[X] My Assistant

[MizarKey]

The original article is here -> http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c...MNGBNC2S9B1.DTL

"But if it isn't a barrier, then within the next week we're aiming for an old eroded crater called Erebus, and after that a huge crater called Victoria that's 900 kilometers (560 miles) across with 40 meters of exposed sedimentary rock on the walls. There's a target to look for water!"

***********************

The rest of the article was pretty good, but the thought that Victoria is 560 miles across gave me a good giggle.

[Jeff7]

Finally, I think it would be harder to justify abandoning functional rovers on a mission that lasted longer than anticipated, especially when they are making discoveries around each new corner. I would recommend that NASA use the same philosophy I follow for my "paid-off" cars. Drive them into the ground before buying new ones.

I agree. All the years of research and planning, and the other expenses of launching and building the things have been invested. The money used to run the things now is a pittance compared to that.
If I were one of the people who helped design and build the rovers, I would be royally pissed to see my good work turned off because they want to save a little bit of money.