Mars Rovers Spirit and Opportunity were intended to explore Mars for just 90 days yet they're going strong for almost 7 years now. How much longer do you think they're gonna go? And what is the significance and usefulness of everything they've explored and discovered so far as well as the long amount of time they could keep going?

The Mars Rover project has cost the U.S. taxpayer approximately $944 million dollars. That's about $6.52 per taxpayer. That's a movie that every taxpayer didn't get to see.

OK, in terms of U.S. government waste that's pretty small change, and the Mars Rovers are pretty cool. I mean, I like robots and I like space. What could be better than robots in space?

Unfortunately for this project, Mars isn't very useful to us. There will be little or no RoI (Return on Investment) from this project. The robots are there to test rocks. We have rocks on Earth, we don't need to go to Mars to play with rocks.

But, we may gain some useful experience in running robotic space missions, which may be useful in future missions, which may have some real purpose. It's a long shot, but it could happen.

Will.Spencer wrote:
The Mars Rover project has cost the U.S. taxpayer approximately $944 million dollars. That's about $6.52 per taxpayer. That's a movie that every taxpayer didn't get to see.

OK, in terms of U.S. government waste that's pretty small change, and the Mars Rovers are pretty cool. I mean, I like robots and I like space. What could be better than robots in space?

I agree on all counts. Taxes are a bad way to fund stuff period, IMO. That however doesn't mean that we wouldn't have robots in space or robots on Mars if it weren't for those taxes. It would just be funded voluntarily depending on genuine interest of people in the market. People like you and me would love to chip in for such efforts if we find them valuable and probably a whole lot more than $6.52 (which would after all be necessary given that not everyone is like us).

Will.Spencer wrote:

Unfortunately for this project, Mars isn't very useful to us. There will be little or no RoI (Return on Investment) from this project. The robots are there to test rocks. We have rocks on Earth, we don't need to go to Mars to play with rocks.

But, we may gain some useful experience in running robotic space missions, which may be useful in future missions, which may have some real purpose. It's a long shot, but it could happen.

Well.. to be honest if I put aside the bitterness regarding the way it's funded I do think there's a lot of potential here. Testing rocks lets them learn more about the composition of Mars. Being there and scanning the atmosphere also lets us learn more about the weather conditions. Plus there's the whole experience aspect. The fact that humans were able to accomplish this sets precedents for something even more ambitious.

Mars could be a good place for future domed colonies and what better way to inspect the terrain than with robots.

But yeah.. I just wish NASA was a private company (and not to confuse it with corporations I mean a really private company, operating in the market and without irresponsibility protection (AKA "limited liability")).

6.52$ is nothing to pay for the possible benefits. I would donate such amount if ESA decide that it needs donations.

USA probably spend lot more tax money for other non important things.

I am looking forward to the NASA curiosity mission next year.

Hellas wrote:
6.52$ is nothing to pay for the possible benefits. I would donate such amount if ESA decide that it needs donations.

If it was privatized, taxes in this country eliminated and EU disbanded, I'll donate $100.