argument top image

Do we need manned space flights?
Back to question

Probability of a space expedition failure is too high

A vast number of drone expeditions failed with the destruction of the spacecraft
< (1 of 3) Next argument >


There have been already several failures on drone missions. A manned mission is way more complex and consequently the risks

The Argument

By considering the drone missions there have been quite a few failures which caused the destruction of the spacecraft. Even successful missions (such as Voyager) experienced some technical failures/issues which luckily still allows to accomplish most if not all mission objectives. However since failures n this case does not imply loss of human lives, the level of acceptable risks is higher. A human mission is more complex since it involves a life-maintain system that should ensure safety of the crew.Therefore the risks of a failure are higher. Also no human mission can be considered successful unless astronauta are able to successfully return to Earth; so far all drone missions have been one-way

Counter arguments

High risks have already been taken in previous mission. It is estmated that Apollo missions had an estimate 50% of failure that might have resulted in fatalities. Even in past centuries explorers take even more risks; in expedition like Magellan's circum-navaigation only a small number of original crew survived the trip. Desire to explore make people accept enormous risks


Rejecting the premises


This page was last edited on Saturday, 15 Feb 2020 at 09:35 UTC

Explore related arguments