty or dangerous work. Robotic systems can be
designed to operate in extreme environments deadly to humans, but they are programmed and at times
teleoperated by humans. Currently, even the most sophisticated robotic spacecraft have limited
intellectual and physical capabilities. Rovers and orbiters only do what they are told and are incapable of
completely independent autonomous reasoning. By comparison, human explorers on other worlds are
intellectually flexible and adaptable to different situations, as demonstrated by the Apollo sample
collection and the Hubble on-orbit servicing and repair. Humans develop and communicate ideas, not
just data. Human adaptability and capability in an unstructured environment far surpasses that of robots,
and will for the foreseeable future. Conversely, the cost of human exploration is perhaps 10 to 100 times
that of robots, primarily because of the human needs for life support, sleeping quarters, eating, and safety.
What should be the roles of humans and robots to meet the goals of planetary exploration? For
decades NRC studies of human spaceflight have concluded that there is no a priori scientific requirement
for the human exploration of the Moon and Mars. 10,11 In reviewing the past studies and current planetary
science goals, the committee reached the same conclusion as past NRC studies that most of the key
scientific lunar and NEO exploration goals can be achieved robotically. Scientifically useful
PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION
2-10